[Nhcoll-l] OSTP blog about Interagency Working Group on Scientific Collections

Tue Mar 14 01:37:24 EDT 2017

It’s been 3 months since the announcement of a new registry of federal scientific collections that has been developed by the Interagency Working Group on Scientific Collections (IWGSC). The post might have been overlooked due to the holiday season but it still seems worth commenting on. The working group is also responsible for the 2009 IWGSC Green Report, Scientific Collections: Mission Critical Infrastructure for Federal Science Agencies, which highlights the variety and value of federal scientific collections. As a retired federal museum specialist I can only say how disappointed and underwhelmed I am. The registry appears to be little more than an opportunity to check off a completed task and will mostly serve administrators who need only the appearance of progress. The National Park Service provided ¾ of the listed institutions but where is the contribution from federal science agencies? Why does the registry list only 147 collections when the 2009 IWGSC report listed 291 federal scientific collections? Were these 144 collections lost, donated, or destroyed? And why does the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) provide the names of only 3 collections, despite listing 86 scientific collections in the 2009 report?
In many respects these are minor complaints; registries like these can still serve to remind us of the contribution of federal scientific collections. However, the registry overshadows the real issues facing federal scientific collections: the lack of dedicated funds committed by federal agencies to manage and preserve scientific collections and the lack of transparency and oversight by groups such as the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) and IWGSC to ensure federal agencies comply with federal mandates.
Support for federal collections has lagged in the past 8 years, and efforts by the OSTP to direct agencies to realistically budget for collections care and maintenance haven’t resolved funding problems due to years of budget neglect (https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__doi.org_10.1093_biosci_biw138&d=DwIF-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=m0R166UiRqihRmKCz0T-eSp_u2EZk0ORnqZq-GsWe48&s=O8npdGP9FvOBNTustsAKXR6T7Y2g07oUy2jAYyKyqLg&e= ).  If the OSTP wants to ensure that federally owned scientific collections are appropriately managed and funded, it can start by preventing federal agencies like the USGS from dismissing what are, in fact, federal property that should be documented and preserved following appropriate, professional museum standards set in agency policy. The USGS has been able to dispose of, or give away, scientific collections at will, simply by calling them working or project collections. This minimizes stewardship responsibility and deflects long-term stewardship costs, effectively allowing the USGS to bypass the DOI policy and standards for accountability and long-term preservation of museum property, which includes scientific collections. And while biological collections continue to grow under the NPS and FWS, the USGS no longer allows biological specimens to be formally accessioned and cataloged as federal museum property. So what is the fate of these specimens once they have been collected, examined, and published on by USGS scientists in the course of conducting biological research?
In light of the potential for looming cuts in the federal workforce, the OSTP should urge the Office of Management and Budget and federal agencies to retain professional staff to manage scientific collections rather than letting federal positions lapse as staff retire, which is what is happening in the USGS. When stand-alone federal repositories are too costly, federal agencies should consider establishing partnerships, where federal museum professionals can retain an active role in managing federal collections rather than turning it over to others. This has been shown to be a cost-effective and mutually beneficial solution for some federal agencies including the USGS.  Failure to do so can leave irreplaceable scientific specimens at risk to loss or damage and can potentially burden non-federal institutions. All scientific collections need long-term support and all will benefit from increased funding and care by professional curators.
For additional information on the USGS and how it manages its scientific collections go to:
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.peer.org_news_news-2Dreleases_inspection-2Dof-2Dvast-2Dfederal-2Dbiological-2Dcollections-2Dslated.html&d=DwIF-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=m0R166UiRqihRmKCz0T-eSp_u2EZk0ORnqZq-GsWe48&s=sawNqLFqkTpCOQAp6RlwqgDT43ZEUcEQIK9BY4qYkeY&e= 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__academic.oup.com_bioscience_article-2Dlookup_doi_10.1093_biosci_biv020&d=DwIF-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=m0R166UiRqihRmKCz0T-eSp_u2EZk0ORnqZq-GsWe48&s=vGO2CgMiSkSFm62qQke7NgqizMHWvLLqRtHnfaZVmaQ&e= .
Cindy Ramotnik

On Dec 9, 2016, at 3:26 PM, "Bentley, Andrew Charles" <abentley at ku.edu<mailto:abentley at ku.edu>> wrote:

From: Schindel, David [mailto:schindeld at si.edu<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__si.edu&d=DwIF-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=m0R166UiRqihRmKCz0T-eSp_u2EZk0ORnqZq-GsWe48&s=Ho21CfDuWCGIAz6BqN8kbuBBmwMb-oG53GgBlW01TFs&e= >]
Sent: Friday, December 09, 2016 4:02 PM
Subject: OSTP blog about Interagency Working Group on Scientific Collections

OSTP just released a blog about the work of the IWGSC, the information Clearinghouse with agency policies for their collections, and the registry of US Federal Scientific Collections.  Any help you can offer in spreading the word would be appreciated.
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.whitehouse.gov_blog_2016_12_09_finding-2Dfederal-2Dscientific-2Dcollections-2Djust-2Dgot-2Deasier-2D1&d=DwIF-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=m0R166UiRqihRmKCz0T-eSp_u2EZk0ORnqZq-GsWe48&s=tljt6dhaLZsnHr8ppqCfBXYRnQdi4uumRAVN7U8jaNM&e= <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.whitehouse.gov_blog_2016_12_09_finding-2Dfederal-2Dscientific-2Dcollections-2Djust-2Dgot-2Deasier-2D1&d=CwMFAg&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=IFVkNmj1WCM74OVg1xGcQ3vZB769izrUssrrk4FrW3I&s=aPKFalcW8Zr_-caG_8Xj9oApU0QV31crWwjjauNbKzQ&e=>
Have a good weekend -
David

_______________________________________________
Nhcoll-l mailing list
Nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu<mailto:Nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>
http://mailman.yale.edu/mailman/listinfo/nhcoll-l

_______________________________________________
NHCOLL-L is brought to you by the Society for the Preservation of
Natural History Collections (SPNHC), an international society whose
mission is to improve the preservation, conservation and management of
natural history collections to ensure their continuing value to
society. See https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.spnhc.org&d=DwIF-g&c=-dg2m7zWuuDZ0MUcV7Sdqw&r=CLFZJ3fvGSmDp7xK1dNZfh6uGV_h-8NVlo3fXNoRNzI&m=m0R166UiRqihRmKCz0T-eSp_u2EZk0ORnqZq-GsWe48&s=nwrQyYgwv1Ravg2Q7DAzoigcX1cd3ufaMrOa1U2c76A&e=  for membership information.
Advertising on NH-COLL-L is inappropriate.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20170314/f66aaf7f/attachment.html 