Isn't the nub of this issue the phrase "in competition with".  I developed
an institutional code at Auckland Museum (New Zealand), and am bound by a
similar one in my present job.  This permits me to collect in the same
subject areas as the Museum I work for, provided that I notify the Museum of
new acquisitions and allow it the opportunity within one month of
notification to acquire from me at the same cost I paid any such new
acquisition.   I have indeed had to yield one item under this provision.

In this way my collecting is not "in competition with" my employing museum,
and I can continue to derive pleasure and understanding from my collecting
(which may well benefit the museum in the long run too.)

Stuart Park
Museum of New Zealand Te Papa Tongarewa,
Wellington, New Zealand.

Email [log in to unmask]


 ----------
From: owner-museum-l
To: Multiple recipients of list MUSEUM-L
Subject: Re: Ethics Query
Date: Wednesday, 18 October 1995 10:45AM

In a message dated 95-10-17 23:52:41 EDT, you write:

>It seems foolish that such collecting should be proscibed for such
interests
>are at the heart of our involvment in the field..  Yet AAM guidelines could
>be read to say we are unethical.
>
>

You should talk to a man by the name of Sam Hoyle. He was the MAP I
Assessment officer who came to our museum (National Firearms Museum) and
discussed this very subject with us. Often times, our curators will use
accoutrements from their own collections to augment an exhibit, etc. simply
b/c the museum cannot afford to obtain these items. Sam confirmed what we
thought, it is unethical for curators to collect privately in competition
with their institutions. This doesn't mean that everyone does not do it
anyway, it is just wrong. You can reach Sam through AAM or I can get his
address for you if you like.

Adrienne DeArmas
National Fireams Museum
Fairfax, VA