Notes from a presentation at APS by Jason Gardner, Echelon Front, fomer Navy Sea Air and Land SEAL.
Sometimes good to let people fail so they can improve.
There is often the assumption that if you told someone what to do then it will work, but may not hold true in stressful situations.
Develop culture where everyone is included and understands that their contribution is important.
1. Cover and Move
If teammate fails, we all fail.
2. Keep it Simple
Everyone needs to understand the goal.
3. Prioritize and Execute
Detach from details. Don't be a robot, but don't forget to see yourself from the outside.
4. Decentralized Command
Everyone leads. Leadership is not just a title but an attitude.
Victory Mindset
-Default mode: aggressive. See and do. Often the most important things to do are in the places we least want to look.
-Innovate and Adapt - aggressively
-Humility: check your ego
-Influence up and down chain of command: develop relationships
-Lead and follow
-Discipline equals freedom
-Extreme ownership: no blame, no excuses.
Wednesday, January 22, 2020
Monday, January 20, 2020
Australian Wildfires
 |
| Extremely large pyrocumulus clouds tower over bushfires in New South Wales and spread over the Pacific Ocean. Sentinel-2A image, December 31, 2019, processed by @andrewmiskelly. Source. |
"Fuels management cannot prevent fires but can change their behavior" but fuels management is limited by budgets and time to burn, especially in droughts." Source.
The BBC has a good overview:
"We’re seeing recurrent fires in tall, wet eucalypt forests, which normally only burn very rarely. A swamp dried out near Port Macquarie, and organic sediments in the ground caught on fire. When you drop the water table, the soil is so rich in organic matter it will burn. We’ve seen swamps burning all around."
"Even Australia’s fire-adapted forest ecosystems are struggling because they are facing increasingly frequent events. In Tasmania, over the past few years we have seen environments burning that historically see fires very rarely, perhaps every 1000 years. The increasing tempo, spatial scale, and frequency of fires could see ecosystems extinguished." Source.
More Info.
Australian Fire Center
Case Study / Educational Info
Tuesday, January 07, 2020
What We Need More Of, Is Science
No Heroes or Villains
Dodds has a nickname for us humans: Homo narrativus. Dodds, a professor at the University of Vermont, uses mathematics to study social networks. He has argued that people see the stories of heroes and villains, where there are really just networks and graphs. It’s our desire for narrative, he says, that makes us believe that something like fame is the result of merit or destiny and not a network model quirk. (From http://nautil.us/issue/47/Consciousness/to-fix-the-climate-tell-better-stories)
Scientific narratives, if they’re done right, are some of the most powerful of all. They teach us more than facts, mechanisms, and procedures. They convey a worldview of skeptical empiricism and indefinite revision, show us how to negotiate the boundary between our rational and emotional selves, teach us to suspend judgment and consider all the possibilities, and remind us that a belief in objective truth is a deep kind of optimism with massive dividends.
Kirk Johnson, director of the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, puts it this way: “If you look at how the media treats scientific discoveries, they’ll go to the wonder. ... [They’ll say] ‘here’s this thing that’s been discovered,’ not the process of how we figured it out. And I think that understanding of how we know what we know is so critical ... If you don’t help people understand what those processes are, [if] you just say ‘here’s the answer,’ now they can go onto the web and dial up an alternate answer. I think we’re seeing an erosion of credibility of science to the public because of this huge flood of technology and information.”
This erosion is essential to understanding the modern climate debate. In the words of the philosopher Richard Rorty, “We understand knowledge when we understand the social justification of belief, and thus have no need to view it as accuracy of representation.”4 In the absence of social justification, the public ends up being called on to be the judge of accuracy of representation—in other words, of scientific content
Dodds has a nickname for us humans: Homo narrativus. Dodds, a professor at the University of Vermont, uses mathematics to study social networks. He has argued that people see the stories of heroes and villains, where there are really just networks and graphs. It’s our desire for narrative, he says, that makes us believe that something like fame is the result of merit or destiny and not a network model quirk. (From http://nautil.us/issue/47/Consciousness/to-fix-the-climate-tell-better-stories)
Scientific narratives, if they’re done right, are some of the most powerful of all. They teach us more than facts, mechanisms, and procedures. They convey a worldview of skeptical empiricism and indefinite revision, show us how to negotiate the boundary between our rational and emotional selves, teach us to suspend judgment and consider all the possibilities, and remind us that a belief in objective truth is a deep kind of optimism with massive dividends.
Kirk Johnson, director of the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History, puts it this way: “If you look at how the media treats scientific discoveries, they’ll go to the wonder. ... [They’ll say] ‘here’s this thing that’s been discovered,’ not the process of how we figured it out. And I think that understanding of how we know what we know is so critical ... If you don’t help people understand what those processes are, [if] you just say ‘here’s the answer,’ now they can go onto the web and dial up an alternate answer. I think we’re seeing an erosion of credibility of science to the public because of this huge flood of technology and information.”
This erosion is essential to understanding the modern climate debate. In the words of the philosopher Richard Rorty, “We understand knowledge when we understand the social justification of belief, and thus have no need to view it as accuracy of representation.”4 In the absence of social justification, the public ends up being called on to be the judge of accuracy of representation—in other words, of scientific content
Sunday, January 05, 2020
Climate Change Belief Tree
An article in Nautilus magazine analogizes beliefs about climate change to branches on a tree. I like that the tree diagram emphasizes the unity of thinking about climate change, even if we may be on different branches. Also, I think it is OK for one person's beliefs to span different branches: belief about the future does not need to be certain but can be probabilistic and can change from one day to the next.
 |
| Diagram and original article by Summer Praetorius. |
The article concludes: "What if instead of feeling threatened by differences in opinion, we were to reconceptualize them in much the same way a tree will distribute a canopy to collect as much sunlight as possible—as a multi-pronged approach to getting the job done? In the same sense that both fast and slow processes contribute to Earth change, both steady progress and immediate local action will contribute to climate solutions. Let’s take stock of our pace and work together, thankful there is someone else to fill the space we can’t. After all, we are not lone trees, but a living, connected forest, and balance is essential for stability."
Wednesday, January 01, 2020
Top 2019 conservation news
Multiple stories of widespread wild animal population declines:
From 10 billion down to 7 billion birds.
The population of birds in North American has fallen by a third in 50 years. Science.
Statistic of the decade: amount of rainforest lost in Amazon.
"Insect apocalypse" in the New York Times Magazine garnered widespread attention.
In the United States, scientists recently found the population of monarch butterflies fell by 90 percent in the last 20 years, a loss of 900 million individuals; the rusty-patched bumblebee, which once lived in 28 states, dropped by 87 percent over the same period.
the overall abundance of flying insects in German nature reserves had decreased by 75 percent over just 27 years. If you looked at midsummer population peaks, the drop was 82 percent.
It is estimated that, since 1970, Earth’s various populations of wild land animals have lost, on average, 60 percent of their members.
What we’re losing is not just the diversity part of biodiversity, but the bio part: life in sheer quantity....Finding reassurance in the survival of a few symbolic standard-bearers ignores the value of abundance, of a natural world that thrives on richness and complexity and interaction.
Scientists have begun to speak of functional extinction (as opposed to the more familiar kind, numerical extinction). Functionally extinct animals and plants are still present but no longer prevalent enough to affect how an ecosystem works. Some phrase this as the extinction not of a species but of all its former interactions with its environment — an extinction of seed dispersal and predation and pollination and all the other ecological functions an animal once had...
Other News (Link)
Last female Yangzte Giant Softshell Turtle died
Last Sumatran Rhino in Malaysia died
Jaguar and Koala populations hit by wildfires in Brazil and Australia
From 10 billion down to 7 billion birds.
The population of birds in North American has fallen by a third in 50 years. Science.
Statistic of the decade: amount of rainforest lost in Amazon.
"Insect apocalypse" in the New York Times Magazine garnered widespread attention.
In the United States, scientists recently found the population of monarch butterflies fell by 90 percent in the last 20 years, a loss of 900 million individuals; the rusty-patched bumblebee, which once lived in 28 states, dropped by 87 percent over the same period.
the overall abundance of flying insects in German nature reserves had decreased by 75 percent over just 27 years. If you looked at midsummer population peaks, the drop was 82 percent.
It is estimated that, since 1970, Earth’s various populations of wild land animals have lost, on average, 60 percent of their members.
What we’re losing is not just the diversity part of biodiversity, but the bio part: life in sheer quantity....Finding reassurance in the survival of a few symbolic standard-bearers ignores the value of abundance, of a natural world that thrives on richness and complexity and interaction.
Scientists have begun to speak of functional extinction (as opposed to the more familiar kind, numerical extinction). Functionally extinct animals and plants are still present but no longer prevalent enough to affect how an ecosystem works. Some phrase this as the extinction not of a species but of all its former interactions with its environment — an extinction of seed dispersal and predation and pollination and all the other ecological functions an animal once had...
Other News (Link)
Last female Yangzte Giant Softshell Turtle died
Last Sumatran Rhino in Malaysia died
Jaguar and Koala populations hit by wildfires in Brazil and Australia
Thursday, December 26, 2019
Ethnography and Human Health Pioneers
I'm interested in people who have traveled the world, learning from the diversity of human adaptations and health responses.
Esther Gokhale
Weston A. Price
Jaws: The Story of a Hidden Epidemic
Esther Gokhale
Weston A. Price
Jaws: The Story of a Hidden Epidemic
Logging to Save a Forest from Climate Change
A good article about logging in the forest where I did my graduate research in northern Michigan. Researchers are using funding from a timber contract with Louisiana-Pacific to cut the aspen trees on part of the experimental forest. They will study the soil and water impacts of cutting the trees, as well as looking at species composition changes.
In the article, a researcher is quoted as saying that it would be irresponsible not to cut the trees because of climate change. "Aspen in the Great Lakes region are considered “climate change losers,” according to Nave, and are not expected to fare well as the region’s climate continues to warm in the coming decades."
"The high-emissions scenario projects an 11.2-degree Fahrenheit summer temperature increase in the assessment area by the end of the 21st century. At the same time, summer precipitation is projected to decline by 3.8 inches under that scenario. "
"It will take a decade or more to know which of the aspen-management treatments was most effective, Nave said. It is expected that future generations of Biological Station researchers and students will carry on with the work, he said."
In the article, a researcher is quoted as saying that it would be irresponsible not to cut the trees because of climate change. "Aspen in the Great Lakes region are considered “climate change losers,” according to Nave, and are not expected to fare well as the region’s climate continues to warm in the coming decades."
"The high-emissions scenario projects an 11.2-degree Fahrenheit summer temperature increase in the assessment area by the end of the 21st century. At the same time, summer precipitation is projected to decline by 3.8 inches under that scenario. "
"It will take a decade or more to know which of the aspen-management treatments was most effective, Nave said. It is expected that future generations of Biological Station researchers and students will carry on with the work, he said."
Thursday, December 19, 2019
Glyphosate Fear-Mongering
Despite recent court cases, glyphosate is not recognized as a carcinogen or toxin as these terms are normally understood in environmental toxicology. Yes, there is some research linking glyphosate with increased cancer risk, but that is not the scientific consensus.
I don't think this blog post on glyphosate can be counted as scientifically accurate, even though it does cite scientific research. Websites that sell fear based on a few studies while ignoring the body of scientific literature are not reliable sources for decision-making.
I am writing as a concerned science-lover. For me (and I could be wrong), I see glyphosate fear-mongering as no different from conspiracy theories about vaccine harms or global warming. Yes, there are scientific papers showing that vaccines cause autism and that global warming is not happening, but any article that only cites those papers without weighing (or at least mentioning!) the current scientific consensus would be misleading at best.
Focusing on glyphosate seems especially misguided given the other chemicals used in agriculture and commonly found in our food supply (e.g. chlorpyrifos). While glyphosate may be the popular boogeyman of the year, science-based reporting should at least acknowledge that it is probably the least toxic of any chemical pesticides currently being used.
A better approach than just selling fear: promote solutions, such as better testing of all chemicals in our food supply.
Wednesday, December 18, 2019
Plant Interactions Versus Integrated Vegetation Management (IVM)
Questions: does existing vegetation help or hurt the
IVM goal of creating a self-sustaining, compatible plant community? Do
some compatible species tend to facilitate or inhibit the establishment and
growth of incompatible species? And do these plant interactions vary
systematically across ecosystems?
These questions fall into the domain of “Community
Ecology”. This
looks like a good review paper but I don’t have access to it. Ecology
is notoriously unsystematic, so (without reading the review) I bet the answer
is “Its complicated” and “It depends.”
Here are some papers I was able to
access:
Paper: The role of plant interactions in the restoration of
degraded ecosystems: a meta‐analysis across life‐forms and ecosystems
Relevant Conclusions: Inhibition predominates in
herbaceous communities typical of early‐successional stages, whereas
facilitation prevails in communities dominated by shrubs and trees.
My Comment: IVM that leaves shrubs (like in Sonoran desert)
would probably not create inhibition for tree growth, whereas IVM that leaves
grasses (like Ponderosa habitats) would be expected to inhibit tree growth.
Paper: Is the change of plant–plant interactions with
abiotic stress predictable? A meta‐analysis of field results in arid
environments
Relevant Conclusions: Density data showed that the net
effect of plant neighbours was positive at low abiotic stress and negative at
high abiotic stress levels. However, none of our meta‐analyses indicated
that the magnitude of the net effect provided by plant neighbours, whether
positive or negative, was higher under high abiotic stress conditions, and
facilitation does not therefore appear to increase in importance with abiotic
stress.
My Comment: Results are mixed, but in general deserts do not
show more importance of “nurse plant” facilitation.
Wednesday, August 07, 2019
Rosemont mine delayed by 1872 Mining Law
Quotes from Arizona Daily Star:
In his 37-page decision, Soto hammered almost exclusively at the Forest Service’s approval of Hudbay’s plan to dump mine waste rock and tailings from its 955-acre pit onto 2,447 acres of nearby public land on the Santa Ritas’ eastern slopes.
Opponents’ lawsuits argued that only public lands directly above valuable mineral deposits are covered by the federal 1872 mining law’s definition of mining rights.
Soto wrote in his decision that for Hudbay to gain access to valuable copper, molybdenum and silver from the pit, the company would need to extract about 1.2 billion tons of economically worthless waste rock and about 700 million tons of mine tailings.
The Forest Service's primary error in this case was to accept, without question, that Hudbay's unpatented mining claims on those 2,447 acres were valid, thereby allowing them to be used for placement of the waste rock and tailings, he wrote.
Source.
In his 37-page decision, Soto hammered almost exclusively at the Forest Service’s approval of Hudbay’s plan to dump mine waste rock and tailings from its 955-acre pit onto 2,447 acres of nearby public land on the Santa Ritas’ eastern slopes.
Opponents’ lawsuits argued that only public lands directly above valuable mineral deposits are covered by the federal 1872 mining law’s definition of mining rights.
Soto wrote in his decision that for Hudbay to gain access to valuable copper, molybdenum and silver from the pit, the company would need to extract about 1.2 billion tons of economically worthless waste rock and about 700 million tons of mine tailings.
The Forest Service's primary error in this case was to accept, without question, that Hudbay's unpatented mining claims on those 2,447 acres were valid, thereby allowing them to be used for placement of the waste rock and tailings, he wrote.
Source.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)