[Nhcoll-l] NPS seeks comments on implementation of benefits-sharing policy

[White, Rich]

"CRADAs include a commitment by a non-federal scientist or company to share reasonable benefits with the park. Benefits may take many forms, including, for instance, information vital to the protection of park resources."

Since nearly all research by scientists (at least those in natural history) involve the publication of the information developed via the research, this happens automatically.  If this is what the NPS is concerned about, I'm not sure why they think a formal legal agreement is necessary.  However, my guess is that someone, somewhere, got it in their heads that natural history research in the Parks was going to lead to lucrative commercially valuable inventions of some sort, and NPS saw funding dollar signs on the horizon.

Is this even a reasonable expectation?  How many natural science projects in Parks even have the potential to lead to such development?  And how many of the natural resources are so restricted in geographic distribution that someone interested in potential commercial development would even bother to try to do the research in a Park, knowing the NPS was legally entitled to a cut?

It seems to me that this is much to do about nothing.  Am I missing something here?

Richard S. White, Jr., Director
International Wildlife Museum
4800 West Gates Pass Road
Tucson, Arizona 85745

520-629-0100 ext 252
Fax: 520-618-3561

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20121221/7e501f46/attachment-0001.html