Practical Field Ecology. C. Philip Wheater
Чтение книги онлайн.
Читать онлайн книгу Practical Field Ecology - C. Philip Wheater страница 16
Be critical as you read; do not accept everything as true just because it is published. Look at the evidence and decide whether the conclusions are justified, or whether the results could be interpreted differently. It is, unfortunately, not uncommon for assertions to be made with no supporting evidence. You will find that different authors in the same field may disagree. It is particularly important to distinguish opinions and speculation from evidence. You can make your own interpretations and conclusions from the work of others and cite them using expressions such as ‘an alternative explanation for the results of Green and Brown (2010) is that …’. Read critically and keep your use of the information relevant for constructing your own account.
Practical considerations
Research, especially field research, can be an unpredictable business. However, with careful thought it should be possible to ensure that most eventualities are covered. Legal and ethical aspects – for example, access rights to land and the impacts on protected species or habitats – should be top of your list of practicalities to consider. Health and safety is another obvious concern and it is essential that you ensure that there is no danger either to you or to those around you through carrying out an appropriate risk assessment. In addition, practical approaches – such as effective time management, efficient data recording and security, and the appropriate use of equipment and techniques – will also help you to deliver a research project successfully.
Legal aspects
When planning fieldwork, it is important to take into account your responsibilities and any legal implications of the work. At an early stage in the planning of the project, always seek permission to work on a site from the landowner and any other interested parties (for example, relevant statutory bodies if the sites have some form of special protection, e.g. SSSI or National Nature Reserve). Keep disturbance to a minimum and remove as few plants or animals as possible. Identify specimens in situ (if you can) so that they need not be removed from the habitat. Whole plants should not be taken without the express permission of the landowner. It is good practice in the field not to pick plants of any kind, unless absolutely necessary. In many countries there are a number of protected species (for example orchids) that should not be uprooted, picked, or harmed in any way. You should check with the appropriate governing organisation for the country involved for details on protected species. In some countries there is specific legislation covering protected species (for example, the Endangered Species Act 1971 in the USA,10 the EU Birds Directive 2009,11 and the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 in the UK12).
Some animals may not be disturbed or handled without a permit (e.g. birds and bats amongst others in the UK), and this extends to some microhabitats (e.g. badger setts in the UK). Rare animals and plants are often protected by law and a licence may be required to handle or disturb them, without which you could face a large fine. You should also consider the ethical aspects of your study. This is particularly important where animals, especially vertebrates, may be harmed. Under these circumstances appropriate licensing authorities should be consulted. Note: this handbook is a guide that does not definitively outline the legal position or interpretation of any act or regulation. In all cases of protected species, it is the responsibility of the researcher to check with the relevant bodies to understand what guidelines and regulations are in force. Legal frameworks can change with time and being unaware of the legality of your actions is not a valid excuse. Therefore, it is important to stay up to date with any legislation pertaining to your area of work.
Ethical issues
There are a number of ethical issues that should be considered before engaging on any study, even if there are no legal restrictions on the sampling regime proposed. Where any damage to a habitat or any destructive sampling or organisms is to be attempted, there needs to be a proper evaluation of the balance of costs and benefits. For example, it is possible through handling animals and plants to vector a disease both to animals and humans and thereby increase the risk of spread. Frogs, for example, carry salmonella which can infect humans who come into contact with their faecal matter, but humans can also vector pathogenic fungi to frogs, endangering these amphibians. Large‐scale depletion of populations of plants or animals should not be considered unless the data being generated are of significant value, or the destruction will occur anyway because of another impact (e.g. fogging trees to remove insects where the trees will be clear felled in the very near future – see p. 185). Similarly, where there is a risk of harming non‐target species, the methods should be modified to ensure that these are unaffected. For example, when trapping for small mammals or invertebrates, there is a danger that animals such as shrews can be trapped and killed; modifications to the techniques can avoid this (see p. 266). Such problems can sometimes become apparent only once pilot studies or even the main study has begun. Under such circumstances, the methods should be modified or the study abandoned, particularly in cases where species of conservation importance are under threat. In one such example, whilst pitfall trapping for invertebrates, researchers inadvertently captured a number of great crested newts from wet grassland. Since it would be difficult to exclude the newts from the traps, trapping at this particular site was abandoned (Cullen 1995). When animals are collected alive, they should only be released into the environment from which they were taken to avoid adversely impacting other habitats. Similarly, plant material and soils should not be disposed of in areas where they might cause ecological issues (e.g. biological or heavy metal contamination). Costello et al. (2016) provide a checklist of ethical aspects that should be thought through before, during, and after implementing any field project. Ethical aspects of working on animals are covered by Reed and Jennings (2007). Where relevant, your work may need to be examined through a local ethical review process, often captured in a risk assessment. Most universities and similar organisations operate these, and further details can be found in RSPCA and LASA (2010). It is also worth reading the discussions by Minteer and Collins (2005a, 2005b, and 2008) and Parris et al. (2010) who comment on fieldwork activities.
Health and safety issues
Look after your own health and safety and that of those around you. All investigations should be assessed for any risks, including those caused by the terrain, the techniques, and any sudden changes in weather (see Barrow 2004). Any chemicals being used should be checked against appropriate regulations and risk assessments should be produced to identify safe use, disposal, and how to deal with spillage and accidents. In the UK, such regulations (COSHH – Control of Substances Hazardous to Health)13 are covered by the Health and Safety Executive (HSE). Many organisations have their own health and