The Resources Inventory Committee (RIC) of British Columbia has a mandate to develop standardized procedures for inventory for provincial resources. Interest in, and demand for, information from biological inventory and research is at a high level for several important reasons. The documentation of biological diversity including the distribution and abundance of organisms (much of which is unknown), is considered a vital ethical and management task. Inventory information is critical to the requirements of Forest Renewal British Columbia (FRBC) and the Forest Practices Code that it supports, Protected Area Strategies, land-use planning, and management issues in general.
Museum collections of biological specimens are the fundamental reference material that documents the province's biological diversity. Such collections are essential for research in the science of systematics, which embraces classification, taxonomy, evolutionary relationships and evolutionary processes. Conserving biological diversity and ecological integrity in British Columbia is intimately connected to taxonomic knowledge. It is impossible to carry our biological inventories of threatened ecosystems such as coastal old-growth forests, southern interior grasslands or freshwater ponds and rivers, without being able to identify and name the distinctive and ecologically critical organisms that are present. Without such inventories of "name-able" organisms people cannot communicate, values of areas cannot be assessed, necessary research cannot be done, and management and protection plans cannot be developed. Natural history museums have the responsibility to develop well-documented field collections; to preserve them; to study them and to publish the results of research; to make them available for examination or loan; to serve as repositories for specimens and associated data; and to provide expert information on taxonomy, identification and distribution (Miller and Nagorsen 1992).
Because of the increased demand for biological information it is imperative that collection standards be established and accuracy in identification be encouraged. This manual presents a standard protocol for voucher specimens, a subset of inventory collections designed to ensure the reliability of the inventory.
During ecological, environmental and taxonomic studies, as well as basic species inventory, biological specimens are often collected and identified. These identifications are used in subsequent analyses and reports to come to certain conclusions. If these identifications are incorrect, false conclusions can be made. If results of future studies disagree with those of the initial study, the initial results can be verified only if representative specimens are available for reexamination. The information contained in these specimens is irreplaceable because we cannot go back in time and resample. Thus, it is imperative that in any inventory or study whose conclusions depend on the identification of biological specimens, provisions are made for the deposition of voucher specimens, preferably in a recognized museum with facilities for maintenance of biological collections (Green and Lambert 1994).
Voucher specimens are defined, and their importance is noted, by Miller and Nagorsen (1992). They "... are representative specimens that are collected in biological field surveys and research, and that are preserved to permit independent verification of results and to allow further study. The term "specimen" covers diverse materials such as photographs and tape recordings, but usually refers to more traditional preparations like skins, skulls, pressed plants or dead animals in preserving fluids... Many kinds of animals and plants that are of interest in environmental impact studies or biological surveys can only be reliably identified when they have been preserved as specimens. Without such voucher specimens it is impossible to independently verify an investigator's claims, it is impossible to re-evaluate the species present in a sample in light of changing knowledge and taxonomic revisions, and it is impossible to reliably make historical comparisons or true ecological changes over time due to environmental effects such as pollution or climate change".
Specific voucher collections (i.e. collections of one biological group from one project) are stored as discrete units for a designated time period. This allows easy access for verification of identifications or additional taxonomic examination. After the designated time has elapsed, museum curators select appropriate specimens from the voucher collection for permanent accessioning into the main reference (research) collections. These latter collections are arranged taxonomically. Therefore, in addition to the primary reasons for making voucher collections, any government supported inventory offers the opportunity for the growth and improvement of the provincial collection.
The voucher specimens, as part of the main collection, then become invaluable for other research such as studies on seasonal occurrence, distribution and biogeography, life history, and taxonomy. Biologists also have an ethical obligation to use fully any plants and animals that they collect, particularly if the species are uncommon or if they are from areas that are subsequently altered by human activity (Miller and Nagorsen 1992).
Responsibilities of museums are to provide curatorial, legal and technical advice on collecting, preserving, documenting and depositing voucher specimens. Arrangements with museums for training field investigators and for accepting voucher specimens should be planned early in a project so that training needs can be met and logistical considerations can be addressed. Museums must maintain voucher specimens in good condition and make them and their data readily accessible. Field investigators and collectors are responsible for properly sampling, preserving and documenting specimens as outlined in relevant protocols and for ensuring that satisfactory samples of collections are deposited in museums after a project is completed. Investigators should cross reference voucher specimens in all reports and publications.
This document should be considered a dynamic document as procedures and techniques change and improve. Note that this manual presents standard protocols for collecting animal vouchers only. Information on collecting and preparing plant and fungi vouchers is covered in manual No. 4b.
The inventory and/or management of free-living wild mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians may require their capture and handling and/or collection for the identification of specific characteristics as well as for other purposes. Guidelines in the Live Animal Capture and Handling Guidelines, manual no. 3, present a standardized approach to the justification and ethical considerations research and operational wildlife workers should consider when planning and performing the capture and handling of any wild animal. It is expected that protocols in the above mentioned manual will be followed, as this information will not be repeated here. Some general considerations when planning to collect vouchers are provided below.
Investigators have an obligation to identify and assess the consequences of their research activities on wild animals, populations and the environment. Whenever possible, action should be taken to avoid, alleviate or minimize any adverse effects. Research activities should include the collection of adequate samples to ensure valid research results, yet be balanced to minimize adverse effects. Investigators should always weigh potential gain in knowledge against the negative consequences of disturbance. Although short-term detrimental effects may result from research activities, research can ultimately yield long-term positive effects for the affected population.
Investigators must also take into account that the sounds, the behaviours and the simple presence of humans as they approach and move closer to sensitive areas may elicit a response from animals. In addition, species that are not under study may be disturbed.
Whether one is collecting study animals for eventual release or for museum preparations, the same humane considerations should apply. These animals should not be exposed to excessive or inappropriate handling, conspecific aggression, predation, temperature extremes, or undue suffering.
The permanent removal of large numbers of animals from any wildlife population should be avoided, unless justified for very specific scientific reasons. Similarly, the collection of large numbers of females from any population for destructive sampling should be avoided. Systematists should investigate extant collections for suitable specimens before conducting any field work.
Animals that have been captured so that samples could be collected and that cannot be released should, whenever possible, be distributed to colleagues for further study. However, if the animal is in chronic distress or pain, or if release or rehabilitation is neither feasible nor likely to succeed, then euthanasia may be the only alternative. If animals must be destroyed subsequent to a study, or as part of a study, then it should be done using a method of euthanasia which is humane, instantaneous and considered acceptable (see Reference section). If the researcher does not have plans to preserve the whole specimen him or herself, then the method of euthanasia should not interfere with any future research potential of the carcass or any specific post mortem analyses. In both the field and the laboratory, the investigator must be careful to ensure that euthanized animals are dead before disposal. Disposal of carcasses must be in accordance with acceptable practices as required by municipal or institutional regulations. Animals containing toxic substances or drugs should not be disposed of in areas where they may be scavenged or become part of the natural food chain.