Data Entry Query

[Peter Rauch]

On Thu, 9 Jan 2003, Panza, Robin wrote:
> ...  However, more people are using the *data* instead of the
> *specimens*, and are not using the data with appropriate
> skepticism.

Knowing that, the role of the data curator (community) is then
to participate in the data-using process, to inject the
appropriate degree of skepticism into the decision-making
processes.

> ..., if the names in the records are too far off, there can be
> some serious problems when policy-makers blindly use the data
> we send them.

Isn't it the rightful role (actually, obligation) of the
data-supplying community to guide policy-makers into making more
intelligent decisions?

> Decisions about which pieces of land need to be preserved and
> which can be paved over; about which species can be left to
> their own devices, which need extra protection by listing as
> threatened/endangered and which need to be "managed" are being
> decided based on the data we export.

Which decisions, in general, will be more enlightened than those
made in a complete lack of data. But, more importantly, anyone
who is "exporting data" without also exporting the intelligence
needed to properly use those data is behaving irresponsibly.
And, for those who might respond that they simply do not have
the time to participate in this role I suggest is critical, I
must say --you need to reassess your business model and goals.
If you goal is only to create an inventory of Biodiversity Past,
you're seriously missing the Big Picture!

> Many museum people are afraid government policy will be set
> based on grossly inaccurate data.  This is why the name put
> into the record can be so important.  Yes, it's just a handle,
> when the database owner is also the specimen owner.  But as
> soon as the data are shared, it becomes politically important.
> I think this is what paralyzes some curators who are
> considering data entry.

There may be those who become paralyzed (and who fail therefore
to contribute to the Big Picture), but what is needed today are
those who jump into the political arena to play with the Big
Boys and Girls --forcing them to deal with reality (as we know
it from our collections).

> On the other hand, data "entry" shouldn't be considered
> complete till the data are verified.

So, we (ecologists, taxonomists, biologists) need to make sure
that political decisions are based on strategies which allow for
"mistakes" or on incomplete (or opinionated) data, and are
"safe" decisions on behalf of the environment (reminiscent of
the intent of the Precautionary Principle?).

The job of the taxonomist/systematist/curator MUST include the
ability and opportunity to contribute to the political game
(where all the important environmental decisions are made). The
Collections Business can no longer be (if it ever was)
parochial and apolitical.

> But it's dismaying to see how many people are paralyzed by the
> magnitude and complexity of the job.

Lack of money (Society pays now, or it pays more dearly later),
and perhaps a lack of recognition that they must be
"politicians" allows them this expensive luxury of paralysis.

Peter