PROFESSIONAL ETHICS AND PRACTICES - Column 162
activities permitted under the general mining or mineral laws, does not apply to Indian land, and does not apply to land other than federal land as defined in the proposed rule.” The potential for these regulations to impact mining activities exists depending on the interpretation of several points. It might be, for example, that paleontological surveys might be required as part of a plan of operations that could require similar surveys for cultural items.
I am not personally aware of uranium deposits that have contained impor- tant paleontological and cultural finds. However, Adkins, who lives in Nucla, Colorado in the middle of uranium country has seen radioactive fossil bones and logs kept as souvenirs and some bone debris in the backs of some mines. Adkins agrees that fossils aren’t common in uranium mines in the area but they do occur. I do know that significant fossils have been recovered from coal mines. Also, the Lompoc, California diatomite deposit contains significant marine ani- mal fossils that are exposed and collected as mining progresses. Lompoc is an example of a location where if mining didn’t occur, the fossils would not be uncovered and made available for col- lection.
It appears that the proposed paleon- tological resources preservation should be expanded to specifically deal with the situation where significant fossils are uncovered as a byproduct of the exploration and mining activities. If as at Lompoc, the miners and paleontolo- gists work together, both benefit. Those with specific knowledge of particular sites where a significant fossil location is a byproduct of other activities, should consider contacting the relevant BLM and other agencies to develop mutually beneficial regulations.1
Safety in the Field
issue of the TPG addressed safety issues. The first, “Safety for the infrastructure geologist—expecting the unexpected,” by George Davis, CPG-10951, spe-
cifically addresses (1) the need to “call before you dig” due to underground utility lines (electric, natural gas, petro- leum products, steam, etc.) that you do not want to inadvertently encoun- ter, (2) overhead powerlines, and (3) vehicular traffic. Davis works for the Missouri Department of Transportation and knows whereof he speaks. But the hazards of underground utility lines and overhead powerlines can be encountered out in the country, not just next to highways. In addition to the very real safety issues presented by utility lines, these lines can also adversely affect your geophysical surveys.
The second article, “Field trip insur- ance and safety,” addressed the prob- lems encountered in trying to obtain liability insurance for field trips. Despite the hundreds of field trips run by geologi- cal societies and schools every year, the insurance industry has no actuarial data on incident rates. I drafted this article for the National Executive Committee as a “heads up” to a potential problem for AIPG meetings and the Editor decided it belonged in the TPG. It is an issue all of us must deal with. This article con- tains the Rocky Mountain Association of Geologists “Accident and Emergency Plan” checklist that all leaders and sponsoring organizations of field trips, including AIPG Sections, should adopt.
De-licensure of Geologists
R. Douglas Bartlett’s, CPG-8433, article, “De-licensing of geologists: com- TPG and Alan V. Moran’s, CPG-9568, and Bill Dixon’s, CPG-3658, Letters to the Editor, “Re: De-licensure of geologists TPG renews a long-standing debate in TPG and these columns over the years (see “Topical Index” under
www.aipg. org/codeofethics for the listings under “licensing”). It’s time to take another look at some of the arguments for and against state licensing of geoscientists.
The justification of profession- al licensing laws is protection of the
1. The uncovering of the Snowmass Village fossil (Snowmastodon) site during the excavation of the Ziegler Reservoir in October 2010 is a well-known example of a significant fossil site being discovered as the byproduct of other activity. A number of fossil sites around the Denver area were uncovered during construction of homes, highways, or the Coors Field baseball stadium.
2. Abbott, David M., Jr., 2016, How do we inform the public about unethical practice? (abs): Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs. Vol. 48, No. 7,
https://gsa.confex.com/gsa/2016AM/webprogram/ Paper278060.html; the presentation slides are available on this website.
3. Bonham, O., Abbott, D., and Waltho, A., 2016, An international review of disciplinary measures in professional geoscience—both procedures and actions (abs.): 35th International Geological Congress (Cape Town, South Africa); available through GEOREF; a paper based on this talk is in preparation for Geoscience Canada and will be re-printed in the TPG.
www.aipg.org
public’s health, safety and welfare by setting standards of education (con- firmed through examination for ASBOG states) and experience. The AIPG Code of Ethics, Canon 2. Obligations to The Public, “Members should uphold the public health, safety, and welfare in the performance of professional services, and avoid even the appearance of impro- priety” states the same principle and Rule 2.1.3 and Standard 3.2 and Rule 3.2.1 provide that protection of public health, safety, and welfare takes prece- dence over client confidentiality. But is this justification being met? The answer is, generally very poorly.2
There are a variety of reasons for this poor performance, one of which is the ability to investigate allegations of incompetent or unethical practice. States only have jurisdiction within their boundaries and actions that licensee (or registrant) in that state takes in another state are not investigated. This is why Canada no longer recognizes an ASBOG licensee for purposes of Canadian National Instrument 43-101 for techni- cal mining reports. Another problem results from the fact that investigations of incompetent or unethical practice require time and expertise, which cost the state attorney general’s office money and lead to a disinclination to prosecute.
A 2016 review of disciplinary proceed- ings in Canada, the United States, and Australia identified 50 proceedings for incompetent or unethical practice; they were AIPG, 11 since 1985; Canada, 19 since 1990; ASBOG states, 17 since 1995; and Australia, 1 in 2010 and 1 in 2016.3 The 50 proceedings fell into 6 general baskets of offence types, (with some actions falling into more than 1 basket (the total baskets is 61)):
2 concerned falsifying data.
5 concerned fraudulent billing and/ or falsifying time sheets.
9 concerned inappropriate behav- iour towards others.
9 concerned problematic geoscience work and/or technical deficiencies.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56
