I just got back to Twin Falls from being in Chicago for the CLM workshop at the Chicago Botanic Garden. The week was well timed as a break from the regular field season and as a chance to meet the other interns, Krissa, Rebecca, and several other great professionals. It was a good chance to hear about how CLM started, the relationship with the BLM, and to get a lot of insights on fieldwork and working for a federal agency.

The seminars covered a lot of information, some of it very basic, but all of it incredibly useful. Often it was good to go over basic concepts particularly in monitoring. Personally, the last time I covered a lot of these topics was in early college or early field jobs. Going over ideas such as what kind of quadrat or transect to use and how to set up a spreadsheet in order to give you the most data manipulation options, was a really good thing to revisit. As someone with a wildlife background working in a plant-oriented position, one of the most helpful courses was the overview on plant families and identification. There were definitely people proficient with the topic but I think that the majority of people found the class helpful in some way. We’ve all had experience keying and identifying plants, but having a clear set of characteristics to fall back on was very useful. It was also a good crash course reminder after not having used dichotomous keys for a few years.

As someone planning to go into management with a focus on wildlife, it was interesting to see the line being drawn so clearly between wildlife people, represented by Fish and Wildlife Service, and botanists. I was a little frustrated by how often the wildlife people were characterized as being unable to look at the system holistically or from an ecological standpoint rather than from a species standpoint. Although I have no doubt as to that being true in many cases, I think that the reverse is also applicable. Characterizing the two groups like this at a workshop could only perpetuate the divide and be off-putting to wildlife-oriented people. It is incredibly important to develop the ability to look at systems from both perspectives and for current and future managers to approach their stewardships through a multi-level view, no matter what their original preference. In a more positive light, hearing from underfunded and underrepresented botanists did highlight things in the current systems that need to be changed in order to better manage the land and resources. Being aware of this can only be a positive thing.

Altogether the conference was very useful and extremely well timed. I always get a little myopic a few months into a field season and being reminded that the rest of the world exists is extremely welcome. It was also great to get connected to other interns in the area and to meet people interested in many of the same things. I especially got a kick out of discussing rope-making with Dean Tonenna. He gave an excellent ethnobotany lecture about the Numa people. It was fascinating to see that their method of rope making is essentially the same as the Ojibwe and the Aboriginal language groups from Australia. I’m planning to collect some sagebrush bark and give it a shot soon.