Research ethics and etiquette

[Cetacea]

Sparked from a conversation with someone I had during a recent seminar and would like to hear some opinions/discussions on the following topic.

Obviously protecting animals from human interference is both necessary and desirable but is there such a thing as too much protection in some cases?

Let's look at the example of cetaceans around NI, very little work has been done apart from Photo-ID and abundance and distribution surveys. Knowledge of fine scale movement and habitat assessment are very much desired in order to protect them further especially as harbour porpoise are notoriously difficult to keep track of as they are small and often get overlooked in surveys in rough water, yet when I was talking to some people about the possibility of putting data loggers on harbour porpoise, the instantaneous response was there was no chance in hell of getting permission to do that. On the other hand noone thinks twice about bunging them on sharks or putting harnesses with data loggers on geese. Why is that? Is there an actual sound ecological reason? But then why does it only apply to cetaceans and not to sharks?

On the same lines some researchers told me that they had had been given a grant to put data loggers on fin whales which are desperately in need of stock assesment but the permission was withdrawn last minute so they are sitting on a grant and data loggers but can't use either. They were also testing pingers on fishing nets to attempt to scare dolphins away and prevent bycatch and barely got permission to do that because, well, they wanted to scare them. In order to save them of course but apparently that was ethically objectable and they only barely got the permit.

Are there limits to research ethics? How much should researchers be allowed to interfer and to which extend is it justifiable?

In my opinion there must be a cost-benefit trade off, if a short term interference can yield long term benefits, the compromising of individual welfare is acceptable under certain circumstances.

Should researchers be allowed to approach closer to whales and dolphins than reccomended under the code of conduct for other boat operators in order to be able to get better ID shots? Or is the 'do as we say not as we do' approach just hypocritical? When is it justifiable?

Is too much consideration given to public opinion and perception of research methods?

Freeze branding was shown to have no adverse effects on some species of sea lions and provides a long term visible identification which facilitates monitoring of individuals, yet it has been outlawed in Australia due to public outrage.

Opinions/thoughts?

Edited November 2, 2009 by Cetacea