New F&W job opening

Paul_

Paul_

Life of the Party
Forum Supporter
Hmm, not sure what to make of this…

Conservation Social Scientist​

www.governmentjobs.com

State of Washington Job Opportunities | Work that Matters

www.governmentjobs.com www.governmentjobs.com

From the announcement-
It is critical for natural resource managers to understand how people value fish and wildlife, how they want those resources managed, and how they are affected or affect wildlife decisions.
 
Last edited:
Great now we'll make biological decisions based on how we feel..

I know this stream historically had 3000 wild steelhead but people really think it should gave 1500.

We don't need public input we have a scientist who knows what you think. And we pay him a rich man's salary.. yes I just used terminology that upholds the patriarchy and I don't feel bad about it.
 
I would think people would support this work. Haven’t people been bitching that the agency is out of touch with citizens’ values? IMHO, without public support for conservation, we are sunk. And, there is a lot of work to do in public education and outreach to increase understanding within the agency of where the public is thoughts-wise on various conservation topics, as well as report out what the agency is doing, what the agency thinks needs to be done, and working to close any gap between those. Therefore, I think it is a good thing that the agency recognizes there is work to be done “Planning and conducting advanced social science research to examine values, beliefs, and behaviors associated with conservation management challenges and recommending ways to increase public support and engagement for positive conservation outcomes.”

Or do people just object out of hand to anything WDFW does, ever? Seems like it, sometimes.
 
It’s been close to 20 years since I was a grad student studying stream ecology. I took a couple of grad courses in fisheries management. The fresh buzz then was “human dimensions” and emphasis on the social science of natural resources management. Having someone in the roll of translator between scientists and the public is good. If that person can also help set priorities for the limited budgets of natural resource managers, all the better.
 
I assumed most managers in fish & wildlife were aware of-
“how people value fish and wildlife, how they want those resources managed”
If they are not, I question how they reached a management level position.

WDFW good do a lot better job telling the public what they are doing, selling their successes. Is a social scientist needed for that?
 
Paul_ said:
I assumed most managers in fish & wildlife were aware of-
“how people value fish and wildlife, how they want those resources managed”
If they are not, I question how they reached a management level position.

WDFW good do a lot better job telling the public what they are doing, selling their successes. Is a social scientist needed for that?
Click to expand...
If managers don't know how people feel. It's because they have turned their backs on them, stuffed their fingers in their ears and are yelling "la la la I can't hear you"
 
Kind of off topic but many moons ago i was asked to do a brief adjunct professor/guest lecturer gig at San Diego State University. During my time there i met this really cool (tenured) professor of communication.

He and another professor wrote a grant proposal and got a hefty grant from the USG (i think NIH?) for the following: a two year study to understand skiiers’ perceptions of sunscreen usage. They also got a super hefty chip-in from an industry association that represents the sunscreen makers.

Basically they got paid really well to travel all expenses paid over the US and ski for two seasons! During the ski trips they would “interview” people on the slopes to see if they used sunscreen and if not, why not? What might make them change their minds?

Really though, the ultimate ski boondoggle.

Those guys are legends in my book. Who knows what earth shattering findings they came up with. All i remember is they got paid to ski.
 
Paul_ said:
I assumed most managers in fish & wildlife were aware of-
“how people value fish and wildlife, how they want those resources managed”
If they are not, I question how they reached a management level position.

WDFW good do a lot better job telling the public what they are doing, selling their successes. Is a social scientist needed for that?
Click to expand...
You can use me as a reference
 
Paul_ said:
I assumed most managers in fish & wildlife were aware of-
“how people value fish and wildlife, how they want those resources managed”
If they are not, I question how they reached a management level position.

WDFW good do a lot better job telling the public what they are doing, selling their successes. Is a social scientist needed for that?
Click to expand...
Exactly what I thought.

Worried this will just be an ear piece for those who are already really loud about their opinions (the anti-hunting group for example) that amplifies further those who already scream the loudest.
 
Rob Allen said:
There is no amount of education that makes you over qualified for that very high wage. Extremely high wage...
Click to expand...
It's not an extremely high wage. I know plumbers who make more than that, electricians too. Hell I even know landscapers who make that much.
Lol
 
Mossback said:
It's not an extremely high wage. I know plumbers who make more than that, electricians too. Hell I even know landscapers who make that much.
Lol
Click to expand...
So? It's still a very high wage.. just under 50 bucks an hour
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top