The label overstated it

How it happens

A tooth is listed with a species name because similar ones are, or a specimen gains a famous formation because the seller it came from said so. Neither involves anyone deciding to lie.

What the statute covers

Any false record, account, or label for, or any false identification of, a paleontological resource excavated or removed from federal land. Identification is named separately from the label.

Attribution is genuinely hard

Fragmentary material often cannot be taken past a group, and that is a legitimate answer. "Shark tooth, Lamniformes" is a better label than a species guess, and a knowledgeable buyer reads it as more careful, not less.

Inherited claims travel

If you repeat the previous seller’s attribution you have made the record. Asking what it is based on, and recording the answer as the previous owner’s attribution rather than your own, is both honest and useful.

Formation names carry locality

Naming a formation is making a statement about where the specimen came from, which can imply federal land. So a formation attribution is a provenance claim as well as a geological one.

Restoration and composites need declaring

Much commercial fossil material is restored, and some is composite. Saying which parts are original is a separate honesty question from identification, and omitting it is the complaint this trade is known for.

Write the uncertainty into the label

Compare, aff., probable, previous owner states. Those are the conventional ways to record a qualified identification, and using them costs nothing and protects everything.

Qualified is a stronger position than confident

A dealer who writes aff. and explains why reads as somebody who knows the material. A confident species name on fragmentary material reads as somebody who does not, to exactly the buyers who pay the most.

References