Honorable Forum:
I would only add to Aney's insight that, even though no one told me that
either, the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune that I endured now seem
to be fortitudinous, as I look back upon the resultant agony and ecstasy and
find that yes, the satisfactions that I now feel are rooted more in my
troubles than in my fortunes. Some of the better decisions I made were those
considered foolish by others, and the greatest pain really were the source
of the greatest gain (melodramatic though that may sound).
Growing up as a farmer's son and seeing first-hand and participating in the
destruction of ecosystems for short-term financial gain and experiencing the
back-breaking toil that once was slave labor (picking cotton, hoeing
peanuts, pulling stumps, fighting fires, working in slaughter-houses,
shoveling chicken-shit, ad nauseam) where Comanches once made a living
without agriculture) really did give me a grounding in reality that could
not be gained any other way had its benefits. Quitting a job that paid over
twice as much to become a lowly GS-4/5 just so I could get paid for counting
trees instead of prostituting myself turned out to be one of the best jobs I
ever had.
Traveling (courtesy the U. S. Air Force) in diverse places in the world
(e.g., along the Damascus road and beyond) allowed me to see the effects of
thousands of years of land abuse continuing unabated, and the consequences
of some of the oldest conservation policies (e.g., hunting which emphasized
the taking of stags in decline and the highly-managed forests of the Alps,
things that we in the USA have yet to try or perhaps even understand), of
course, turned out to be a kind of field-trip on steroids, vastly more
valuable than the quick, guided tours offered by academia. Ecology by
osmosis, as it were . . .
Enduring more than a decade as a mid-level bureaucrat and contempt for my
efforts to serve both the earth and the citizens whose pockets were being
picked to pay my salary. Shucking that and the opportunity to gain an
inflated pension, then spending more that two decades "consulting." As Aney
points out, this is a mercurial way of making a living where honesty is
often penalized rather than rewarded and one becomes the enemy of the
extremes . . . but despite all of that able to restore a bit of germplasm
that otherwise would have been lost.
In the final analysis, some of us have to "settle" for small gains--even
small reductions in losses. But maybe the most important lesson of all is
what a burden egocentrism is, and what a relief it is when one finds one can
simply discard that dead weight and stand up straight.
I want to thank Malcolm for his question; it has opened up a sense of
responsibility too often neglected.
WT
"You are what your publicity says you are." --Author forgotten (And good
riddance!)
----- Original Message -----
From: "Warren W. Aney" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, March 05, 2011 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] working in academia vs govt vs consultancies
There have been relevant responses to Malcolm's challenge. Even so, let me
offer something semi-relevant using a perspective gained from a career with
government followed by several years as a consultant:
You can go to work for a government agency and end up very content with
maintaining a status quo.
You can get an academic appointment and end up satisfied with a short
publication list in obscure journals and herding a progression of students
through the mill.
You can work for a not-for-profit organization begging for grants and then
feel useful completing a long string of short term random projects.
Or you can become a consultant with wildly fluctuating incomes and work
loads and perhaps successfully educate or transform a client or two without
selling your soul.
So what do you want to accomplish given your knowledge and skills? What do
you hope is going to happen because of you? These should be the top
criteria for selecting a career slot in ecology.
If you're good at planning, organizing and performing improved ecological
management, then a government job may be the way to make a difference.
If you're good at discovering and comprehending the meaning of rigorous
ecological details and inspiring others to employ this knowledge, then
academia may be our route.
If you are good at envisioning and promoting an ecologically considerate
socio-political structure, then some non-profit organizations could make
great use of you.
And if doing the right thing ecologically in ways that improve both the
natural and human systems is your forte (and you don't need to make a lot of
money), then consulting can be your field.
In every one of these situations, you want to be able to finish your career
able to look back and see where things changed and improved because of you
-- you didn't just maintain a status quo, do some obscure research, make
temporary improvements, or satisfy a client. You made a difference because
you chose the field where you, with your special abilities and interests,
could make a difference.
And I wish someone had told me that early in my career.
Warren W. Aney
Senior Wildlife Ecologist
9403 SW 74th Ave
Tigard, OR 97223
(503) 539-1009
(503) 246-2605 fax
-----Original Message-----
From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of malcolm McCallum
Sent: Friday, 04 March, 2011 15:08
To: [email protected]
Subject: [ECOLOG-L] working in academia vs govt vs consultancies
Hi,
With all the graduate students and recently graduated on this listserv,
might it not be interesting to compare from personal experience working in
different academic sectors (e.g. research, regional, private, public, SLAC),
government (e.g. US EPA, USGS, US FWS, NOAA, USACE, USFS, state vs fed),
not for profits (e.g. nature conservancy, zoos, museums), and consultancies
(e.g. self-employed, tetra tech, &c.).
I just think this might be a useful discussion and we seem to have people
from all groups!
--
Malcolm L. McCallum
Managing Editor,
Herpetological Conservation and Biology
"Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" - Allan
Nation
1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert
1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,
and pollution.
2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction
MAY help restore populations.
2022: Soylent Green is People!
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message.
-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 10.0.1204 / Virus Database: 1435/3485 - Release Date: 03/06/11
