In a recent perspective, Byrne emphasized that natural history museums “are essential hubs for research and education” but that their mission should be reimagined to focus on nonlethal collecting. We endorse many of the practices advocated by Byrne, including the storage of tissues, recordings, photos, and other data; embracing new technologies such as massively parallel DNA sequencing, μCT scanning, and stable isotope analysis; and large-scale digitization of collections and associated metadata. Indeed, many of these practices are widely used by museums today. We also welcome the call to provide stable financial support to maintain and expand the infrastructure of existing collections. However, we do not support the call to use new technologies “to replace the need for whole animal bodies.” Byrne’s position overstates the potential of new technologies to replace specimen-based research and fails to acknowledge the importance of whole-organism–based research in building the foundations of modern biology and in continuing to promote new discoveries. Our intention is not to address all the claims or ethical assumptions made by Byrne. We fully realize that collecting specimens is not necessary or desirable in certain circumstances, and we value the scientific contributions of researchers who choose not to collect whole animals. The importance and ethics of scientific collecting have been reviewed in many recent papers (e.g., [2–4]). Rather, our goal is to underscore the tremendous value of ongoing, wholeorganism specimen collection by highlighting some of the key scientific and societal gains that arise from this research (Box 1).