1916] The Ottawa Naturalist. 23 



it to enable him to preserve it on a rectangular block, which 

 will display well in his cabinet. Before he has completed his 

 work a fissure develops which cuts across the specimen and re- 

 moves perhaps a third of it. To his mind this specimen is 

 spoiled. He throws away the separated fragment, and dis- 

 appointedly leaves his find in order to search for another. I 

 cannot but contrast this procedure with that of a collector I 

 well remember. In breaking off a part of a ledge some portions 

 of a rare trilobite were discovered. Before attempting to re- 

 move the rest of the specimen this collector first secured all 

 fallen fragments which preserved any portion of it, and fastened 

 them to the removed piece with a little glue. The portion still 

 remaining in the cliff edge was next secured and the whole care- 

 fully wrapped in paper and tied together. I recall an instance 

 in which a specimen, after being freed from its matrix in the 

 workshop, showed the loss of a portion of a remarkably long 

 caudal spine. In the following year the original collector made 

 a long journey back to the quarry, found the place from which 

 the specimen was taken, and secured the rest of the imbedded 

 spine. 



Attention is called to the destructive work of the amateur, 

 because he otitnumbers the experienced collector ten to one, 

 and not only destroys much valuable matter in the field, but 

 oftimes loses his interest in his own collection, and allows it 

 finally to go the way of all waste. Particularly is "this true in 

 the neighbourhood of certain boys' summer camps, where 

 "nature study" leads them afield with their "councillors," and 

 where indiscriminate collecting is encouraged." The damage in- 

 flicted by the amateur is wholly unintentional, and the more 

 experienced worker has but to take an interest in the younger 

 collectors to make them very helpful allies. 



The amateur is not the only person who injures the field 

 in which he operates. Many experienced collectors of the 

 "second type" still have the dominant idea that well-nigh per- 

 fect specimens are alone worth saving. This, to my knowledge, 

 has led some of them to crush with the hammer certain finds 

 that they had stopped to examine and found defective. This 

 impulse to destroy in the field may arise from disappointment, 

 or from the desire to avoid being misled at a subsequent visit. 



To the above loss we must add that which often occurs when 

 the "cabinet' ' is re-arranged and many specimens thrown 

 away. Because of the great difference in point of view between 

 collectors of the second and third types, this loss may be a 

 serious one. 



. Some will doubtless think the picture overdrawn. To their 

 minds the supply of fossil forms is practically inexhaustable. 



