The search for potentially useful biological compounds in Nature (sometimes popularly referred to as “biodiversity prospecting” or “bioprospecting”) involves two distinct sets of issues: access to biological resources and benefit sharing. Issues relating to access concern the terms and conditions associated with collection and sampling of bio- logical research specimens. These issues also may relate to the purpose underlying collection and sampling, or to how the research specimens are to be used. Issues relating to benefit sharing concern the terms and conditions under which the provider of biological research specimens may be positioned to share in the beneficial results of research in- volving biological specimens provided to a research user. While research specimen collection and related sci- entific research activities in national parks certainly is not new, the Congress enacted a law in that mandated increased scientific research in the national parks and use of the results of scientific study in park management decisions.31 The new law encourages the
development of cooperative research initiatives between individual national parks and scientific researchers (public as well as private), and mandates the integration of research results into park management decisions. It also mandates development of long-term inventory and monitoring ac- tivities that provide baseline information and document trends relating to the condition of resources protected by the national parks. Implementation of these new statutory directives clearly can accelerate cooperative development and management of the wealth of biological resource in- formation flowing from Yellowstone’s hot springs as well as from other national parks.
By linking scientific and economic incentives asso- ciated with research activities with other incentives for conserving valuable biological diversity, research initia- tives can encourage sustainable resource conservation and management in accordance with the new mandates enacted by Congress in the National Parks Omnibus Management Act of . Effective implementation of these provisions,
however, requires clear focus on the two sets of core is- sues that relate to biodiversity prospecting: access and benefit sharing.
Access
Access to the biological resources of national parks for research purposes is governed by regulations. The research specimen collection permit regulations have been implemented since , and permits for the collection of research specimens throughout the are issued routinely.32 Issuance of an research specimen
collection permit is based on a determination by a park su- perintendent that “public health and safety, environmental or scenic values, natural or cultural resources, scientific research, implementation of management responsibilities, proper allocation and use of facilities, or the avoidance of conflict among visitor use activities will not be adversely impacted” by issuance of a permit.33 Based on public com-
ments filed at the time the regulations were promulgated, concluded that these determinations are “adequate to ensure protection of park resources”.34
A park superintendent’s express regulatory authority to issue permits for the collection of research specimens (with terms and conditions deemed necessary to protect park resources) provides the mechanism for each unit to govern access to its own biological resources for research purposes. “Permit” is defined under the regula- tions to mean “a written authorization to engage in uses or activities that are otherwise prohibited, restricted, or regulated”.35 The regulations also provide that a superin-
tendent “shall include in a permit the terms and conditions that the superintendent deems necessary to protect park resources”.36 Collection of any biological material in an
unit without a permit is strictly prohibited.
regulations provide that specimen collection permits
reputable scientific or educational institution or a State or Federal agency for the purpose of research, baseline inventories, monitoring, impact analysis, group study, or museum display when the superintendent determines that the collection is necessary to the stated scientific or resource management goals of the institution or agency and that all applicable Federal and State permits have been acquired, and that the intended use of the specimens and their final disposal is in accordance with applicable law and Federal administrative policies.37
The regulations do not discriminate against for-profit or other corporate research firms provided they engage in reputable scientific research activities. This reflects the reality that some of the very best science is practiced by private corporations while some of the most entrepreneur- ial research activities are carried out by universities and other academic institutions.
Permits are issued after a researcher has submitted a permit application that provides the information required by the park and is deemed by the park superintendent to be consistent with the park’s mission, applicable regula- tions (particularly .), and policy. The permit application process helps ensure that the permit applicant discloses the information required to enable the park to determine that the proposed research activities are consis- tent with regulations and policy38 (Figure ).
In the review of applications for research projects, considers it a “favorable” characteristic if the proposed research
• Contributes information useful to an increased un- derstanding of park resources, and thereby contrib- utes to effective management and/or interpretation of park resources;
• Provides for scheduled sharing of information with park staff, including any manuscripts, publications, maps, databases, etc., which the researcher is will- ing to share;
• Addresses problems or questions of importance to science or society and shows promise of making an important contribution to humankind’s knowledge of the subject matter;
• Involves a principal investigator and support team with a record of accomplishments in the proposed field of investigation and a demonstrated ability to work cooperatively and safely and to accomplish the desired tasks within a reasonable time frame; • Provides for the investigator(s) to prepare occa-
sional summaries of findings for public use, such as seminars and brochures;
• Minimizes disruption to the park’s natural and cultural resources, park operations, and visitors; • Discusses plans for the cataloging and care of col-
lected specimens;
• Clearly anticipates logistical needs and provides detail about provisions for meeting those needs; or
• Is supported academically and financially, making it highly likely that all fieldwork, analyses, and re- porting will be completed within a reasonable time frame.39
considers it “unfavorable” for a permit review, if the proposed research
• Involves activities that adversely affect the experi- ences of park visitors;
• Shows potential for adverse impact on the park’s natural, cultural, or scenic resources, and particular- ly to nonrenewable resources such as archeological and fossil sites or special-status species (the entire range of adverse impacts that will be considered also includes construction and support activities, trash disposal, trail conditions, and mechanized equipment use in sensitive areas);
• Shows potential for creating high risk of hazard to the researchers, other park visitors, or environments adjacent to the park;
• Involves extensive collecting of natural materials or unnecessary replication of existing voucher collections;
• Requires substantial logistical, administrative, curatorial, or project monitoring support by park staff, or provides insufficient lead time to allow necessary review and consultation;
• Is to be conducted by a principal investigator lacking scientific institutional affiliation and/or recognized experience conducting scientific research; or • Lacks adequate scientific detail and justification to
support the study objectives and methods.40
Currently, as part of the research permit terms, sci- entists are required to submit a yearly summary of their park research activities, known as an Investigator’s Annual Report. In addition, copies of field notes and scientific publications may be required by the park.
Microbial research projects at Yellowstone require ac- cess to the government-owned biological resources that are controlled by these research specimen permit regulations. There have been approximately research projects per- mitted annually at Yellowstone since the mid-s that cover a wide range of natural resource subjects. Not all of these projects involve the collection of biological or other natural resource samples from the park for research purposes. In , there were more than research projects relating to thermophilic microbial resources at Yellowstone that involved the issuance of research speci- men collection permits.
Projects also benefit from cooperative guidance and data provided by the Yellowstone Center for Resources in connection with resource-relevant information for the researcher. Researchers are frequently accompanied in the field by Yellowstone staff, who monitor specimen collec- tion procedures and provide assistance on information
relevant to the specific research project. This assistance
from the park often makes the best use of research time and resources. Likewise, Yellowstone benefits from the researchers’ own research-relevant information (some of which may be proprietary and protected by Federal intel- lectual property laws).
There is an important distinction between “sale or com- mercial use” of natural products collected from national parks (which is prohibited under .(c)()(v)) and the discovery of valuable useful applications from “re- search results” that could bring the park potential benefits (whether commercialized or not). The facts and circum- stances surrounding permitted research at Yellowstone and throughout the system reflect this important distinc- tion. This distinction also has been upheld as valid by the federal judiciary.41 Significantly, the standardized permit
terms and conditions also specify that collected specimens remain property.42
There are several additional important standardized research specimen collection permit terms and conditions that relate specifically to access issues. First, the permits provide that permittees shall comply with all applicable and other federal and state laws and regulations, and that “[n]o specimens (including materials) may be col- lected unless authorized on the Scientific Research and Collecting permit”.43 Second, the permits prohibit unau-
thorized third-party transfers of any specimens collected, which effectively limits legitimate access to resources that have been collected to specifically authorized persons only. Third, the permits require that “[c]ollection methods shall not attract undue attention or cause unapproved dam- age, depletion, or disturbance to the environment and other
Figure . Standardized Review Procedures for Scientific Research and Collecting Permit Applications. The chart illustrates
the general order of decision making and the major criteria used to accept or reject a permit application. The Internet-accessible National Park Service Research Permit and Reporting System webpage describes the review procedures in full detail (http: //science.nature.nps.gov/permits/index.html). The procedures were made standardized and Internet accessible in January .
1. encourages researchers interested in natural resource or social science research in a unit of the National Park System to submit an application for a permit.
2. The requestor obtains the application packet and related information that could affect the researcher on the Internet at the web site listed below or by corresponding with the park in which the applicant wishes to work.
3. Establish a file of the application.
4. Estimate the turn-around time for application review. Notify the applicant if the review is ex- pected to take longer than 90 days.
5. Review application and proposal for: scientific validity; researcher and institutional qualifica- tions; benefit to the park service and the public; actual or potential impacts to park resources, visitor experiences, wilderness, safety, and other issues; and possible need for other federal or state permits or approvals. Depending on the park and the content of the proposal, there may be various levels of review in the park and possible outside peer review.
Once a park has received a completed application through the Internet or by
other means, park staff will:
6. The permit could be denied at this stage (or recommendations for denial or acceptance could be prepared for review).
7. Assess proposal for potential impact under guidelines. Categorically exclude proposal or recommend that further analysis is required.
8. Consider total potential benefits against poten- tial impacts and risks.
9. Make recommendation to Superintendent or designee to approve or reject the permit request.
10. If application approved, send permit and attached conditions (including requirement for annual accomplishment report) to applicant for signature.
11. If application rejected, notify applicant of denial decision and identify reasons for denial. (In most cases, an opportunity for revising and resubmitting the application is possible.)