Leaderboard

I've posted this sometime, somewhere in the past, but wanted to focus on the necessity and ethics of acquiring a type specimen(s) in biological research. The text below comes from http://www.animalethics.org.au/policies-and-guidelines/wildlife-research/voucher-specimens and does a nice job sorting things out. I have pasted the "Justification" section, as this is the big issue between the pro and no kill camps in the realm of bigfoot research. However, the rest of the document is definitely worth a read over. What say the rest of you about this as it applies to possible acquisitions of bigfoot specimens? "4.0 Justification4.1 Functions of voucher specimens 4.1.1 Role of taxonomy Correct identification of the animals that are being studied are crucial to the outcome of the work. Incorrect or unresolved identifications can lead to misleading or incomplete conclusions. This is true despite the emphasis of the research that is being conducted (physiological, anatomical, biochemical, behavioural or some other aspect of the animal's biology) and whether it occurs in the field or the laboratory. Conservation needs are impossible to assess without the ability to recognise and differentiate species. Thus, identification, although often taken for granted, is fundamental to any animal-based study and particularly important when studying native animals. 4.1.2 Voucher specimens fulfil an archival role by permitting: identification to be checked subsequent to the initial study, thus permitting verification or, if required, correction; reassessment of studies based on those specimens and which otherwise cannot be repeated; extension and elaboration of studies based on those specimens when new questions arise and/or new analytical techniques become available. Such studies may involve, but are not limited to, geographic variation, higher level systematics, ontological stages, life histories, sexual dimorphism, morphological variability, physiological measurements, biochemical comparisons and behaviour. 4.1.3 Voucher specimens allow problems to be addressed that cannot be resolved in the field, including: when there is no other means to verify identification; group for which taxonomy is undergoing or expected to undergo change; questions raised cannot be answered at the time the animal is in hand. 4.1.4 Voucher specimens permit confirmation of the distribution and occurrence of a species at a certain place at a certain time. This is important: if an animal is near or outside the limit of its known distribution; as part of a routine inventory and future documentation of local fauna. 4.1.5 Voucher specimens serve a special role when they serve as types of species-level taxa. 4.2 The Animal Ethics Committee must consider the conservation impact as part of the justification for collection of voucher specimens. A National Parks & Wildlife Service Authority is an essential prerequisite as an indication that the conservation aspect has been considered by experts. Additional advice may also need to be sought directly from the National Parks & Wildlife Service if the committee is still concerned about the conservation aspect. 4.3 Minimising impact 4.3.1 Kinds of vouchers - justification The fundamental bases for identifications are whole animal specimens, usually maintained in a museum or similar institution. If necessary, identifications can be confirmed by reference to such collections. In some situations, e.g., distinctive species, a non-essential part of the animal such as a hair sample, or a photograph, sound recording or some other non-destructive record may be adequate for identification. These, however, have limited value. They do not offer the range of information as do whole body specimens, initially or through re-examination, nor are they suitable for detailed study by alternative means, including new technology (e.g., biochemical). There are many species for which these are not valid alternatives. Accurate identifications can only be made if there is one or more specimens already available for comparison and examination. If an animal is thought to represent a new species, a specimen should be taken. Types (the basis for taxonomic descriptions of new taxa) should always be specimens; other kinds of samples are not suitable alternatives. 4.3.2 Numbers The number of specimens which can be justified depends on: 4.3.2.1 The minimum number of specimens required to establish identification. This is affected by: sexual dimorphism. It may or may not be necessary to collect both male and female specimens; how distinct the species in question is from other species; whether differences between growth stages exist which could make identification difficult. 4.3.2.2 The minimum number of sites required to describe a population. This is affected by: the diversity of habitats within any site; geographical variability across the species range; the type and scale of study. Collection of animals from more than one site must always be justified. 4.3.3 Methods Capture and euthanasia methods require consideration but this should be no different from consideration of these methods as part of projects not involving voucher collection."

DWA....dmaker......don't make me pull this car over.

^^ Oh for Pity's sake! I get so tired of this old claim trotted out all the time. Is it really that hard to understand that some of us just do not believe in Bigfoot? Seriously?? You have to make us sound like frightened little children to explain away our disbelief? It is nothing more complicated than I just simply do not believe there is an unknown primate running around North America. The evidence does not point to one, it points to hoaxes and fakes and mistakes. Not a single shred of biological evidence has ever been found. But plenty of the evidence has lead to a hoax, quite often in fact. But yes, please, tell me again and again how "afraid" I am of a creature that does not exist outside of your ( collective, not you personally of course) head.