Yes, I agree! The information is already out there. But finding the
original description requires some research. Pinpointing the location
from the description may also be difficult. And the population may
already be gone (if not from collecting or habitat destruction, possibly
by natural succession!).
This project sounds like it will involve collating and compiling large
amounts of information already known by assorted people and available
from far-flung sources. It does not sound like this project is based
on creating "new" information (ie. active exploration of habitat to
find new localies)... although "new information" may be aquired by
studying the composite of inforation as presented in the map--hence
the scientific interest in the map.
> Imagine if one would write a protologue and would not give the best
> information he/she has. Is this the kind of science you prefer? For
> me that sounds a bit like middle ages style...
> The consequence would be to limit access to university libraries to
> the privilegued who are best in pretending that they are the right
> people. Deep dark middle ages........
> The same holds true for a mapping project:
> I think that science simply has no right to select who will get information
> an who will not. Conservation people should do their best to conserve
> environments or plants but not information.
I think this map will be the property of those who construct it. It's
thier baby. They can post it on the web or show it to nobody. However,
if public funds or support from other people is used to construct the
map, then there may be other obligations. It is up to those of us who
may support the project (by giving out our "secret" information) to
decide if we want to do so or not. The map-makers may need to make
some promises regarding distibution of the map, if they are to gain
support from some sources.
This issue is just the tip of the iceberg. The "information age" and
the internet are raising many questions concerning proprietary information,
dangerous information (bomb diagrams), privacy, military secrets, and
Colonel Sander's secret recipie. I don't think everyone should have
access to unlimited information. What are the limits? That's the
controversy! :-)
Michael Chamberland