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