Finally, to send 2010 off into the history books, I was absolutely tickled to see this report about the discovery of an active nest of Harpy Eagles in the mountains of Belize! This pair is raising chick in an area where Harpies were recently thought to be extinct, a full 700 miles north of the what we thought was the extent of their range. The Harpy Eagle is high on the list of animals I most want to see in the wild at some point in my lifetime (joining the Great White Shark, Komodo Dragon, Nile Crocodile, African Elephant, Kodiak Bear, and Mandarinfish among others), and knowing there is one more place where that might be possible is encouraging.
Indeed, any report of species showing recovery, resilience and adaptability gives me hope and encouragement. To be sure, the Belizeans are owed credit for protecting tracts of good habitat in which the Harpies could re-establish. But the birds themselves deserve the most credit for their perseverance, not to mention my personal thanks for sending me into 2011 on a positive note!
Friday, December 31, 2010
Countdown to 2011, Part II: Numbers
Although I find my thinking as a scientist, not to mention my work, has evolved over the past 5-7 years away from original training and interest in population biology much more toward the more complex arena of ecosystem ecology. That evolution began when I began to work on watershed and habitat issues, stepping beyond the single-species demographic studies that had dominated my doctoral and post-doctoral work. More recently, I find my interests moving further still toward the concept of social-ecological systems, which essentially means truly integrating the full complexity of the human species into ecosystem science. It's an exciting, albeit somewhat overwhelming, area, about which I have much to learn.
Still, I think there is still an important place for the more focused study of populations of individual species in their own right. From an applied point of view, single-species population biology will establish the conservation and management backstops guiding action when we find a species in dire straits, or is the species is sufficiently important (most likely economically, but perhaps culturally or ecologically as well) to warrant more focused attention. Moving toward ecosystem science and management involves trade-offs in what we factor into our understanding and decision-making. Specifically, we will generally pay less attention to the intricacies of individual species' biology, but factors in more of the external factors that also drive their dynamics yet are largely ignored by classical population biology. But population biology will be where we turn when a species needs special attention.
Also, in terms of my own personal satisfaction from scientific study, I find in-depth examination of population biology to be more gratifying because it allows one to know a species in a way that is almost intimate, uncovering the uniqueness and complexity that shape its numbers and place in the world. The study of populations is heavily grounded in numbers (growth and mortality rates, abundance and density, age and size structure), but taken together those numbers become something more, a whole greater than the sum of its parts. When I think about an area of the ocean from an ecosystem perspective, I consider a wide array of species interacting in that space. But each is somewhat anonymous, and I feel special affinity for those species I have studied in more depth (notably, the stripey bass that was the focus of my doctoral dissertation, and to a growing extent the humble alewife that inspired the name of this blog).
In any case, I have entered into this discussion of populations because two milestones in the population of our own humble species are at hand. Firstly, the U.S. Census Bureau recently released the results of the 2010 Census, announcing to the world that there are now 308,745,538 Americans. Frankly, that number seems low to me. For some reason, I thought we were up above the 350,000,000 mark.
Regardless, it's tough to know exactly what that number really means. Probably very little. What is more important is how that population is structured and distributed, not to mention how its members interact with one another and the world around us. In the coming weeks, I'll be poking around that site more deeply to see what interesting patterns lie in the data. And I won't be alone. Census data form the cornerstone of any number of analyses by government agencies from the local to federal level, non-governmental organizations, academicians and corporations (marketing...). Indeed, my guess is that the decadal U.S. census is the most widely used database in the world.
The second milestone is our global approach toward 7 billion people. Whoa. That number and scale is a bit too daunting to say much more about right now, but National Geographic has done an interesting exploration of its significance that is well worth checking out.
So many numbers, so little time!
Still, I think there is still an important place for the more focused study of populations of individual species in their own right. From an applied point of view, single-species population biology will establish the conservation and management backstops guiding action when we find a species in dire straits, or is the species is sufficiently important (most likely economically, but perhaps culturally or ecologically as well) to warrant more focused attention. Moving toward ecosystem science and management involves trade-offs in what we factor into our understanding and decision-making. Specifically, we will generally pay less attention to the intricacies of individual species' biology, but factors in more of the external factors that also drive their dynamics yet are largely ignored by classical population biology. But population biology will be where we turn when a species needs special attention.
Also, in terms of my own personal satisfaction from scientific study, I find in-depth examination of population biology to be more gratifying because it allows one to know a species in a way that is almost intimate, uncovering the uniqueness and complexity that shape its numbers and place in the world. The study of populations is heavily grounded in numbers (growth and mortality rates, abundance and density, age and size structure), but taken together those numbers become something more, a whole greater than the sum of its parts. When I think about an area of the ocean from an ecosystem perspective, I consider a wide array of species interacting in that space. But each is somewhat anonymous, and I feel special affinity for those species I have studied in more depth (notably, the stripey bass that was the focus of my doctoral dissertation, and to a growing extent the humble alewife that inspired the name of this blog).
In any case, I have entered into this discussion of populations because two milestones in the population of our own humble species are at hand. Firstly, the U.S. Census Bureau recently released the results of the 2010 Census, announcing to the world that there are now 308,745,538 Americans. Frankly, that number seems low to me. For some reason, I thought we were up above the 350,000,000 mark.
Regardless, it's tough to know exactly what that number really means. Probably very little. What is more important is how that population is structured and distributed, not to mention how its members interact with one another and the world around us. In the coming weeks, I'll be poking around that site more deeply to see what interesting patterns lie in the data. And I won't be alone. Census data form the cornerstone of any number of analyses by government agencies from the local to federal level, non-governmental organizations, academicians and corporations (marketing...). Indeed, my guess is that the decadal U.S. census is the most widely used database in the world.
The second milestone is our global approach toward 7 billion people. Whoa. That number and scale is a bit too daunting to say much more about right now, but National Geographic has done an interesting exploration of its significance that is well worth checking out.
So many numbers, so little time!
Countdown to 2011, Part I: Jumo?
Well, I set a goal back in November of publishing more posts in 2010 than the whopping 4 that went live in 2009. Today, I woke up to find the final day of 2010 upon us and my yearly total sitting at an underwhelming 2. D'oh! Looks like I have some work to do, and fast. Brace thee for a fast and furious barrage of thought-provoking nuggets, all of which will be teasers for themes to be developed more extensively in the New Year...
Let's start with this story that caught my eye a month ago. It describes the launch of "Jumo", a new social media site focused on social change. I was intrigued by this site for two reasons. The first is my general exploration of the potential and limitations of social media in general. As I posted not long ago, I recently (and somewhat hesitantly, not to mention almost inexplicably) began some low-key dabbling in the word of Twitter (a place I once swore I would never venture...). Of course, I also shared Malcolm Gladwell's poignant piece from The New Yorker on the limits of social media in really changing the world. It will be interesting to see how far Jumo can push the envelope, although I can't see any way that Galdwell's central premise will be disproven by the new site. Action will always ultimately require standing up from the keyboard, walking out the door, and engaging the world...
My second interest lies in the potential for Jumo to help my goal of keeping Facebook personal. I rather like Facebook. But I want it to be something fun, and something first and foremost about re-connecting and keeping up to date with family and friends, and not something for work, politics, and other less light-hearted matters. Sure, I've been know to post a status update addressing matters of policy, etc., not to mention commenting when others do the same. And I do show support for various organizations and such through my page, although most of those are groups that friends work for and my support is more for the person than the organization. However, I've avoided any sort of social, political, or other less personal action through Facebook, but might get more active in those arenas through Jumo.
So far, I've gone to the site, looked at the home page...and done nothing more. Early in the New Year, I plan to set up an account, poke around a bit, and report back to the RO faithful with my take on the site. Stay tuned!
Let's start with this story that caught my eye a month ago. It describes the launch of "Jumo", a new social media site focused on social change. I was intrigued by this site for two reasons. The first is my general exploration of the potential and limitations of social media in general. As I posted not long ago, I recently (and somewhat hesitantly, not to mention almost inexplicably) began some low-key dabbling in the word of Twitter (a place I once swore I would never venture...). Of course, I also shared Malcolm Gladwell's poignant piece from The New Yorker on the limits of social media in really changing the world. It will be interesting to see how far Jumo can push the envelope, although I can't see any way that Galdwell's central premise will be disproven by the new site. Action will always ultimately require standing up from the keyboard, walking out the door, and engaging the world...
My second interest lies in the potential for Jumo to help my goal of keeping Facebook personal. I rather like Facebook. But I want it to be something fun, and something first and foremost about re-connecting and keeping up to date with family and friends, and not something for work, politics, and other less light-hearted matters. Sure, I've been know to post a status update addressing matters of policy, etc., not to mention commenting when others do the same. And I do show support for various organizations and such through my page, although most of those are groups that friends work for and my support is more for the person than the organization. However, I've avoided any sort of social, political, or other less personal action through Facebook, but might get more active in those arenas through Jumo.
So far, I've gone to the site, looked at the home page...and done nothing more. Early in the New Year, I plan to set up an account, poke around a bit, and report back to the RO faithful with my take on the site. Stay tuned!
Sunday, December 19, 2010
The right alignment
So we know that the sun, earth and moon will in the right alignment in the wee hours of Tuesday morning to produce a lunar eclipse. As a scientist, I always take notice when the night sky will provide us with an eclipse, meteor shower, comet, or other astronomical phenomenon. Of course, "take notice" doesn't necessarily mean "actually get out of bed and watch". After all, the heavens have an annoying tendency to showcase their wonders at an incredibly inconvenient hour. This week's eclipse, for example, will begin around 1:33AM EST, will reach totality at 2:41AM, and last for 72 minutes thereafter, with the deepest shadow at 3:17AM. My primary scientific interest lie in the forests, deserts, lakes, streams, and especially the oceans. For all of its vastness and mystery, the cosmos is at best a peripheral interest, and generally one that is not strong enough to lure from a warm bed at a late hour on a cold night...
However, the good people as NASA have provided a particularly compelling description of what the moon and the landscape it illuminates at night will look like during this eclipse (the link is also the source of the eclipse timeline recounted above). And I have to say it sounds pretty cool! The deep amber color that overtakes the moon and bathes the land has given the nickname "blood moon" to a lunar eclipse, and the phenomenon has given rise to numerous myths and legends across the globe, and at least one instance of cross-cultural deception.
With so much rare beauty possible, and so much science, history and legend tied to the event, I foresee setting my alarm to 2:45AM or so before bed on Monday night. Of course, there is one other alignment that will be an important determinant of whether my sleep is interrupted or not: the weather. Snow showers are forecasted for Monday night and Tuesday morning amidst cloudy skies. If those come and go before the eclipse, the land might be covered in a new white blanket ready to absorb the red hues. Or, the whole shebang could be obscured from view by clouds and flurries. It seems that some very subtle differences in weather patterns could be the difference between a rare night outside and a good night's sleep...
However, the good people as NASA have provided a particularly compelling description of what the moon and the landscape it illuminates at night will look like during this eclipse (the link is also the source of the eclipse timeline recounted above). And I have to say it sounds pretty cool! The deep amber color that overtakes the moon and bathes the land has given the nickname "blood moon" to a lunar eclipse, and the phenomenon has given rise to numerous myths and legends across the globe, and at least one instance of cross-cultural deception.
With so much rare beauty possible, and so much science, history and legend tied to the event, I foresee setting my alarm to 2:45AM or so before bed on Monday night. Of course, there is one other alignment that will be an important determinant of whether my sleep is interrupted or not: the weather. Snow showers are forecasted for Monday night and Tuesday morning amidst cloudy skies. If those come and go before the eclipse, the land might be covered in a new white blanket ready to absorb the red hues. Or, the whole shebang could be obscured from view by clouds and flurries. It seems that some very subtle differences in weather patterns could be the difference between a rare night outside and a good night's sleep...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)