Recommended Reading | November 2012

Science, then, necessitates a certain comfort with being wrong, a tolerance for the fear of failure — perhaps cultivating that capacity is an essential prerequisite not only for science but also for the basic appreciation of science.

– Maria Popova in What is Science?, an article collating many quotes on the topic. (via Kate Clancy)

Graduate student’s guide to necessary skills for non-academic conservation careers (via @ficaryl). This paper was subsequently covered in the QAEco reading group.

And for those who are seeking academic conservation careers, grant writing advice that can’t be said too many times.

I’ve just discovered The Contemplative Mammoth and have enjoyed browsing her archives, especially her thoughts on the native-vs-alien dichotomy in conservation, packing for a conference, math anxiety, imposter syndrome, shadow CVs, getting a faculty job and engaging with the media as a scientist.

Georgia Garrard leads a new paper introducing a trait-based model of plant detectability.

Cattle grazing leases will be extended in NSW national parks. (via Mick McCarthy)

And next week is ESA 2012! As well as a presentation on weed detectability, I’ve been preparing a map of restaurant recommendations for delegates. There are 21 other QAEcologists scheduled to speak too, I can only hope they’re not giving out an award for the most over-exposed lab.

Malleefowl workshop, University of Melbourne

Brendan Wintle helps workshop participants extricate their fundamental objectives from their means objectives

After an illuminating weekend observing malleefowl monitoring practices, the University research team reciprocated by inviting around twenty mallee and malleefowl experts to one of our study sites, G26 Botany North. While the surrounds were not quite as picturesque, we did our best to compensate with comfy accommodation and abundant catering.

Our purpose was to develop a picture of malleefowl persistence with help from the people who know them and their environment best. We aimed to identify:

• Objectives: What do we want for malleefowl? How will we know if we’re succeeding or failing?
• Threats and Drivers: What processes influence our ability to achieve the objectives we have set?
• Actions: What could be done to address the threats and drivers that negatively impact malleefowl?

We ran sessions of structured brainstorming in small groups and developed influence diagrams that connected our actions to threats and drivers, and our threats and drivers to our malleefowl objectives. Dynamics are complicated, with different processes operating at different temporal and spatial scales, and our diagrams often looked like spidery messes even as we made progress in ordering our thoughts and theories.

An influence diagram in its inevitable ‘horrendogram’ phase

Since we’re embarking on an adaptive management project, we aim to embrace uncertainty. We encouraged our experts to disagree and to cast doubt; this will allow us to characterise our uncertainty, carry it through our modelling processes, and develop strategies that are robust to what we don’t know. Our experts filled us in on what data exist where, and for what interactions there is little or conflicting information.

Still stoically smiling after almost two days of modelling

Eliciting and ordering information from experts is hard work for everyone involved. It’s an art (sensing the mood of the room, maintaining morale and focus) and a science (obtaining relevant information in a meaningful format with as few biases as possible), and something that I’m very new to. A number of QAEco and ACERA researchers are expert expert-wranglers and I’m hoping to learn a lot from them as the malleefowl and kangaroo management projects progress.

Luckily for us, this cohort of experts had as much enthusiasm and stamina for the project as they did knowledge and data. The University research team is enormously grateful for their time, and we’re hoping to continue involving them in our work.