Spending time in the field is one of many reasons we chose a career in wildlife biology. Some of us receive extensive training while others learn while on the job. This can lead to a knowledge gap that requires biologists to conduct surveys for species where they have limited knowledge or experience. This can also result in the biologist overlooking sensitive species or making errors in the identification of a target species. Overlooking State or federally listed species denies the animal the protection it is due under the law. In addition, it can result in substantial personal risk, delay projects, result in fines, and damage reputations. Misidentifying common species as sensitive can also result in unnecessary mitigation, permitting, and regulatory burdens for the client or land manager. How do we avoid making these mistakes, maintain our ethics, and seek the mentoring needed to become better field biologists. Join us for an app based interactive discussion where we present methods to overcome knowledge gaps, communicate with clients and colleagues on our field abilities, and how to gain the knowledge and experience needed to succeed as a wildlife biologist.

Advocacy, Ethics, Client Needs, and the Resources. Maintaining Your Ethics While Supporting Responsible Growth Wildlife biologists play a key role in the preservation and management of wildlife. We study the behavior, physiology, and ecology of wildlife and how humans alter or modify the distribution and behavior of species. Wildlife biologists also conduct surveys to determine the potential for sensitive species to occur in an area proposed for development. These studies are used by land managers, resource agencies, and consultants in the evaluation of impacts associated with the development of infrastructure. But how do we balance advocacy for the species, the client, and compliance with State and federal regulations. How do we maintain our ethics while ensuring projects that benefit society are completed with the best possible mitigation to off-set impacts to sensitive wildlife. Join us for an app based interactive discussion with the audience and panel to discuss how advocacy and ethics relate to our roles as wildlife biologists.

This interactive session builds on the previous presentation (Ethics in the Field. Know Thyself) and takes a deeper dive into the legal and administerial consequences that affect projects or studies when critical mistakes are made in the field, in the data analysis, or the conclusions presented in a report. We will discuss how these errors often accumulate or are compounded overtime, where they often occur, and how they should be remedied when discovered. More importantly, we will highlight methods that should be used when planning and conducting field work, how to support your conclusions, and how to prepare legally defensible documents.

Surprisingly, there is a significant paucity of natural history information for most wildlife species. This is in the context of the most significant increase in biologists in the field in history. Many of us see or know about aspects of the natural history of one or more species—which may be used as a subject of a story among colleagues or a posting on social media—and don't fully understand or value the significance of these observations. This is particularly true among consultants who don't find the support to publish natural history notes or otherwise report their findings and observations. Those biologists that have published findings, both great and small should feel an obligation to those around them to encourage others to publish observations and findings. This is not only in support of the individual’s professional standing but can greatly enhance or facilitate management of many species that are currently enigmatic. Publishing natural history notes is relatively easy and can provide future workers with the information they need appropriately manage species and their habitat.