Rare species and ethics

[Russell Seymour]

Dennis Paulson wrote:

>I have resisted calling attention (as possibly vulnerable) to a dragonfly
>species that I described from a single short stretch of river in
>Washington, as I concluded that as a consequence of this it was far more
>likely the species would be "protected" so I could no longer collect
>specimens of it than that the entire rivershed would be "protected" so no
>harm could come to the species. Ohio, Eric's home state, has been
>wonderfully perceptive in allowing dragonflies (and other insects?) to be
>listed as of special concern, yet not banning their collection by
>researchers, but not all state and federal agencies are so sympathetic to
>science.

This is certainly not intended as a personal dig against anyone in
particular BUT....

At what stage does a species become sufficiently 'rare' that specimens
should no longer be collected? How can scientists justify being selfish
about their research if there is even a potential for further endangerment?

Perhaps I have misunderstood the above paragraph but these were the
questions which immediately occurred to me.

RUSS
____________________________________________________________________________

RUSSELL SEYMOUR MRes.   MSc. Advanced Methods in Taxonomy and Biodiversity
THE NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM, LONDON and IMPERIAL COLLEGE, LONDON UNIVERSITY