[Nhcoll-l] Accession of rare photo records

[Mike Rutherford]

As an alternative way of preserving the record for posterity why not add the photo to iNaturalist? Research Grade records(i.e. ones that have been verified by others) are shared by iNaturalist with GBIF so the record would be widely accessible. This way you could share the data without compromising your collection standards.

Mike


Mr. Mike G. Rutherford
Curator of the University of the West Indies Zoology Museum (UWIZM)
Department of Life Sciences
The University of The West Indies
St. Augustine Campus
Trinidad & Tobago, W.I.
T: (Office) 868-662-2002 ext 82231
T: (Mobile) 868-329-8401
E: mike.rutherford at sta.uwi.edu<mailto:mike.rutherford at sta.uwi.edu>
S: mike.g.rutherford

Find us on
Website: www.sta.uwi.edu/fst/lifesciences/uwi-zoology-museum
Facebook: www.facebook.com/uwizoologymuseum

CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and/or privileged information. Any duplication, copying, distribution, dissemination, transmission, disclosure or use in any manner of this email (including any attachments) without the authorisation of the sender is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email (including any attachments) in error, please notify the sender and delete this email (including any attachments) from your system. Thank you.



From: Nhcoll-l [mailto:nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu] On Behalf Of Curtis Schmidt
Sent: Monday, 21 May 2018 18:28
To: Lance McBrayer <lancemcbrayer at georgiasouthern.edu>; nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu
Subject: Re: [Nhcoll-l] Accession of rare photo records


Lance,



What kept the individual from collecting the non-native species in the first place? I would certainly caution against cataloging an unverifiable photograph because, as you mention, it promotes bad science and poor quality data. It would be different if it was an endangered species, but I see a photograph of very little value in this particular situation. I personally am an advocate of not publishing records based on photographs unless the animals are protected. This is becoming an all too common practice that is irresponsible IMHO. I hope this helps.



Curtis

_________________________________



Curtis J. Schmidt

    Zoological Collections Manager

    Sternberg Museum of Natural History



    Instructor

    Department of Biological Sciences

    Fort Hays State University



    3000 Sternberg Drive

    Hays, KS  67601

    785-650-2447 (cell)

________________________________

________________________________
From: Nhcoll-l <nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu<mailto:nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu>> on behalf of Lance McBrayer <lancemcbrayer at georgiasouthern.edu<mailto:lancemcbrayer at georgiasouthern.edu>>
Sent: Monday, May 21, 2018 3:21:24 PM
To: nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu<mailto:nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>
Subject: [Nhcoll-l] Accession of rare photo records

All

I curate a herpetology collection of about 35,000 specimens, almost all of which are actual specimens. However, I also take definitive photographs such that there is little to no question about the species in the photograph. I am aware of the debate on the value of photographic records, but I've come into an interesting situation.

Recently, a collector I do not know asked to voucher a photograph of an invasive species of tropical frog that is established in Florida, and now Georgia and several other states.  Yet this record is from Massachusetts.  Furthermore, the specimen was photographed in a potted plant in a national chain store of lumber and hardware...in February of 2018.

Clearly the frog was brought there in or on the plant(s). But as such, this record is potentially valuable. This tropical frog species is very likely to have died in the harsh MA winter....but it does well cohabitating with humans...so maybe not. And the store is literally next to a major river. So, if it does survive and disperse, it could move lots of places quickly.

I have contacted four other very knowledgeable herpetologists to confirm my identification, and that of the collector. We all agree it "looks like" the same species; i.e. all five of us agree on the identification.

To accession, or not to accession?  How do we balance the risk of preserving high quality data while at the same documenting potentially important events like this?

Thanks for your insights.
lm

--
Lance D. McBrayer
Associate Dean of Faculty & Research Programs
College of Science and Mathematics
Georgia Southern University
TEL: 912.478.5111
Webpage<https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__sites.google.com_a_georgiasouthern.edu_lance-2Dd-2Dmcbrayer_&d=DwMFaQ&c=cjytLXgP8ixuoHflwc-poQ&r=LpYc_Z_iN1KRw0hheb3x6-8MJUMu482qfHowpGYJqwc&m=X8OZAEBTE3DbHbmuWdsqg9AShDNGf1EHZQbvVr2zrm8&s=nrFiBYQ9akOJWFB-DdBiohFzLRZa6tB2IYJPTWTiE1k&e=>
CONFIDENTIALITY: This email (including any attachments) may contain confidential, proprietary and/or privileged information. Any duplication, copying, distribution, dissemination, transmission, disclosure or use in any manner of this email (including any attachments) without the authorisation of the sender is strictly prohibited. If you receive this email (including any attachments) in error, please notify the sender and delete this email (including any attachments) from your system. Thank you.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20180521/28c17d00/attachment.html>