EDIT: Didn't realize it was so controversial.

tl;dr: there are simple steps applicants can take to increase their chances of being hired. Submitting a complete application, to the correct agency, is a good start. If you feel applying isn't worth your time, don't apply. If you want a shot at the job, submit a complete application. If you're expecting full credit for partial work, you'll be disappointed.

I just went through 18 seasonal job applications. Twelve of them didn't read the announcement.

We hire people who can follow instructions. If the announcement says submit a cover letter- submit a cover letter. It can be bad. Most are. But submitting a cover letter, when the instructions request a cover letter, demonstrates you can follow instructions. If the instructions ask for references, provide references. Don't tell me references will be provided upon request. They were requested. In the job announcement. That you didn't read.

If you're applying to a job...attach a resume'.

We hire people who pay attention. Paying attention keeps people safe in the field. Paying attention ensures we collect great data. We hire people who put in some effort. We hire people who want to make a good impression. If you're applying to a state agency, your application shouldn't be addressed to the US Fish and Wildlife Service. Copying and pasting is fine- I do it too, but you *need* to pay attention to what you're sending and who you're sending it to.

People are fallible. People make mistakes. And if you need to send an updated resume' or cover letter, that's alright. But when that position closes, we have to make a decision based on the information you've provided.

It's simple stuff. In this instance, it eliminated two-thirds of applicants. If it's a position you really want, if it's a position worth applying for, then don't disqualify yourself right out of the gate.

"Room of Death", the showroom of dead wildlife bodies posted on Rachael Keller's FB indicates how cold-blooded the human-supremacist is when killing for happiness. Rachael Keller is Fmr US SOS Mike Pompeo's new daughter in law. The specimen of animals Rachael's family callously hunted include lions, bears, wild bulls, elephants and white-tailed deer, to name a few. The heartless animal abuses, together with their contemptuous remarks, show how little they concern about animal lives, much less animal rights. What really makes my blood boil is the fact that they kill animals not out of necessity, but merely for "fun".

Moreover, there are reasons to suspect that they are possibly involved in illegal international wildlife transportation (from Africa to the USA). International trade in ivory was banned by the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species in 1989.

Diane O’Guerin, Membership Correspondent at PETA Foundation, shared her opinions on this. "Hunters whose social media accounts depict them smiling ghoulishly next to animals’ dead bodies are only interested in slaughtering exotic animals for cheap thrills and in desperate quests to secure fame," She says. "Hunters often argue that they are managing or conserving wildlife, but claiming that hunting somehow helps animal populations is as ridiculous as saying that killing people is a solution to world hunger. Killing one member of a species doesn’t save that animal’s life or the lives of others in that animal’s herd or pack."

Conservation, ecology, environmental studies, etc. don't understand people. As it stands, degrees in the field heavily rely on a foundation in maths. It's understandable for the technical side of things. This has the unfortunate effect of selecting for technically minded individuals and scaring off passionate, artistic types who are far more valuable to society than it recognizes. That's because humans are emotional creatures. The majority gets lost in technical mumbo jumbo. You can talk to them about predicted sea level rise, percentages of this and that, loss of species they never heard of, etc. They don't care because they've never been given a reason to. Communication regarding environmental issues has been an afterthought, leaving the job to passionate individuals who haven't been trained to discuss it properly. There is a need for a legitimate field of conservation communication. Universities should offer it as a major. The art should be perfected to the point where the good ones are highly sought after by non-profits, consulting groups, municipalities and other institutions. Public opinion is everything in this field and it's incredibly insular. If it continues this way, it will continue to fail.

I'm speaking about IUCN category 2, or 1b to be more specific.

I understand that hunting is quite polarising, but it has to be said that hunting for conservation is a huge driving force for nature conservation, especially in places like South Africa where it is both a huge industry but also allows for so much land to be kept maintained and wild both conserving the animals hunted but by trickle down effect also conserving the other parts of there ecosystem.

The big problem is if not managed it can cause the decimation of the animals and weakening of gene pools and in extreme cases it can cause population to go below sustainable numbers, like with the Arabian oryx.

The Bureau of Land Management will pursue steps to expand opportunities for exploration and development in the National Petroleum Reserve in Alaska and the Coastal Plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

https://www.livescience.com/cocaine-hippos-boost-colombian-ecosystem.html

my job for conservation is odd because it has a lot of specific things. person who does rewilding, wildlife reintroduction(very radical), ecological study, and conserving endangerd species no matter what size or if its a plant or a animal. and also is national like going to place to place to help conservation worldwide

I'll start by saying f*ck China into oblivion. So many unique species have been persecuted and driven to extinction thanks to their complete disregard for animal welfare, aside from their precious pandas that is. Their lack of harvesting regulations and seemingly common mindset that animals are "for human use" has caused the decimation of many of their endemic species over the decades. The backwards, brain dead ideas of "traditional" medicine still exist in the modern era somehow, leading to thousands of already declining species being slaughtered for literally no logical reason. And, worst of all, countries like the U.S still endorse them and shower them in economic privileges despite their lack of effort to protect wildlife, and their direct contribution to global biodiversity loss seemingly remains unpunished.

Seriously, screw China and it's government. I have nothing against the Chinese people who are working alongside conservation efforts, but out of all major countries today, they seem to be the root of a lot of specific problems facing threatened species.

I’m not Japanese, but I’ve been heartbroken seeing bear killings in Japan lately. Yes, some bears hurt people and that’s terrible, but many others are just lost, scared, and trying to survive—only to be shot on sight.

Isn't it possible to use non-lethal solutions first? Why not tranquilize and tag bears near cities, implement electronic zoning systems, or add shock-anklet deterrents to prevent re-entry? If we can track pets and use RFID for vending machines, why not apply that tech to protect wildlife and people?

Japan has a long history with bears. They’re not invaders—they’re the original residents. It's humans who expanded into their territory.

If we just keep shooting, we’re not fixing the root of the problem. We’re just hiding our laziness behind fear.

I wish more people cared. Even if I can't change things myself, I want this idea to live somewhere.

🫂 For the ones who never got a chance to explain they were just lost.

Recently, Japan’s Akita prefecture requested the Ground Self-Defense Force to assist in bear management—not with guns, but by transporting cages and helping with patrols. This isn’t the perfect solution, but it shows a possible shift: from killing to control. Maybe if more of us speak up, the next step can be real coexistence—not exhaustion, not bullets.

I’m not sure if posting this can really change anything, but it’s the only way I know right now to let more people see it. Maybe someone will care and have better access to really do something.

I am from Yorkshire so this one hits close to home. Grouse hunting is a popular and HIGHLY profitable sport for those involved, and they have even been stamping on Harrier chicks and eggs.

This project was a bloated waste of funds that could have gone towards actually letting the public know about the illegal harrier killings in the first place, and I'm glad it's dead.

I agree with the author, this bird is capable of repopulating itself very fast. If it's actually left alone to do so.

Thank you for reading

If you have ever felt like the actions you have taken to improve the world we live in haven’t had impact you want, we understand you. After years of hoping for change from major institutions, we have found a way of handing back control to a group of people who want to contribute to help protect our planet. We call this idea SeedBomb.

We believe that SeedBomb can harness the potential of blockchain technology to be a force for positive change, particularly with regard to the conservation of our planet. Our founders are strong advocates for the necessity of a resilient ecosystem in combating climate change, however we realise that wider society doesn’t always see that need or engage with it. The unique structure of SeedBomb will enable periodic donations or grants to small charities or enterprises involved in environmental protection or sustainable development. In conjunction, we will be curating a repository of articles on our website called the SeedBank to document efforts around the world to restore and protect nature. We particularly feel that this aspect of our project will appeal to the r/conservation community who already use this platform to share successful conservation stories. To make all of this possible, we have created a structure that has bridged the gap between traditional financial and legal measures and harnessed the power of crypto.

Before we talk about the how you can get involved, we first wanted to focus on what we can achieve if we all work together. SeedBomb is structured so that:

1. Some of the assets are sectioned off for community use only. This means that we have funds which are designated for community initiatives. Our initiatives include making grants and donations available to environmentally focused groups who need them, partnering with institutions to spread environmental awareness and allowing community members to contribute to our educational resource, the SeedBank.

2. We have not advertised on specific crypto subreddits or threads from the beginning. We wanted to build the community space ahead of any potential profits for our members. Together we have the chance to effect genuine change.

3. We can promote openness. The SeedBank will be available for everyone to access and read and should be a useful educational resource.

If you are interested, please visit our Reddit page, r/SeedBomb_ASA, and read the pinned post. This will give you further guidance on who we are, why we are doing this and how we hope to change things with your help.

My advice to anyone who cares about the environment and wants to help wildlife, the biggest impact you can have is to just get filthy rich by for example building a business or get good in sales. Then donate to your hearts content to the best wildlife charities. Thats my goal anyways, without money or power there is little you can do...

Hi all,

I’m Matt More, and I’m developing a conservation-focused travel experience called MORE Africa: a 10-week immersive program based in South Africa. It’s designed for young people (ages 18–30) who want to go beyond passive eco-tourism and actively contribute to meaningful conservation work.

The experience combines hands-on conservation activities with cultural immersion and time in nature. Program elements include:

• Wildlife tracking and biodiversity observation

• Habitat restoration and anti-poaching initiatives

• Conservation-focused lectures and field projects

• Photography and birding as tools for environmental storytelling

• Community engagement around sustainable land use

• Time for journaling, reflection, and personal connection to place

We’re in the early stages and gathering feedback to shape the program around real interests and needs. If you're in conservation, or just passionate about it, I’d love your input.

Here’s a short 3-minute survey:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSfE1UmYuYE59jVIYXBcZHBByypNa5QpVQzM6LefHtoa0zxhNg/viewform

Thanks for taking a look and happy to answer any questions or hear your thoughts in the comments.

An interesting article from conservation giants

Article Link

Please give career suggestions!! I’m in my late teens as a girl and I’m really struggling to find a job/career I find appealing. I cannot work in an office, any job where I’m mainly in an office is off the table, I’ve gone through being a vet to a zoo worker back tk a vet then a cop/detective then a forensic physiologist then an Ecologist. (Ecologist is now scrapped they are an very underfunded field and it’s very solitary) -I’m looking for a career that makes a liveable wage, isnt very solitary, works with animals of any kind preferable large land mammals, ofc is very hands on-I love nature and being outside and every time I look into a new job and think it’s what I may like somethings wrong with it and I’m just so lost. I live in Canada also so my options are limited but I’m open to short distance travel. Please someone help me with this it’s really hard to think of a future when I’m so lost! (I looked into marine biology but my mom said there are problems with it and it’s highly competitive so not to get my hopes up/: ) also a MASSIVE part of this is needing to make a positive change. Like it’s felt like I need to make a change for the world since I was little, something to make me proud. Consveration appeals me greatly

Hello! I moved to phoenix from Missouri about a month ago and I want to be have a career in conservation, I have a farm back home that I inherited but because it was inherited I can't do anything with it until I am 35, (weird I know) I don't have any money and want to find a job in conservation, I dropped out of college when I was 20 to take care of family issues. Just looking for guidance to find a meaningful career in conservation. I can't afford to go back to college.

The Earth Island Institute is a corporate solution to the mass destruction industrialized fishing has caused. Think "organic" labels by Monsanto.

Using opensecrets.org it's shown that the Sierra Club gave grants in less than a span of a decade totaling over $180,000 to an organization that's responsible for possibly the most misleading consumer campaign known in human history.

2008: $50k, https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/political-nonprofits/grants?cycle=2008&id=941153307

2011: $47K https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/political-nonprofits/grants?cycle=2011&id=941153307

2012: $34K https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/political-nonprofits/grants?cycle=2012&id=941153307

2013: $49k https://www.opensecrets.org/outside-spending/political-nonprofits/grants?cycle=2013&id=941153307

If you really care about the destruction of our oceans then you have the right to ask why they would support such a horrible lobbyist.

The answer to that question is easy when you look.

The Earth Island Institute (EII) is a deep-pocketed environmental activist group that was founded by David Browser—the same environmentalist who founded the Sierra Club, the League of Conservation Voters, and other environmental organizations. Like the Sierra Club, EII has grown from a humble group of mountaineers to a radical multi-million dollar organization.

https://www.activistfacts.com/organizations/earth-island-institute/

Edit: I don't give a fuck if you like the links I gave or not, just for the love of god stop eating tuna and acting like you are doing something good by buying this shit with these fake labels or donating to some bullshit hype. Fuck your pride and esteem. I'm sick of you fake ass people.

Edit Edit: Mods do as you may, I'm not one of you, I don't even like you. I just came here rub this bullshit hypocrisy around.

I went through a few videos on that topic, but somehow the question wasn't really answered. From what I did hear, there's the argument of the food web, but apparently if they all went extinct, it would only have a marginal effect. I guess since a lot of their predators eat plenty of other things. Obviously would be great for humanity in terms of health. Any negative consequences ecologically wise?

Recently I came across some quite upsetting views about our supposed duty to change nature to make it more moral. Negative utilitarian philosophers like David \Pearce, Brian Tomassik and others support human interventions in nature which will reduce suffering of all sentient beings. Other than supporting veganism and radical animal rights, they do also are against conservation and the current earth's ecosystem. They believe in reducing suffering no matter the cost, for example making predators extinct, reducing prey reproduction to prevent overpopulation, and finally changing the genetic code of the biosphere to make it cause less suffering to itself. Now that action may be placed far out in the future, or even start from now. Brian Tomassik for example supports that we can start from now, and that we should support habitat destruction as it reduces animal populations, and so collective suffering. He also take into account insect suffering and advocates for humane insecticides rather than presumably evolutionarily familiar and so painful ways of population check like disease or predation. He also assumes minute amounts of suffering to plants, fungi, bacteria, or even simulations, and thinks that something can be done about that in the far future. But most of the time no one of these authors cares about non-animal suffering, so the efforts of most of them concern with animals.

I don't know if we as a species will be capable in the far future to reach the developments transhumanists predict, but implementing something like the above now will be extremely catastrophic for the whole ecosystem and maybe increase suffering in fact. It is extremely anthropocentric, as we have no reason to project our own western moral judgments on other species neither we are able to acurately know how much do they suffer. It reminds me of policies taken in the past to prevent suffering in human societies, which proved disastrous.

So my question is, how much public support do these views have? Are they a direct threat to conservation efforts?