An open letter regarding the University of Aberdeen accused for whaling

This is an article that I have been dying to write for a while now. My university has been accused of using whaling data in a project recently http://www.scotsman.com/news/education/aberdeen-university-under-fire-over-whale-slaughter-1-3200216. This caused quite a stir, especially in the Biological Sciences students who were shocked. After poking about and asking people, a few of us found that the data that were used, were from already harvested whales. Some students were still shocked while others, much like myself relaxed. In the end of the day data are data and so long as they were done ethically or in the past then there is no reason why they shouldn’t be used. Now I don’t know exactly what the data were used for. Talking to some people around university it seems to be for a PhD project that dealt with the effect of whaling as well as whale watching on whale species but then others say it had to do with whale physiology.  I hardly think it is relevant at this stage.

Allow me to elaborate. Science that deals with wild animals in their natural habitat is tricky. Some animals can be elusive, migrate, budget cuts can prevent you from doing exactly what you want, extreme weather conditions or extreme environments are few of the reasons why science is hard to conduct with wild animals. Scientists in general try their best to obtain their own data but will not shy away from using data from other sources. Whether these sources are volunteers conducting surveys on their own time ( as per the case of Shorewatch  done by  WDC which is an excellent use of volunteer time and locations), hunters reporting kills, trappers reporting catches, roadkill sites, sightings and so forth. The internet alone is filled with sites where everyday people can log in and report sightings of animals.  These data are used by scientists, NGOs, of even government organizations and find themselves in academic journals as well.  It is a matter that needs to be understood by the general public. Scientists are not always able to collect fresh data and hence may use older data which might have been gathered in less ethical ways or with questionable means.

Now this is where it falls to the individual. Some scientists may have no quarrel using data from any source so long as the data can help them gain an understanding of what is going on. Others may take  a more ethical route and prefer to make sure that animals have been treated fairly. Others simply try not to disturb the animals. There are myriad ways of thinking and whether they are right or wrong is simply a matter of perspective.

In my opinion, using the whaling data was fine. I understand the fact that in a way, the whaling industry is still supported if you use the data but the animals are dead and the data is already collected. Sure, this may be used to justify further whaling and I am not for that.  I do not agree with whaling due to the damage it does to the general population and the fact that whales  cannot recover from such harvesting easily. But in this particularly case the data are already present so why not use them. It is a moral conundrum surely but it won’t change the fact that these animals are dead already. In a way it is best that they at least be used for something.

My main issue is the way journalism has handled the particular subject.  Flaring articles accusing the university for whaling while very little was actually given in terms of what had happened.   Like most press these days, some articles were unbiased and provided information and some didn’t. This led to a confusing state both amongst students, staff and the rest of the world.  Maybe if it was handled better by both the University and the press then no confusion would have happened and people would be able to reach a conclusion on the own on whether they support what happened or not.

In the end of the day what appeared to be a shocking story ended up being a matter of personal views and opinions as the fog cleared out, but some damage may have already been done  that may be irreversible. Once again don’t trust what you read and question everything at least once before you believe it.

Dissections: What's the point

WARNING: Somewhat graphic descriptions

During June I had to attend a field trip in Parasitology conducted by my university. The whole point of the field trip was to observe parasites, learn their life cycles and consider how these parasites could potentially affect the host organism. It was a very interesting field trip but not for the faint of heart as a lot of dissections were involved. We were no strangers to dissection. In my second year one of the modules taken by all students was one that familiarized you with a worm and leech dissection, a trout dissection and a rat dissection. Then according to the modules taken you got to do more dissections. Taking Ocean Biology I dissected dogfish, starfish, sea urchins, shrimps and so forth. The point isn't what I dissected though, the point is that some people grew squeamish when they had to deal with mammals while some saw no point and refused to do dissections. To each their own I always say but the whole idea intrigued me. Should dissections be carried on now that we have access to multimedia tools that could easily emulate a dissection and further more reduce animal welfare. Here is my opinion on the matter.

There can only be so much you can learn from a virtual dissection. Things change in animals. When I first performed my first dissection on a rat(Rattus norveticus) I was thoroughly confused. I had looked up manuals and the internal layout of the animal before hand but I found the lungs to be smaller, the intestine to take up much more space than I thought and some parts harder or easier to cut through than I expected. After spending a week dissecting mice and voles in my Parasitology field trip I got less messy and more efficient. I can safely say though that if I were to have a look through the internal structure of the rat online and then dissect I would definitely be surprised by the differences that are present. Not to mention things that get you off guard such as embryos,diseases and most of all the smell.

It could be something that is needed in your line of work. Usually there are specialists about who can perform dissections, forensics and they can determine a cause of death. This is often done to determine if a population is suffering from a disease or parasite, or if a protected species is found dead. Whether you want to be one of those specialists is a different thing all together. However I think that dissections can be vital as you never know what you may come across and how dissections could be a solution to a problem affecting wildlife. If you lack the skill then you may have a harder time determining what's wrong or identifying key issues. Of course each animal has a different anatomy so gaining experience on rats doesn't mean that you can dissect and analyze issues on a deer carcass. However basic skills such as how deep to cut, what to look out for, be prepared for smell, don't puncture the gut and so forth are basic skills that can be applied to any sort of dissection you might come across.

Of course there is the dark side. Animals do have to die for you to learn from dissections. More often than not these animals were to die as they may be part of a control experiment or bred in captivity which means they cannot be released in the wild but the fact is that some institutes actively breed animals for dissection. It's a tough choice to make. By opting to do a dissection then you passively condone to animal killing and welfare. Most institutes do it humanely(or so they claim) and some even use them in sustainable matters. For example we were told that the rats that were dissected were gassed and that they were to be given to a local falconry center after the dissection to feed the birds of prey which I suppose could offer some closure in knowing that the animal have another use after their death. Looking into how your university/institute deals with dissection is a factor that could make you more comfortable with performing one if you really want to do it but feel bad about the animal.

Overall in my opinion I think dissections are a good way to get your hands dirty, learn by acting and enhance your skill set. However it is your own right whether or not you are comfortable in doing them and an alternative option should be provided to those who do not wish to do it. It's up to every individual to decide this for themselves and even if you go ahead with it and you figure out that you cannot stomach it then you should be adamant about stopping right there and now. It's a choice that can be hard on anyone and you should not care what people say or think about you in regards to the matter.

Zoology myths

As every student returning home after the holidays, meeting up with old friends and relatives is somewhat of a requirement. One subject that comes up is what my degree is exactly. Usually this follows up with people asking whether they should start studying the same thing. So I have decided to clear some things up here in the blog. Hopefully this will clear your perception of what Zoology is exactly and whether you want to pursue it or not. However before I go on, let me say that I am studying at a Scottish University( there are difference between the English Universities) and that also I have just finished my second year and that there are two more years to go until I finish my undergraduate. Don't let this article be your final decision point. Your best bet is to find someone studying Zoology at the Universities you want to join or in the country you want to study and ask them about the degree. Then make up your mind.

Firstly. Zoology is not a extensive hands on animal degree. Although you do get to handle some animals, odds are those animals are either small enough to be contained in the lab,predicable enough to study or they are dead already and dissections and observations need to be conducted. If you envision yourself as a Zoology student, going out in the field every day studying wild animals then it's time for a rough reality check. Most Universities shy away from such teaching tactics as they are expensive, unreliable and often might be dangerous. If you want such experience then you are better off checking with Universities before you apply or wait until you can conduct your own research. That being said you might get to study wild animals on your field trips and at some labs and those moments are often treasured.

You can't avoid plants. There are people out there that don't find plant life interesting. If you think that in your Zoology degree you won't come across plants at all then you are mistaken. Plants are an important part of an animal's life cycle and hence you will come across them even in small doses every once in a while. Some plants might be important for conservation, important for animal behavior and hence merit being studied a lot more. So be prepared for some plant biology in your degree.

You can't avoid math. This is one of the largest misconceptions that I once thought myself. I thought I would be doing Zoology and that's it. Statistics and model maths are important parts of the science in zoology and so you will be taught about them, required to include them in plenty of lab reports and will be a basic content of your undergraduate and further studies. Most biologists struggle with them and their computer programs so I would advise you pay close attention to statistics and try and learn as much as you can about them.

You will spend a lot of time on the computer or reading books. Scientific papers don't write themselves and neither do essays. Be prepared to do a lot of background reading, working with statistical software, creating or working with computer and writing up reports. Some computer knowledge will get you a long way in your degree and although you are taught the basics, a few tricks will make your life easier.

It won't always be interesting. Let's face it. We are human beings and as humans we find some things interesting and some boring. Even if you love animals some parts of your education will be boring either due to the subject, the lecturer or because something else is on your mind. Don't assume that just because your degree deals with animals that everything will be interesting. I honestly hope that everything is interesting in your studies but so far I have had lectures I couldn't stand and I think it will always be that way.

Not everyone cares. This is something that I learned the hard way. I thought everyone will be interested in learning about wolves, their conservation and politics. Unfortunately that is not the case. However it makes sense. In your year alone will probably be a hundred people or more. Not everyone will find the same things interesting as you do and not all tutors or lecturers will either, although hopefully a large number of people will have some common ground with you to share.

I don't want to give the image of a horrible degree though. I love what I am doing now even if it involves an unhealthy amount of statistics. Hopefully however this will give you a clearer image into what Zoology is and is not and might steer you in the right direction. If you have any questions then please don't hesitate to contact me and I will try and answer them.