BOU statement of ethics
in respect of submissions to Ibis
and applications for BOU Research Grants
Introduction
Public perception of what is acceptable in scientific investigation (and other walks of
life) changes, and methodologies employed must be kept under scrutiny. For example, the
collecting of specimens formed a major part of nineteenth century work of BOU members and
was reported in Ibis. This work contributed considerably
to our present knowledge of the world’s ornithology and to status changes that now
present us with conservation concerns, but the Union would now support such work only
under exceptional circumstances.
BOU Council and its Ornithological
Affairs Committee have recently given considerable consideration to ethical aspects of
work supported by the Union or published in its international journal Ibis. Members
and others are rightly concerned that studies should not involve unnecessary risks or
stress to individual animals nor impact upon populations of plants or animals. It has to
be recognised that few, if any, studies of birds are free of risk. Even purely
observational work may cause some disturbance or increase the risk of predation. Against
such considerations must be balanced the likely gain in knowledge and especially the
conservation benefit of this knowledge. The nature of potential impacts of different
studies form a continuum and it is not possible to make simple classifications or to test
against simple thresholds. This issue is, however, important and should not be avoided.
The Association for the Study of Animal Behaviour and the Animal Behavior Society have
put considerable effort into devising Guidelines for the treatment of animals in
behavioural research and teaching and published these in Animal Behaviour (see
below). BOU Council’s policy statement, which makes reference to these guidelines is
printed below. It is also included in the notes on applications for BOU
grants.
Policy
The Union expects all authors of papers submitted to Ibis and recipients of BOU
research grants to act within the law of the land in which the work is conducted. They
must ensure therefore that they have the necessary licences for whatever they are doing.
Investigators should abide by the spirit as well as the letter of relevant legislation.
Where work is carried out in places lacking relevant legislation, or where this is not
adequately administered, the work should conform to the ethical standards expected in the
UK.
The Union expects researchers to have proper regard for conservation considerations and
humane practice. Attention is drawn to the guidelines for the use of animals in research
published most recently in Animal Behaviour 1995, 49: 277-282.
The Union is not opposed in principle to the taking of birds for valid scientific
purposes. However, studies should not involve unnecessary risks or stress to individual
animals nor impact significantly upon populations of plants or animals. Research workers
should be aware that even field observations of free-living birds could result in a
significant disturbance to their lives. The impact of any particular study must be
evaluated in terms of the possible gain in knowledge weighed against possible adverse
consequences for individuals or the population.Papers may be rejected and research grants
may be refused solely on ethical grounds.
Explanatory note
The first paragraph of the Union’s policy sets out the minimum requirement that
researchers must adhere to the laws of the countries in which the work is done. Submission
of material to the Union is an indication to the Union that the workers concerned have
done this. However, this minimum requirement alone is not enough. The second paragraph of
the Union’s policy draws attention to the further guidance in this area noted above.
In the third paragraph of the policy, the Union makes clear that the first onus of
responsibility in considering balance lies with the workers concerned. In taking a
decision on publication or the award of a grant, Council and its delegates (the Editor of Ibis
and the Ornithological Affairs Committee, respectively) will make their own assessments of
balance. However, the responsibility of the workers concerned is not removed, and evidence
of this may be requested by the Union.
It is a condition of acceptance of papers for publication by the Union or awards of
grants by the Union that the workers involved accept and adhere to this policy. Referees
have been, and will continue to be, asked to draw attention to any matters which should be
queried on ethical grounds. Where such questions arise, authors or applicants may be asked
to give further and fuller accounts and rationale of their procedures.
Research, by its very nature, progresses all the time. It is not possible to set down
in advance sets of rules. The Union will, however, check that a suitably balanced approach
is taken in each study. In evaluating research proposals, consideration should be given,
for instance, as to: whether an alternative experimental model might involve less
disruption; the likely sample size required; whether marking techniques could be less
disruptive; and whether or not a pilot study might be appropriate. Further examples are
given in the reference cited. Above all, in evaluating a study, special consideration
should be given as to whether it will generate information of real value to conservation.
Back to top
|
