<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Elephant Engineers</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/field-talk-elephant-engineers/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/field-talk-elephant-engineers/</link>
	<description>audio interviews go into the field with ecologists</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2013 19:51:26 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: OOKii BOOKii</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/field-talk-elephant-engineers/comment-page-1/#comment-36</link>
		<dc:creator>OOKii BOOKii</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 30 May 2008 14:02:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/?p=12#comment-36</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nice interview Rob and also very nice project. As both a marine and terrestrial conservation ecologist I can completely understand the dilemma that you seem to be in when you stated that you find it difficult to understand where ecology meets conservation. I was in the same boat. However, I always had the knowledge that I would make the science of ecology meet the science and passion for conservation. I was reading Captain Paul Watson’s of the Sea Shepherd Society biography Ocean Warrior when he stated “that there is no use understanding the natural world around us if we do not preserve it”. 

I think that statement goes a long way, in so far as explaining a fundamental principle that I follow. That is, we as ecologists describe to the best of our scientific knowledge at the time (which may be incorrect) what we believe relationships among species in an ecosystem are. However, if in the short term or long term future these species and the ecosystems described are gone, then the point of originally explaining these relationships may be futile and irrelevant. This I believe makes us as ecologists also irrelevant in the long term if we do not put into practice in 2008 the simple rule that “we describe to understand and preserve”.

The statement is definitely worth giving some time to, and putting it into practice the next time we are out there collecting data to explain species relationships and ecosystem processes 

Anyway that’s my and many other ecologists positions that I have had the pleasure to talk to.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice interview Rob and also very nice project. As both a marine and terrestrial conservation ecologist I can completely understand the dilemma that you seem to be in when you stated that you find it difficult to understand where ecology meets conservation. I was in the same boat. However, I always had the knowledge that I would make the science of ecology meet the science and passion for conservation. I was reading Captain Paul Watson’s of the Sea Shepherd Society biography Ocean Warrior when he stated “that there is no use understanding the natural world around us if we do not preserve it”. </p>
<p>I think that statement goes a long way, in so far as explaining a fundamental principle that I follow. That is, we as ecologists describe to the best of our scientific knowledge at the time (which may be incorrect) what we believe relationships among species in an ecosystem are. However, if in the short term or long term future these species and the ecosystems described are gone, then the point of originally explaining these relationships may be futile and irrelevant. This I believe makes us as ecologists also irrelevant in the long term if we do not put into practice in 2008 the simple rule that “we describe to understand and preserve”.</p>
<p>The statement is definitely worth giving some time to, and putting it into practice the next time we are out there collecting data to explain species relationships and ecosystem processes </p>
<p>Anyway that’s my and many other ecologists positions that I have had the pleasure to talk to.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: George Shedrawi</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/field-talk-elephant-engineers/comment-page-1/#comment-9</link>
		<dc:creator>George Shedrawi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 08:22:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/?p=12#comment-9</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Nice interview Rob and also very nice project. As both a marine and terrestrial conservation ecologist I can completely understand the dilemma that you seem to be in when you stated that you find it difficult to understand where ecology meets conservation. I was in the same boat. However, I always had the knowledge that I would make the science of ecology meet the science and passion for conservation. I was reading Captain Paul Watson&#039;s of the Sea Shepherd Society biography Ocean Warrior when he stated &quot;that there is no use understanding the natural world around us if we do not preserve it&quot;. 

I think that statement goes a long way, in so far as explaining a fundamental principle that I follow. That is, we as ecologists describe to the best of our scientific knowledge at the time (which may be incorrect) what we believe relationships among species in an ecosystem are. However, if in the short term or long term future these species and the ecosystems described are gone, then the point of originally explaining these relationships may be futile and irrelevant. This I believe makes us as ecologists also irrelevant in the long term if we do not put into practice in 2008 the simple rule that “we describe to understand and preserve”.

The statement is definitely worth giving some time to, and putting it into practice the next time we are out there collecting data to explain species relationships and ecosystem processes 

Anyway that&#039;s my and many other ecologists positions that I have had the pleasure to talk to.

Good luck Rob and it was a pleasure to listen to your interview.

Cheers
George Shedrawi]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Nice interview Rob and also very nice project. As both a marine and terrestrial conservation ecologist I can completely understand the dilemma that you seem to be in when you stated that you find it difficult to understand where ecology meets conservation. I was in the same boat. However, I always had the knowledge that I would make the science of ecology meet the science and passion for conservation. I was reading Captain Paul Watson&#8217;s of the Sea Shepherd Society biography Ocean Warrior when he stated &#8220;that there is no use understanding the natural world around us if we do not preserve it&#8221;. </p>
<p>I think that statement goes a long way, in so far as explaining a fundamental principle that I follow. That is, we as ecologists describe to the best of our scientific knowledge at the time (which may be incorrect) what we believe relationships among species in an ecosystem are. However, if in the short term or long term future these species and the ecosystems described are gone, then the point of originally explaining these relationships may be futile and irrelevant. This I believe makes us as ecologists also irrelevant in the long term if we do not put into practice in 2008 the simple rule that “we describe to understand and preserve”.</p>
<p>The statement is definitely worth giving some time to, and putting it into practice the next time we are out there collecting data to explain species relationships and ecosystem processes </p>
<p>Anyway that&#8217;s my and many other ecologists positions that I have had the pleasure to talk to.</p>
<p>Good luck Rob and it was a pleasure to listen to your interview.</p>
<p>Cheers<br />
George Shedrawi</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Jim Amen</title>
		<link>http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/field-talk-elephant-engineers/comment-page-1/#comment-6</link>
		<dc:creator>Jim Amen</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2008 16:07:31 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.esa.org/fieldtalk/?p=12#comment-6</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Excellent idea.  Well thought questions.   Format is clean and to the point.   Audio production of phone interview does not seem to be broadcast quality however.  Would recomend looking into a Telos System ONE hybrid telco line interface.  I believe its what NPR uses. (~$700)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Excellent idea.  Well thought questions.   Format is clean and to the point.   Audio production of phone interview does not seem to be broadcast quality however.  Would recomend looking into a Telos System ONE hybrid telco line interface.  I believe its what NPR uses. (~$700)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>