Alum v. Synthetic

[wesheltonj]

Can someone state with reasonable scientific certainty which one of these processes is the best for long term mount life. Alum seams to get bad mouthed for long-term life on-line, i.e. more then the hunters life time. And synthetic as too new. Thanks.

 

[rookhawk]

A few pros I know that want "forever" life span use arsenic. You must glass enclose the mount if you use arsenic because...its friggin arsenic. But that's what I know.

I've seen many 125 year old bird mounts that were arsenic treated and they are in amazing shape.

Don't know with less toxic solutions which is best. I'd call Wendy, taxidermist at the Milwaukee museum, and ask her what method preserves mounts the very longest.

The field museum in Chicago has some amazing mounts of great antiquity...wonder if they are all arsenic? It would be worth calling.

 

[wesheltonj]

I googled Arsenic taxidermy, it appears that was mixed to provide insect control. Of course the down side was the taxidermist had a greatly shorter life span. It was interesting to read that during Lincoln's time it was use for the preservation of humans, with good results. Of course the embalmer also had a shorter life span too. Hoping of the taxidermists here or else where can him in and provide some guidance.

 

[CAustin]

Dennis at Artistry of Wildlife should respond. He will know!

 

[harden]

Arsenic does one thing kills bugs when they eat it. It IS NOT A TAN . Phenol was an alternative. but not used anymore.
Alum only tan I prefer. Syntan new 10-20 years now unknown life over 50-100years
Sulfuric acid tams in the early 1900's. These days Lutan, citric acid tan, vinegar tan, carbolic tan all kinds
I use alum have for 40 years always will.. Like anything it's not the raw material it's how it used by a professional and those dumping on alum have a commercial and monetary aspect to kicking it form their own personal gain.
NO TAN is perfect and NONE are in any way BUGPROOF.

 

[CAustin]

Thanks Dennis