Natural History Museum ‘clique’ accused of betraying its purpose
‘The NHM [is] managed by a corporate clique incapable of recognising what it can and should be doing’
SINCE opening its doors in 1881, the Natural History Museum has been considered a cathedral to nature; a beacon of scientific egalitarianism that opened the public’s eyes to species from distant lands and times.
But now, the London museum has been accused of losing its way, in a row which threatens to cause a deep schism through the venerated institution.
Fred Naggs, a scientific associate in the Department of Life Sciences, has penned an excoriating article in the journal Megataxa claiming his employer is no longer led by scientists and is “descending into irrelevance”.
Mr Naggs accuses the management of obsessing over Victorian collections instead of preserving endangered modern specimens.
And he called a decision to move some of the collection and scientific staff to the University of Reading “a selfimposed act of institutional vandalism” that will “mutilate a national treasure”.
“It is not just the collections that are being split up, but the scientific staff and support facilities,” Mr Naggs told The Sunday Telegraph. “It can only have been conceived by those who simply have no idea of what they are doing. ”
In response, the museum denied it was failing in its duty, and said it was actively committed to combating climate change and biodiversity loss.
The article, published last week, argues that the museum has deviated from its original mission of storing and recording the world’s specimens at a time when Earth is facing a sixth extinction event and desperately needs an “ark” for threatened species.
Mr Naggs said modern preservation methods, such as cryogenics, meant museums could now become repositories for living samples, which could aid research while ensuring their survival. “It is about maximising options for future generations to restore a biologically diverse world,” he said.“But, in addition, viable cells provide optimum material for molecular research into understanding the diversity of life; they can be used for research now.”
In the article, he wrote: “When the NHM should have entered the 21st century as a science-led organisation, it finds itself managed by a corporate clique incapable of recognising what the museum can and should be doing.”
A spokesman for the museum said: “Our scientifically critical collections and world-leading research expertise both play a pivotal role in finding solutions to the planetary emergency.
“We are committed, through initiatives such as our planned digitisation and science facility, to ensuring the collections and the vast data contained in them are safe, accessible and digitally available for researchers, enabling cutting-edge analysis and major scientific collaboration to help tackle issues such as biodiversity loss, climate change and food insecurity.”