With only 2 weeks until my exit seminar things are beginning to wrap up, but at the same time, I feel like I am busier than ever. I have mostly finished my background reading (although there is always more to read) and am concentrating on writing. I went out on another survey route, this time with IMBCR in the mountains, and had my first deliverable (A Tale of Two Methods) for the Bird Conservancy published on their website.
If I have learned nothing else, it is the need for flexibility. When I went out on the BBS survey, I was given two days warning, but planning to go out on an IMBCR survey has required patience. After weeks of planning, re-planning, watching the weather, and coordinating busy schedules, I finally went out on an IMBCR survey. Just to keep things interesting, I had to find a small dirt road not found on Google maps with a road marker not visible from the turn off in the dark. It was sad when my 9-year old flip phone finally died a few months ago, but sometimes smartphones are lifesavers.
Unfortunately (and fortunately), the birds weren’t very active that morning. I didn’t get as much of a chance to learn new bird songs, but the quiet gave me time to learn the methods and talk with Chris White, the Director of Science Operations. For a first time out I did pretty well, although I always counted more snags than Chris and was absolutely awful at estimating distances to unseen, singing birds. This made it clear how important the week-long training they do for field techs is. It takes a lot of practice to record data in a consistent way between multiple people.
This project has given me insight into, not only communication and outreach, but a wide variety of conservation efforts. Between going out on bird surveys in Colorado grasslands and mountains, I have learned about land management techniques from short-grass prairies to lodgepole pine forests. Not everything discussed during interviews with experts has turned out to be directly applicable to my outreach materials, but these things have made me think more deeply about the process of conservation. Whether it is about who should bear the burden of proof for the impacts of development on wildlife or the frustrations of developing new management plans when Forest Service rules change, conservation is rarely simple.
As mentioned at the start, my first deliverable for the Bird Conservancy has been published (A Tale of Two Methods). While I enjoyed writing that blog post, it has shown me some of my weaknesses. The technical parts of the blog were fun and easy to write but making it a bit more personal was a challenge. This blog also emphasized the importance of framing, a topic we discussed frequently in our classes. With two large-scale monitoring programs doing similar things, there is almost an expectation of competition and dislike between the two groups. While this is not the reality, there is tension. I have to be careful with my framing so that I help diffuse this tension instead of exacerbating it.
As I get closer to the end of this project with the Bird Conservancy, I want to take a step back and reflect on my experiences from earlier this year. This past spring, I worked with the Wisconsin Society for Ornithology (WSO). Building off of our work in Conservation Planning, I created a plan for restoring the fields on WSO’s property in the Baraboo Hills to oak forest. Between these two projects with very different goals and deliverables, I expected the day to day aspects to differ as well, but some things were surprisingly similar.
Knowing how to pick out the important conclusions from reading materials and keeping in contact with bosses, colleagues, and stakeholders is important. No matter what kind of report or material you are writing up, you have to consider the needs of your audience. What do the people who would use this information want to know about? What kinds of things would they find useful? What kind of background or perspective do they have? As we have talked about in our classes, simply providing more information is insufficient. For example: IMBCR data is great for adaptive management but is often not used for that yet. Without considering the time constraints and needs of the potential users, even high-quality datasets can end up sitting on a shelf collecting dust.
Of course, even good intentions, good communication, and good data cannot solve every problem. With politics, culture, science, and many other factors in play on complex conservation issues, you can’t make everyone happy all the time. Sometimes you just have to keep pushing forward and doing the best you can even when things seem to be going wrong.
Conservation is a collaborative process and, despite what I used to think, requires more than just an understanding of the science. It is important to build relationships and maintain strong networks. I have been fortunate in my projects with WSO and the Bird Conservancy to work with dedicated and enthusiastic professionals and interact with people in a wide range of conservation organizations from government positions to NGOs. While I have come to realize my contributions to conservation are unlikely to take the form of online/social media outreach (a shock to those who know me, I’m sure), my passion and optimism for conservation has only increased. I do not yet know where I will roam to next but, after working with an amazing Cohort 4, always helpful UW professors, and enthusiastic professionals, I am confident I can face whatever challenges may arise.
The Nelson Institute: Environmental Conservation Leadership Projects 