Regulations & Responsibilities

[christian thompson]

Thank you, Peter, for sending the New York Times article.

At last, an important news source has publishized what we have long known
to be a problem.

But given that most of know of this problem, what should we do about
colleagues who continue to ignore and disobey the existing regulations and,
thereby, feed the basic justification for tighter regulations.

As many may know I run the BioSystematic Database of World Diptera (see
http:\\www.diptera.org\names) where I try to capture nomenclatural
information as well as information on type specimens of flies. All to
frequently, I note colleagues who publish new species collected from
countries, like Australia or Brazil, where there have been regulations about
the return of the primary types to a local institution, but just deposit
those types in their PERSONAL or home institution collection. Further I know
of scientists who get the appropriate permits, agreements, etc., from
countries, but never intent to follow them. Etc.

I view these as "time-bombs," which some day some local scientists are
going to discover and officially complain, etc., but I wonder about my
ethical responsibilities today. Should I suggest to the scientists involve
to return the types? Should I tell scientists in the original country about
the violation? Or should I just ignore the violation?

Comments?





F. Christian Thompson
Systematic Entomology Lab., ARS, USDA
Smithsonian Institution
Washington, D. C. 20560-0169
(202) 382-1800 voice
(202) 786-9422 FAX
cthompso at sel.barc.usda.gov [NB: no terminal "n"]
visit our Diptera site at www.diptera.org