Memorandum submitted by the Biological
Recording in Scotland (BRISC)
BACKGROUND
BRISC came into being in 1975 to provide a central
focal point for biological recorders in Scotland. It has since
evolved into an organisation that represents both recorders and
Local Record Centres in Scotland. In recent years it has undertaken
an advocacy role on Strategic issues affecting biological data
to serve best those it represents.
Biological Recording is defined as: the collection,
collation, management, dissemination and interpretation of spatially
and temporally referenced information on the occurrence of biological
taxa, assemblages and habitats.
RESPONSE
BRISC is only responding to parts of Questions
2, 7 and 8, where it feels it can provide a relevant input. Whilst
other questions are of interest to BRISC any comments on them
would be based on anecdotal evidence.
QUESTION 2
What is the role of systematics and taxonomy and,
in particular, in what way do they contribute to research areas
such as biodiversity conservation, ecosystem services and climate
change?
Taxonomic knowledge is obtained by sound and
up-to-date systematic research. The ability to accurately identify
and name taxonomic units (eg genera, species and sub-specific
taxa) is fundamental to understanding the taxonomic units being
studied. The understanding of systematic inter-relationships,
even of well-known taxa, increases awareness of intrinsic factors
that may impact on the responses of individual taxa to anthropogenic
and natural processes. UK research in biodiversity conservation
and climate change has tended to be directed towards individual
species and often almost in isolation from related species, or
the species assemblage and habitat within which they occur.
How important is this contribution and how is
it recognised in the funding process?
Baseline information is still required for many
taxa throughout the UK, in spite of assertions to the contrary.
Most taxonomic expertise relating to UK species
is now vested in voluntary organisations and non-professional
individuals, rather than with the professional scientific community
of universities, museums and research institutions, resulting
in much of the UK taxonomic expertise being unfunded. This does
not provide for a sustainable future for taxonomy in the UK. Prior
to the 1980s taxonomy and systematics had formed part of undergraduate
biological sciences courses at many UK universities and basic
taxonomic principles were part of O/GCSE and A level syllabuses
with an awareness of species often starting at primary school
level.
The UK's role and particular expertise in taxonomy
and systematics research should be recognised and supported at
universities and at national and other major museums, particularly
when so many of the issues in biodiversity conservation, ecosystem
services and climate change are national and global.
QUESTION 7
Does the way in which taxonomic data is collected,
managed and maintained best meet the needs of the user community?
There is a profound failure by potential "users"
of taxonomic data to realize that they even require such information
and, therefore, they do not identify what data is required. As
a result the "providers" of taxonomic data, who are
undertaking their recording on a voluntary basis, need to second
guess the data requirement of an ill-defined "user Community"
and do not necessarily undertake the most required recording.
Many of those involved with biological recording
have been aware, since the 1980s, of changes in the range and
abundance of species and assemblages and changes to habitats which
appeared to relate, at least in part, to climatic variables. This
awareness prompted voluntary groups to advocate the need to establish
national surveillance and monitoring schemes and to maintain the
few schemes that had been established earlier. However, funding
was refused or reduced to level that delivered only part of the
necessary data. It was not until after 2000, when voluntarily
managed schemes began to deliver incontrovertible data, that governmental
agencies began to recognise that such organisations and schemes
had a role to play in supplying data.
It is particularly important at a local level
for the "user community" to be able to ask for information
that is sensible and deliverable. However, in Scotland, Government
guidance to local authorities and other users to seek data from
"your local biological records centre" is nonsensical,
as very few exist.
At regional and local levels, taxonomic expertise
is now almost exclusively vested in the voluntary community, such
as through local natural history societies and wildlife trusts.
Local museums, which used to provide access to collections, literature
and advice, are very rarely given resources to maintain that role.
What is the state of local and national recording
schemes?
Anecdotal evidence to BRISCs indicates a woeful
lack of support to both local and national schemes. BRISCs belief
is that most taxonomic knowledge is almost wholly dependent on
the voluntary sector and gained without significant public funding.
QUESTION 8
What is the role of major regional museums and
collections?
It is important to distinguish between major
regional/national museums, such as those in Edinburgh and Glasgow,
which are custodians of some national and international taxonomic
expertise and the truly local museums. The national collections
are extensive and generally accessible for use, with at least
some curatorial staff. Glasgow (Kelvingrove) has an extensive
collection but little scope for taxonomic research. Some local
museums have extensive and often important collections, few curatorial
staff and usually no role in taxonomic studies or taxonomic training,
other than through specially funded outreach projects aimed at
schools. Many smaller local museums, although they may have good,
even important collections, often have no specialist trained curatorial
staff.
How are taxonomic collections curated and funded?
BRISC does not believe that there is any systematic
curating and funding of taxonomic collections, but considers this
to be of great importance, both for validation of biological records
and for the training of new generations of naturalist specialists
and taxonomists.
Collections are probably of greatest value when
held at local museums, although local museums would probably have
difficulty in accepting collections due to space and financial
constraints, which in turn would present problems over the provision
of access.
4 February 2008
| 
