You are in: Home » Antarctic Treaty » The Committee for Environmental Protection » Committee for Environmental Protection III Papers
Committee for Environmental ProtectionThe Hague, The Netherlands, 11-15 September 2000
ANTARCTIC METEORITES
Working Paper submitted by SCAR
At the meeting of the SCAR Working Group on Geology, held in Tokyo, Japan, 10-14 July 2000 during XXVI SCAR, serious concerns were expressed regarding the potential for collection of Antarctic meteorites by private expeditions. All meteorites have major intrinsic value to science and Antarctic meteorites have considerable commercial value. These factors make the collection of Antarctic meteorites very attractive not only to scientists but also to entrepreneurs. All meteorites collected by scientists are lodged and catalogued in internationally recognized depositories and are made freely available for study by the scientific community. Meteorites not collected by the scientific community may be retained in private hands or offered for sale at inflated prices so that they are effectively lost to scientific research.
At XXII SCAR in 1992, SCAR Delegates adopted Recommendation XXII-1 on "Protection of Geological Specimens", specifying meteorites among other types of geological specimens. This recommendation was noted in the report of XVIII ATCM and its general provisions were incorporated into ATCM Recommendation XVIII-1, specifically in the Attachment to the Recommendation at Section E) paragraph 4). However, specific reference to meteorites, and to other items identified by SCAR, was omitted. In the current situation, SCAR wishes to re-emphasize the vulnerability of geological specimens, particularly meteorites, to unrestricted collecting and has adopted the following recommendation.
Recommendation XXVI SCAR-10
On the collection of Antarctic meteorites
Noting that members of certain private expeditions are apparently going to Antarctica with the expressed aim of collecting meteorites for subsequent sale,
Concerned that meteorites collected in this way will be lost to science, and
Mindful of SCAR Recommendation XXII-1,
SCAR recommends that National Committees, via their governments, request the ATCM to take a stronger position on Recommendation XXII-1 that states:
"SCAR recommends that:
1. Geological specimens, such as fossils, minerals, meteorites, volcanic bombs and ventifacts in Antarctica should be collected for scientific or educational purposes and not for commercial gain;
2. Geological samples collected from Antarctica for these purposes should be properly curated in institutions accessible to the scientific community and, wherever possible, should be publicly displayed."
The papers and discussions that led to the formulation of the recommendation are attached to this paper in Annexes 1-4 as follows:
Annex 1: E-mail message from Professor Gregory Herzog, Chairperson of the Meteorite Working Group, to Professor Ross Powell, US Representative to the SCAR Working Group on Geology
Annex 2: Paper prepared for the SCAR Working Group on Geology by Dr Ralph P. Harvey, Principal Investigator, Antarctic Search for Meteorites Program
Annex 3: Press Release by Space Adventures Ltd, dated July 17, 2000
Annex 4: Extract from the draft Report of the SCAR Working Group on Geology, Tokyo, Japan, 10-14 July 2000
______________________________
Annex 1
Date: Thu, 06 Jul 2000 14:46:07 -0400
From: herzog herzog@rutchem.rutgers.edu
To: ross@geol.niu.edu
Subject: Antarctic meteorites: some issues for SCAR
Dear Prof. Powell:
I write to you in your capacity as the US representative to the Scientific Committee on Antarctic Research. As you no doubt know, the Antarctic is a wonderful place for finding meteorites. Most of the lunar and Martian meteorites in the world's collections come from there as do many other rare meteorites of great scientific value. Lately, I have become concerned about the implications of Antarctic meteorite collections undertaken by non-governmental agencies. For more than twenty years, several elements of existing government programs have allowed researchers to take full advantage of the recovery of Antarctic meteorites:
1) careful and consistent documentation on collection;
2) sustained curation of high quality; and
3) availability, on an impartial, cost-free, and timely basis, of samples to working scientists around the world.
I believe that governmental agencies are more likely to build and sustain programs that have these elements than are non-governmental ones. We know from experience that both the Japanese and the U.S. meteorite programs have consistently provided samples in this way to the international community.
A related issue of possible interest to SCAR seems likely to arise some time soon, namely, the conditions under which Antarctic samples originally collected for scientific purposes might eventually be sold. Existing treaties, I believe, already bar large-scale mineral exploitation from the Antarctic. Meteorite recovery, however, is intrinsically small scale and may not be covered by the treaties. With some rare -- and therefore scientifically valuable -- types of meteorites now priced at $(US)10k/g, the temptation to sell a valuable find will probably be harder to resist for a non-governmental than for a governmental agency. One can argue about what the consequences of such sales might be. My concern is that they would limit for years to decades the quantities of material available for research.
I encourage SCAR to consider these issues. My personal view is that any program to collect Antarctic meteorites should have to (a) commit to implementing and (b) demonstrate the ability to implement programs that have the features listed above. As far as I know, there are no such requirements at present. I also believe it is in the best interest of science and of international amity to limit the commercialization of Antarctic meteorites. Perhaps SCAR can help lend these positions or ones like it some moral, or better still, legal authority. Enforcement presents complicated problems that will have to be addressed.
Thank you for your attention. I would be very interested to learn the outcome of your discussions.
Gregory Herzog
Chairperson,Meteorite Working Group*
*The Meteorite Working Group is a standing committee with ten members that meets twice yearly. Among other tasks, it oversees the distribution of samples of meteorites held in the U.S. collection at the Johnson Space Center, Houston, Texas.
Gregory Herzog
Dept. Chemistry, Rutgers Univ.
Wright-Rieman Laboratories
610 Taylor Road
Piscataway, NJ 08854-8087
Voice: 732-445-3955 FAX: 732-445-5312
______________________________
Annex 2
Paper tabled at the meeting of the SCAR Working Group on Geology
Tokyo, Japan, 10-14 July 2000
Protecting Antarctic Meteorites
Introduction
Since the discovery of a concentration of meteorites at the Yamato (Queen Fabiola) Mountains in 1969, more than 25,000 meteorite samples have been recovered from Antarctica. The vast majority of these have been collected by nationally funded scientific expeditions and made available to the planetary materials research community. These specimens have proven to be of extraordinary value to planetary scientists- they are currently the only source of "ground truth", non-microscopic extraterrestrial materials. Meteorites also have extraordinary desirability as curiosities, and are often assigned high monetary value by collectors. With the increase in private access to the continent, the allure of Antarctic meteorites to private expeditions has become stronger, and in the 1999-2000 Austral summer, the first systematic collection of meteorites by a private organization occurred. This summary has been prepared for SCAR consideration, with the intent of expressing the concern of the planetary materials community over this recent development and promoting an examination of possible solutions.
The importance of Antarctic meteorites to science
Antarctic meteorite recoveries provide a reliable and continuous supply of extraterrestrial samples. The abundance of samples has made destructive analysis, which is unavoidable for some types of measurements, easier to justify, allowed accommodating access to samples, and provided a quantity and breadth of materials for study far beyond that from any previously discovered source. The relatively complete and unbiased nature of systematic collections in Antarctica has been particularly valuable. Antarctic meteorites, collected from a single icefield in a consistent, unbiased manner, serve as a well-preserved and represen-tative sample of the full spectrum of materials arriving from space.
Illustrating the importance of Antarctic meteorites, the recently published book Planetary Materials (Papike, 1998) is the most recent comprehensive survey of research on extraterrestrial materials, running over 1000 pages. Of the 435 individual meteorites listed in the index to this book, 38% (167) were collected in Antarctica. Similarly, GeoRef, the comprehensive online bibliography of Earth Sciences publications includes 2250 publications on Antarctic meteorites since 1972. Meteorites collected by the US Antarctic Search for Meteorites (ANSMET) program have been particularly important. 68% (114, or 26% of all meteorites) of the Antarctic meteorites listed in Planetary Materials were collected by ANSMET; 16 have been the topic of more than 10 publications, 8 have been the topic of more than 20 publications, and 4 having been the topic of more than 50 publications.
Perhaps the single most important aspect of Antarctic meteorite collection efforts to date is that nearly all of these important samples are made available to the world's planetary materials research community through altruistic distribution systems that are virtually unparalleled in the world of science. It was recognized early on that no single institution, let alone single investigator, could begin to realize the scientific potential of these specimens. Even-handed sample distribution systems were created that continue to serve the community. For example, ANSMET meteorites are shipped from the field unsorted to the Johnson Space Center in Houston, where each sample undergoes rapid, broad-brush characterization. These initial characterizations are published on the web and in a bi-annual newsletter, and scientists from around the world are actively invited to receive the samples. Neither the field team nor the initial characterization team has any pre-emptive rights to the specimens, ensuring that opportunities for new discoveries are available to anyone. The US program receives requests from around 250 researchers each year, and provides approximately 600 samples in that timeframe. The active Japanese Antarctic meteorite program has a similar sample distribution ethic, as have the several smaller programs initiated by European agencies.
The problem of private expeditions
The biggest concern is that active recovery of Antarctic meteorites by private or other non-governmental groups will result in the loss of specimens to science. Throughout human history, meteorites have been assigned uncommon value and been actively sought out by both scientists and private collectors. The lure of meteorites has in turn given them both commercial and assumed value, and unfortunately often proves strong enough to encourage illegal activities. For example, in spite of laws forbidding the export of meteorites, an extremely active and systematic "black market" in the countries of the Sahara has resulted in the loss of thousands of specimens in recent years. In contrast to the altruistic Antarctic sample distribution systems, only a tiny, non-representative sample of Saharan meteorites end up in scientific repositories &endash; and these only in exchange for money. Even the most "mundane" samples are of great value commercially. Ordinary chondrites, the most common type of meteorite (about 90% of what falls) typically sell for US $1&endash;10 per gram depending on a specimen's state of weathering and completeness; similar to the price of gold. Martian meteorites typically sell for about 100 to 1000 times as much, and unique Martian meteorite samples may sell for perhaps US $30,000&endash;50,000 per gram - approaching the price of cut, flawless diamond. Money can thus be a powerful driving force behind meteorite recovery. Similar problems plague the field of paleontology as well.
Unfortunately Antarctic meteorites, because of their rarity on the market, have exaggerated trade value. For example, the largest meteorite found in Antarctica (ALH76009) was recovered in the first season of the ANSMET program before strict protocols were in place. It consisted of dozens of scattered fragments totaling more than 440 kg. A few pieces ended up outside of scientific controls, and occasionally they can be found for sale. Asking price is typically US $500-600 per gram. Even when not sold for cash, the rarity of Antarctic meteorites gives them an enhanced value in trades &endash; one mundane Antarctic specimen is currently worth many dozens of rarer types from other continents. This implied value is clear enough that the US repositories of Antarctic meteorites (the Johnson Space Center and the Smithsonian Institution) have chosen not to conduct permanent trades of these specimens to avoid infringing on the Antarctic Treaty System.
While historically the lack of access to the continent, the harsh conditions, and the Antarctic Treaty and its protocols have provided some protection, the unique nature of Antarctic meteorite concentrations make them an increasingly attractive target. The locations of existing Antarctic meteorite stranding surfaces have been identified in the literature, and become potential targets for any recovery expedition. Access to these sites is now primarily an issue of funding &endash; Twin Otter aircraft operated by commercial entities such as ANI can easily locate and land at these locations. Most legal obligations can be simply met by claiming scientific or educational credentials and keeping all sample exchanges off the public record.
Previous consideration of the issue
Discussions among those familiar with Antarctic research and planetary materials researchers showed that most considered the potential for private meteorite expeditions low until recently. Costs seemed prohibitive and risk seemed high. Periodically private expedition planners discussed plans to look for meteorites along their paths, or collectors approached existing meteorite recovery team members, but none targeted meteorites as a primary goal and no recoveries were made (or admitted to). That situation changed in 1998 when a private group with the specific goal of recovering meteorites (The Planetary Studies Foundation) visited the Patriot Hills and surrounding regions. While their goals were generally stated as science and education, their website specifically states that "..... the team especially sought meteorites", and the party included two members whose primary interests were meteorite collection. While the 1998 expedition did not meet any obvious success in finding meteorites, they later serendipitously discovered a tiny fragment of meteorite within a collected morainal sample. The same private group organized a larger expedition to Antarctica in January 2000 and, with meteorite collecting as a primary focus, recovered 19 specimens thought to mass nearly 5 kg total from the Thiel Mountains area. The group has publicly stated that it plans future expeditions. While for both expeditions the group has privately claimed that meteorite samples would be made available to outside scientists and shared with existing sample distribution channels, they have yet to do so or make this offer publicly.
Realistically, the impact of these activities has been small. However, the potential for future activity is significant. The 19 specimens recovered by the private group demonstrate the feasibility of private recoveries, and if sold or traded could easily translate to enough actual value to finance several future expeditions. It is not apparent that the existing Treaty and related protocols and laws can hinder such activity as long as it is done in the name of science or education. Yet the damage such expeditions can do to the existing programs is real. Private expeditions can greatly lessen the value of government-supported efforts by removing meteorites from areas currently being systematically searched in several ways. First, private collections almost certainly cannot (or will not) conduct searches, handle, curate and distribute samples to the standards of the governmental collections. As a result all collections suffer; the private samples are biased and underutilized, while the public collections are incomplete and may also suffer bias (particularly if private collectors "high-grade" during searches, removing or withholding the biggest or the best samples). The Thiel Mountains region, where ANSMET had conducted reconnaissance searches in 1982-83 and 1991-92, has now been degraded in this manner.
Possible solutions
ANSMET's preferred tactic has been to appeal to the altruism of other parties that may operate around meteorite stranding surfaces. The potential for meteorite recoveries is fairly well-known among Antarctic researchers, and when field parties have encountered meteorites, in virtually every case they have enthusiastically offered them to the existing curatorial system. This solution is ideal for all concerned &endash; non-meteoritical groups can enjoy the thrill of finding meteorites and know they are serving science, while the planetary materials community avoids the loss of specimens.
Private expeditions have different motives and are unlikely to feel this altruism so strongly; if at all. The cost of mounting a private expedition is significant, and meteorites represent a tangible, valuable return on their investment. The private expeditions detailed previously bear witness to this conclusion. The leader of both expeditions was approached on several occasions by representatives of the US Antarctic meteorite efforts, in the hopes that representative samples of recovered specimens could be provided to research scientists through the existing system. Unfortunately no agreements were reached, and the prospects for these samples reaching the larger community remain unknown.
Other possible solutions have been discussed, most of a more severe nature. One of them is for ANSMET and the other governmental meteorite recovery efforts to quit publishing find-site locations. This is the tactic currently favored within the paleontological community to preserve fossil locations and is used extensively by the illegal collectors operating in the Sahara. Unfortunately this tactic also has the potential to diminish the value of the scientific collection, by removing the capability of establishing the geographical relationship among finds. ANSMET has published fairly detailed maps and indexes of all of its meteorite recovery sites since its inception, all of which are publicly available.
Another possible solution is to limit access to and activity within specific areas by designating individual meteorite stranding surfaces as "Sites of Strategic [sic] Scientific Interest" (SSSI). There are several complications to this approach. First, it obviously imposes limits to the activities of both meteoritic and non-meteoritic expeditions. Finding limits that can segregate harmful activities from those that are helpful or unrelated may be difficult. For example, the SSSI regulations might require that a significant proportion of each recovered meteorite sample be provided immediately to one of the established governmental distribution centers. But how would such a regulation be enforced? Private groups might simply claim the rocks they collected are terrestrial, and take them out of the public eye. A second complication is the fairly large number of sites currently under investigation could increase the number of SSSI by 10 or more, with more being added as time goes on. Some of the areas currently under study consist of many small and intricately shaped icefields &endash; would we designate "all the exposed blue ice within the given range" as an SSSI, or designate each small icefield individually? It is clear that guidelines would have to be developed as to which sites should be included, for how long, and what procedures should be followed for future designations.
Summary
Antarctic meteorites are a significant scientific resource that private (non-governmental) expeditions have begun to collect. While such expeditions may describe themselves as scientific or educational, such descriptions may disguise meteorite collection activities that counter, rather than enhance, scientific returns. This kind of activity by private groups could lead to the disappearance of Antarctic meteorites from scientific circulation, as well as open the door to more general exploitation of Antarctic resources for profit (with either monetary or implied monetary value) contrary to the spirit, if not the letter, of the Antarctic Treaty System. Private collectors have significant potential to interrupt current and planned meteorite recovery efforts (in fact they already have done so). These interruptions can dramatically lower the scientific return represented by all recovered specimens. There is significant reason to believe that private expeditions to collect meteorites will increase in number and frequency, now that the first successful expedition has just been completed. The planetary materials research community is eager to find a solution that will guarantee the rapid availability of significant samples of privately collected meteorite specimens. We welcome the help of SCAR in this regard.
Helpful Internet resources:
Homepage of ANSMET, the US Antarctic Search for Meteorites Program.
http://www.cwru.edu/affil/ansmet/
Antarctic Meteorites Curation homepage (including biannual Antarctic Meteorite Newsletter)
http://www-curator.jsc.nasa.gov/curator/antmet/antmet.htm
Antarctic meteorite locations homepage
http://cass.jsc.nasa.gov/pub/research/amlamp/intro/tableofc.html
Homepage of Japan's Antarctic Meteorite Research Center
http://yamato.nipr.ac.jp/AMRC/
The Meteorite Shop; a retail outlet that lists Antarctic and Saharan meteorites for sale.
Homepages for Planetary Studies Foundation's 1998 expedition. See "everybody must get stones" for reference to the expedition's meteorite goals.
http://beyond.landsend.com/antarctic/epilogue/
Homepages for Planetary Studies Foundation's 2000 expedition.
http://www.foxnews.com/science/antarctica/dispatch_0114.sml
This summary prepared for the SCAR Working Group on Geology by:
Ralph P. Harvey
Principal Investigator, Antarctic Search for Meteorites Program
Assistant Professor, Dept. of Geological Sciences
Case Western Reserve University
Cleveland OH 44106-7216
USA
Tel: +1 216-368-0198
E-mail: rph@po.cwru.edu
______________________________
Annex 3
For Immediate Release - July 17, 2000
Contact: Bill Bell
Space Adventures, Ltd.
+1 703 524 7172
info@spaceadventures.com
PRIVATE EXPLORERS TO GO IN SEARCH OF MARTIAN METEORITES
Space Adventures Now Assembling Explorer Team For Antarctic ExpeditionALEXANDRIA, VA, July 17
Space Adventures, the world's only space tourism company, announced today the immediate availability of seven places on its first expedition to the frozen continent of Antarctica. The voyage will mark the first time private individuals will specifically seek the retrieval of Martian-origin meteorites.
"NASA's 1996 discovery of possible Martian fossils inside a meteorite launched interest in Antarctica as a space destination," commented Eric Anderson, President and CEO of Space Adventures. "We are extremely excited about bringing this opportunity to the world's adventure tourists in the tradition of our other 'Steps To Space' expeditions."
The objective of this expedition is to find more Martian meteorites, which could contain further evidence of extra-terrestrial, fossilized life. The ideal scenario would be to find a sample and transport it back to the laboratory with its ice casing intact; Meteorites collected will be used and studied by NASA or other research organization.
The 14-day voyage was created in partnership with Adventure Network International (ANI), the only organization in the world providing private-sector services to the Antarctic interior since 1985. The expedition will be led by an ANI field guide with a resident geologist accompanying the group through most of the journey.
The seven-member Space Adventures "team" will begin their journey on December 1, 2000 in Chile where they will depart, by aircraft, to Patriot Hills, Antarctica. From there the group will travel by plane to the Thiel Mountains, only 300 nautical miles from the geographical South Pole. Here they will spend 7 days searching for meteorites and exploring the terrain before departing home. Parties interested in joining the expedition should contact Space Adventures now.
About Space Adventures, Ltd.
Space Adventures, Ltd., a privately-held company, is the world's premier space travel and tourism agency. Founded by astronauts and adventure travel pioneers, Space Adventures offers a broad spectrum of educational and adventure space experience programs. Programs available today include the Steps to Space series of adventures: zero-gravity flights at 2.5 times the speed of sound to the edge of space in high-altitude supersonic jets, and exclusive tours of the world's space and astronomy facilities, institutions and centers. Space Adventures also has partnered with the world's most innovative rocket development companies, which are planning actual tourist flights into space within the next three years. The company's advisory board includes Apollo 11 moonwalker Buzz Aldrin; shuttle astronauts Kathy Thornton, Charles Walker, Norm Thagard, and Byron Lichtenberg; and Skylab astronaut Owen Garriott.
For more information or for reservations, call 1-888-85-SPACE (+1-703-524-7172 outside the U.S.) or visit
http://www.spaceadventures.com/
______________________________
Annex 4
Extract from the draft Report of the SCAR Working Group on GeologyTokyo, Japan, 10-14 July 2000
2.7 Private collection of Antarctic meteorites
R Powell (USA) drew members attention to US concerns that participants in certain private expeditions were going to Antarctica with the express intention of collecting meteorites for subsequent sale. The Working Group on Geology expressed its concern that the integrity of future meteorite collections for scientific research is at risk, and that many meteorites of important scientific value may find their way into private collections and be lost to science. The WG drew attention to Recommendation SCAR XXII-1:
On Protection of Geological Specimens
Recalling the commitment to environmental protection under the Antarctic Treaty;
Recognizing the increasing frequency of non-scientific activities in Antarctica; and
Recognizing further the consequent possible loss of scientifically valuable geological specimens;
Mindful of the possible consequences of identifying the location of such geological specimens through formal site protection;
Noting the likelihood of further discoveries of such specimens;
SCAR recommends that:
1. Geological specimens, such as fossils, minerals, meteorites, volcanic bombs and ventifacts in Antarctica should be collected for scientific or educational purposes and not for commercial gain;
2. Geological samples collected from Antarctica for these purposes should be properly curated in institutions accessible to the scientific community and, wherever possible, should be publicly displayed.
That was adopted by SCAR Delegates at their meeting in San Carlos de Bariloche, Argentina, June 1992. SCAR forwarded the recommendation to the ATS where it was subsumed into ATS Recommendation XVIII-1: Tourism and Non-governmental Activities. Section E4 of that ATS Recommendation states:
Do not collect or take away biological or geological specimens or man-made artifacts as a souvenir, including rocks, bones, eggs, fossils and part or contents of buildings.
Members suggested that a suitable action might be for the US to write to IAATO, notifying them of the apparent non-compliance of some private expedition participants with this ATS Recommendation. They further suggested that SCAR might remind ATS that their recommendation was not being fully complied with and requesting that they strengthened their position. The US representative to the CEP might also pursue this issue. Members then approved Recommendation XXVI-Geol 1
Recommendation XXVI-Geol-1
Noting that members of certain private expeditions are apparently going to Antarctica with the expressed aim of collecting meteorites for subsequent sale,
Concerned that meteorites collected in this way will be lost to science, and
Mindful of Recommendation XXII-Geol 1 that the collecting of geological samples and meteorites for barter or sale should be expressly forbidden, and that any specimens should be curated in institutes or museums with free access for study,
The WG Geology recommends that SCAR asks the ATCM to take a stronger position on Recommendation XXII-Geol 1, and further asks that SCAR should bring these activities to the attention of the CEP through a working paper.
About Acrobat/PDF files