london

A group of senior palaeontologists is proposing an international agreement that hominid fossils should not be moved from their country of origin without “compelling” scientific reasons.

In a motion passed earlier this year during its meeting in South Africa, the International Association for the Study of Human Palaeontology (IASHP) urged that requests to move such material must be backed by a demonstration that the investigation could not proceed “in the foreseeable future” in the country of origin.

Not all palaeontologists agree. Some feel that the words “foreseeable future” are too vague, and are concerned that increased restrictions on the movement of fossil hominids could hold back scientific investigation, as the country of origin may lack up-to-date research equipment.

But those keen to press the case for restricting access argue that this is needed to compel greater investment in museums in developing countries. “If you allow fossil hominids to be taken [abroad] every time you want to do a sophisticated analysis, countries are never going to develop,” says Bernard Wood, of George Washington University in Washington DC.

Leakey: seeks to protect ‘priceless’ fossils and says some sophisticated analyses may be unnecessary. Credit: FRANK SPOONER/ANNE NOSTEN

The need for restrictions to be tightened was initially raised by Meave Leakey, of the National Museums of Kenya, following a request that Turkana boy, a 1.6 million-year-old skeleton of Homo erectus, be lent to the University of Chicago for an exhibition.

Wood, who put forward the IASHP resolution, says: “We all know developing countries need money. But many are concerned this is not the way to raise it. If it is done this way, there is no pressure on governments to fund museums properly.”

Wood adds that, if a government cannot find money for a scientific investigation, “then it is up to the international community to solve [the problem], without the need to have fossils flying round the world in money-making activities”.

But a senior British palaeontologist says that, although he welcomes the attention that the resolution has brought to the issue, he does not support the wording. “It is all very well for scientists to pass this, but it is still museums and governments who make decisions,” he says.

“All of us are being continually asked to loan specimens,” he adds. “Our policy 20 years ago was not to allow transportation. But in the last ten to fifteen years we have loosened our attitude.”

He points out, for example, that the Natural History Museum has been unable to afford expensive computerized tomography and γ-ray dating facilities, and that some “outstanding science” has resulted from its loans to institutions abroad. “The science community is going to have to be realistic,” he says.

Leakey describes hominid fossils as “priceless specimens”. She says: “We are often asked very difficult questions — such as requests to apply destructive techniques. I ask, what are you going to gain? Technology progresses so fast, you have to be careful not to make a hasty decision.”