Brazilian fossils are not necessarily cultural heritage
Caiubi Emanuel Souza Kuhn,Ismar de Souza Carvalho,Fábio Augusto Gomes Vieira Reis,André Luis Spisila,Marjorie Csekö Nolasco,Abdelmajid Hach Hach,Adelir José Strieder
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-024-02396-7
IF: 19.1
2024-03-30
Nature Ecology & Evolution
Abstract:In their Comment published in Nature Ecology & Evolution concerning the part that scientific societies can play in the repatriation of fossils, Araújo-Júnior et al. 1 did not consider the complete set of laws that govern fossils in Brazil. This gives the impression that Brazilian law predominantly considers fossils as cultural heritage. In fact, Brazilian legislation is conflicted on issues related to the identification, protection and management of palaeontological heritage. In different Brazilian laws (Table 1), fossils are variously considered as (1) a mineral resource, used for the production of cement, fertilizers, ornamental rocks and so on; (2) an educational resource in accordance with Law No. 13.575/2017, article 2, item XIII, when intended for museums and research institutions; and (3) cultural heritage, where recognized by the responsible body, the National Historical and Artistic Heritage Institute (IPHAN) 2,3 . Table 1 Complete Brazilian legislation related to fossils Full size table Just as not all urban complexes or sites of ecological value are cultural heritage, not every fossil or palaeontological site can be considered cultural heritage. To date, IPHAN has recognized only the 'Fossil Forest' on the Potim River (1510/2003) as cultural heritage 4 . The fact that the recognition of palaeontological sites as cultural heritage by IPHAN is rare reinforces the conclusion that, on the whole, Brazil currently considers fossils to be mineral heritage 2,3,5 . As such, the National Mining Agency (ANM) is the body that is responsible for authorizing and managing research that involves fossils.
ecology,evolutionary biology