The Expert Survey
Expert Consultation
When creating the guidelines for both fossil finds and for Indigenous artefact finds that appear on this website, significant research of the existing academic literature was completed, as well as consultation with experts within Indigenous archaeology, Australian palaeontology, and science communication.
Experts were chosen because of their prior experience in relevant fields. Experts had the option of participating anonymously where they could select a generic expert label (e.g. Museum Curator), or could list their name and job title. Responses were collected between September and December 2021 through an online survey.
21 experts were initially contacted (seven Australian palaeontologists, ten Indigenous archaeologists/heritage experts or Aboriginal Elders, and two science communicators, and one heritage and policy expert). Of this group, 13 responded and participated in the survey (six palaeontologists, 4 Indigenous archaeologists/heritage experts, two science communicators, and one heritage and policy expert).
While the first section of the survey was dedicated to hearing about the participants suggestions for the heritage guidelines, I also took this opportunity to ask them about their thoughts on the current state of heritage legislation, and its communication.
The Results
Why do you think that Australia's palaeontological and archaeological heritage should be protected?
Do you think that Australia’s palaeontological and archaeological material is adequately protected under the current state and/or federal legislation?
All but one of the experts agreed that Australia’s heritage material is NOT adequately protected under state or federal legislation.
*The one person that disagreed (a palaeontologist) stated that there are adequate laws to keep heritage finds in the country, but didn’t mention state laws.
Why do you consider the laws to be inadequate?
There is no incentive for people who find palaeontological or archaeological material to bring their finds to the correct authorities. In some cases there are disincentives for people who find paleontological or archaeological material to the attention of the authorities. What's needed is a collaborative and collegial system whereby people can bring forward finds without risk of penalty and with suitable renumeration for valuable finds.
– Paul Willis, Adjunct Associate Professor in Palaeontology, Flinders University
***
Archaeological material is not being protected. Development takes precedence and only a small fraction of a site has to be salvaged to allow destruction of the remainder. Many areas are not investigated at all, especially in cases of development of state significance.
– Archaeologist
***
The legislation itself is intended to protect, but in practice it can have 'perverse' effects. The problem is not so much with the legislation as such, as its implementation and regulation. The legislation is written to protect significant finds with large-scale, corporate development projects in mind. When the investment stakes are high however, state governments have overridden the protections. For the individual landholder/farmer the process of compliance can be too arduous and a perceived imposition on the landowner's rights: specifically, the 'stop work', 'don't move it', report to Heritage. The shadow of this can and has lead to the destruction of material, or most commonly a failure to report and engage in the process, which means that the record of this heritage is never built up.
– Museum Expert
***
Museums are not adequately resourced to accept new finds in many circumstances. This means that people often keep what they find instead of it being stored in an appropriate place; Laws are commonly outdated and need reforms.– Northern Territory Archaeologist
Where would you advise a member of the public look for information about a fossil/artefact find?
Do you think that there is adequate communication to the public on how to responsibly handle fossil or archaeological finds in Australia?
>90% of experts agreed that communication is NOT adequate
No attention has been given to communicating this information to the general public.
– Paul Willis, Adjunct Associate Professor in Palaeontology, Flinders University
***
The legislation generally is not clear on who owns the specimens - is it the finder, or the landholder, or the Crown?
– Former Government palaeontologist
***
Many people only consider these types of finds from a perspective of potential monetary value. Education should inculcate people with an understanding of the whole range of different sorts of values for this material.
– Dr Andrew Simpson, Palaeontologist (retired)
***
There is not adequate communication to the public on this topic. Why do I think that? From first hand experience speaking with farmers and others who live in small towns, and also among friends and acquaintances living in the major capitals in the south-east, knowledge of 'what to do' is very limited. This includes knowing that such finds are 'to be expected' generally speaking, rather than being a rare phenomenon. Why is it, that the communication is not adequate? Lack of resources, and lack of priority.
– Museum Expert
The onus is on the public to interpret the legislation for themselves.
– Archaeologist
Do you think that clearer messaging around what actions to take when discovering a fossil or artefact would help to protect Australia's palaeontological and archaeological heritage?
Why do you think a member of the public would NOT report a fossil or artefact?
They do not know who to contact
They do not want to have to stop certain activities (e.g. ploughing, digging, construction, mining)
They may want to keep the object
They are scared that their land might get taken away
Potential financial value
Potential of trespassing
They don’t want to get in trouble
They have no interest in fossils or artefacts
Science Communication
The following questions were included in this survey to examine how we can better connect with and engage public and non-academic audiences. These responses will be compared with responses from the public that were collected through the main Found a Fossil survey.
Which communication formats do you think are the most engaging and informative for science communication to the general public?
Why do you think that they are the most informative and engaging communication formats?
They are dynamic and can convey information in a variety of formats.
(Social Media Post & Video) – Museum Curator
That's where the most eyes are.
(Social Media & Video) – Paul Willis
Widely available. Multiple platforms. could be both long and short form. Options for entertainment, not just "information transfer".
(Social Media and Other: Podcasts) – Rod, Science Communication Academic
A properly maintained website is more likely to contain accurate information that has been critiqued. Social media is apt to be erroneous and other forms are not likely to be found a very large audience.
(Website) – Palaeontologist
They remove a lot of barriers - most people have internet access, but many don’t enjoy reading a lot of text. Short catchy statements with links to more detailed resources are useful. Videos (short ones like TikTok) are great at getting the attention of younger audiences.
(Video) – Dr Kailah Thorn, Museum Curator
Websites are widely accessible; museums are always fascinating if well-presented as nothing beats seeing fossils for real.
(Websites and Other: Museums) – Former Government Palaeontologist
The web is a ubiquitous source that is often the first place people will look for information. I also include museums in the answer because by using museum processes such as collection building and exhibition work the contextualisation of information is enabled. Therefore they can be seen as a type of communications technology.
- (Websites and Other: Museums) – Dr Andrew Simpson, Palaeontologist (retired)
I think in-person communication is the most engaging – its live and interactive. Being in the same actual shared space with someone who is trying to communicate directly with you is a lot more compelling than text and pictures on a page, whether print or online.
(Other: in-person) – Museum Expert
Quick snippets of information on social media is what will work for most people who have a passing interest in a subject, and have the potential for greatest reach.
(Social media and websites) – Jason Irving