Another option to consider-

I have heard of art museums that actually let patrons borrow or rent
paintings.  The bennies are - The museum always knows where the paintings
are,  they reduce their storage problems and maybe make a few bucks for
future acquisitions. The patron has a nice item for display or to nurture
their love of a type or period object.

Carl Barna



                    "MacLeod, Heather"
                    <[log in to unmask]        To:     [log in to unmask]
                    CAN.GC.CA>                      cc:
                    Sent by: HISTORICAL             Subject:     Re: culling artifacts
                    ARCHAEOLOGY
                    <[log in to unmask]>


                    11/28/2000 01:19 PM
                    Please respond to
                    HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY






If you were to record the buyers of such items then future generations
could
perhaps track these folks (and their purchases) for any future intellectual
venture that may arise....


> ----------
> From:         Carl Barna[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Reply To:     HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY
> Sent:         Tuesday, November 28, 2000 1:40 PM
> To:   [log in to unmask]
> Subject:      Re: culling artifacts
>
> Hi -
>
> You could say this about a lot of mass produced items, not just bottles.
> Do we include Civil War buttons, canon or musket balls?  Will there be a
> commitee who meets to decide which artifact classes to include?
>
> Not a bad idea, though.  How many of these mass produced, standardized
> items do we need?  Museums could use the money and it might help curb pot
> hunting abuses.
>
> Jump back.....
>
> Carl Barna
>
>
>
>                     Praetzellis
>                     <PRAETZELLIS@COMPU        To:     [log in to unmask]
>                     SERVE.COM>                cc:
>                     Sent by:                  Subject:     Re: culling
> artifacts
>                     HISTORICAL
>                     ARCHAEOLOGY
>                     <[log in to unmask]>
>
>
>                     11/28/2000 12:18
>                     PM
>                     Please respond to
>                     HISTORICAL
>                     ARCHAEOLOGY
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Bill Lockhart wrote:
>
> >Another possibility is to sell off all the surplus artifacts to
> >collectors and use the resulting money to finance legislation agains
> >pothunting.
> >(Before the hate mail starts pouring in, this is inteded as humor)
>
>
> I'm for it, sort of.
> What if we were to give redundant artifacts (I'm thinking of whole, late
> 19th-century glass bottles, which we have in abundance) to museums? They
> could sell the stuff off and thereby:
> 1. reduce the retail value of these items and make pothunting less
> attractive,
> 2. provide some income to museums, and
> 3. free up some space in archaeological facilities.
>
> I'm totally in agreement with JHB concerning slag and clinker (nice to
> know
> there's another clinker fetishist out there), but industrially made
> bottles
> are a different kettle of fish. They are essentially identical and take
up
> a lot of room in a box.
>
> I await the fallout.
>
> Adrian Praetzellis
> Sonoma State University
>