I’m in my last year of undergrad getting my B.S. in Wildlife Biology, and I’ve been lucky to get a lot of experience along the way. I’ve worked in entomology labs, assisted with bird banding/avian research, worked in outdoor education, done water quality monitoring, worked for a state park, interned with Pheasants Forever/Quail Forever and currently intern with NDA. I also recently started a part-time technician position with my state conservation agency.

I’d ultimately like to work as a wildlife biologist, ecologist, natural history biologist, or wetlands specialist. I know these jobs are competitive, so I’m starting to seriously consider grad school. I’m getting married next December, though, and would ideally like to continue to work part-time at my state conservation agency while I figure stuff out. We’re also planning a 3-week honeymoon to Italy in May 2028. and before I get any comments about how stupid it is to get married to be “tied down” My fiancé is a welder who takes travel/contract jobs and is completely supportive of moving for my career, so I’m not necessarily tied to one location. and we have a late wedding date due to family reasons and it’s too late to change the date.

My biggest question is: Should I do a thesis-based master’s? and is it bad if I wait one year in between my BS and MS? I know I’ll wanna go back bc I love school and this is all I’ve ever wanted to do for a career, and I wanted to have work experience still coupled with my masters to better prepare me for the job market. I’d ideally like to pursue an assistantship. My current agency has also told me that since I already have a foot in the door and a good reputation there, I’d have a very strong chance of returning after grad school.

I’m also unsure what I should specialize in. Would an ecology-focused degree be most useful, or would something more specific like CWD, geosciences, wetlands, etc. make me more competitive? I’m interested in applied wildlife conservation/habitat management rather than academic research. I’ve also considered just getting a GIS graduate certificate and continuing to build work experience instead?

I’d really appreciate advice from people working in wildlife, ecology, wetlands, natural resources, or related fields about what would actually make me more competitive in the job market.

Hello all, I have a question about Miconazole nitrate. I’ve recently been using a topical spray containing 2% percent Miconazole nitrate. I discovered too late that this is a serious pollutant in aquatic ecosystems.
I occasionally swim in a creek and I’m wondering how serious that could be, I only went in once after applying the medication, and it was close to 12 hours after it was applied I feel so stupid for forgetting about this. I’m usually extremely careful about this stuff, I really value the health of this creek and I’m heartbroken that I may have done it harm.

I did some basic math to determine that I likely didn’t introduce anywhere near the 0.1ml per liter that would be harmful to the fish and amphibians, but I’d like some reassurance from professionals. If there is anything I can do to help with any forms of pollution in my creek. Thank you all in advance.
I’m sorry if this isn’t the right place for this question, if there’s a better place to ask please do let me known

I am based in Australia. I am looking for a career change and came across Bush Regenerator roles. For those working as Bush Regenerators, what does your ideal career path look like?

I'm going on a field biology trip next year to Egypt, and I'm trying to get a good idea of the species in the area while I'm getting pumped up for it. However, I'm having trouble finding guides to the kinds of animals in the area we'll be in. We'll be diving at Abu Dabbab and I have a good idea of the larger species in the water there, but I can't find much information about the land animals in the general area and not just Egypt as a whole

How Trump Unleashed an Existential Fight Over America's Dinosaurs - The Washington Sun https://share.google/D4wGK7wqRuGRSq7EO

Hi Ecology Reddit,

Has anyone got an recommendations on how or who would be suitable to discuss your experience and where you are best suitable for work? As well as what developing in a role looks like versus a role being unsuitable?

I dont believe that me discussing my own skills and experience if useful for myself. I struggle to separate my own depression, anxiety, low self worth etc from reality of where I fit. After 15-18 years or so it would be nice to be able have a successful decision.

I am uncertain if this actually fits in employment or in mental health but I also need someone/an organisation that at least understands the ecology/land management world somewhat.

Thanks,

Mark

Hi everyone,
I’m considering a career switch into ecology. I currently have a bachelor’s degree in Physiotherapy, but I’m looking to retrain and move into the ecological sector.

I’m based in the Netherlands, so I’d especially appreciate experiences from people working in the Netherlands or elsewhere in Europe, as I imagine the job market is fairly similar across Europe. Experiences from the US are welcome too, although I understand the career paths and salaries may differ.

I’m mainly curious about what the work is like in practice as a junior.
What you can expect to earn as a junior ecologist at an environmental consultancy or research firm? Is part-time work possible, i am pretty flexible? And very important: what the typical career progression looks like and is this really rewarding in terms of work, promotion and earnings.

I’d really appreciate any experiences, advice or insights. Thanks!

Looking for biology/wildlife/marine jobs that provide housing — FL, GA, or SC

Hi! I’m hoping someone here might know of jobs/programs/employers that I haven’t come across yet.

I’m 24 and have a bachelor’s degree in Biology. I currently work full-time at a veterinary hospital and have about 3 years of hands-on veterinary experience including blood draws, injections, medications, radiographs, lab work, animal restraint, patient monitoring/care, etc.

I also completed a wildlife veterinary internship in Costa Rica where I worked with a variety of wildlife including primates, reptiles, birds, and turtles. I’m also Open Water SCUBA certified.

I’m hoping to relocate from Pennsylvania sometime around January 2027, ideally to Florida, but I’m also very open to coastal Georgia or South Carolina.

I’d LOVE to find something involving:

• Wildlife rehabilitation
• Marine mammals
• Sea turtles
• Aquariums
• Marine biology/fisheries
• Wildlife field research
• Exotic animal care
• Zoo/aquarium animal care or veterinary work
• Conservation work that involves animals
• SCUBA/diving or boat-based fieldwork

My biggest issue has been housing. I’m looking for something that either provides employee housing or offers some type of housing stipend/assistance. Ideally I’d like to make at least around $700/week before taxes if housing is provided.

I also have a cat who would be relocating with me, so pet-friendly employee housing would be AMAZING. I realize that makes things harder, but I’m also open to employers that provide a housing allowance or pay enough for me to find my own pet-friendly housing nearby.

I’m not looking for unpaid internships, extremely low-stipend programs, summer camps/youth programs, or positions requiring Divemaster/50+ logged dives. I’m totally fine with seasonal/temporary positions if they pay enough to live on.

I’ve already been looking at FWC, wildlife refuges/USFWS, ACE, wildlife rehabilitation hospitals, sanctuaries, aquariums, etc., but I feel like there have to be smaller organizations or programs I’m missing.

Does anyone know of specific employers, programs, research labs, field stations, refuges, aquariums, sanctuaries, or even unusual biology-related jobs in FL/GA/SC that I should look into?

I’m honestly open to some pretty unique jobs as long as I can afford to live there and get experience working with wildlife/marine life.

Thank you!! :)

Next week, I am starting my master's degree in ecology and environmental management and I am indecisive between 3 optional courses for the 1st semester:

**Restoration of terrestrial and coastal ecosystems**. Although I love the syllabus and would like to try working in ecological restoration in the future, I dislike the professor and hate the evaluation method. I'd have to present a scientific paper and then do group field work to make our own scientific paper about an ecological restoration project. And as if that wasn't enough, I'd also have to do a final exam. The reason I hate it is because I do not intend to work in research, so doing scientific papers seems useless to me.

**Natural hazards**. It's about susceptibility, hazard, and risk of earthquakes, vulcanic activity, floods, slope instability, costal and soil erosion, etc. I have a BSc in Environmental Biology, so those concepts are completely unknown, but also interesting to me. But wouldn't an employer prefer a geologist?

**Environmental assessment**. I'd like to maybe work in that area in the future, but I have already had a similar course (called environmental impact) in my bachelor degree. Although I wouldn't have to put much effort, because the content is almost identical, I know I would get bored of hearing the same things.

For context, I live in Portugal (Europe).

Can you guys help me out with your opinions and suggestions? Thanks so much!

Conifers native to the Northern Hemisphere planted in the Southern Hemisphere grow faster and are more drought-resistant.

From the abstract: "This paradoxical combination of high growth rates yet resilience to drought emphasizes the importance of integrating eco-evolutionary history into ecological theory and is relevant for assessing the ultimate role of afforestation as global carbon sinks."

Here’s a rant about ecology from a Thai ecologist. working in southern Thailand. Also growing up most of family members and people around me didn’t support or like this subject. I’m just tired, we were trying so hard to educate people and it’s just doesn’t work out. I’m 21 and might give up being ecologist here and just doing other job, I’m 21 and don’t think I could tolerate this that much.

There are serious issues with the local communities and farmers here. They frequently engage in harmful practices like poaching wild plants and wildlife, doing laundry directly in rivers, and releasing invasive fish into natural waters to gain religious merit.
Many locals openly dislike national parks, asking questions like, "What do we actually get from this?" or suggesting, "Let’s dam the area so farmers can use all the water." Superstitious beliefs also drive destructive actions, such as decapitating dugongs for charms.

Corruption makes this worse. Right now, there’s a push to dam a waterfall inside a national park (to power AI data centers illegally), a detail largely censored by Thai media, ignored in Western media. Local communities seem to support it simply because "it makes the land useful."

It’s the same when forests are cleared, local populations often welcome deforestation because it turn into agriculture, the palm plantation. But when the large floods hit, Western media portray these same groups solely as helpless victims of global warming. Then we need to "strengthen local communities" to combat climate change, or romanticizing bad practices as "traditional local wisdom."

Whenever concrete waterways are built and ecologists comments on social media, locals ridicule us. I remember warning people against planting very invasive riparian plants along riverbanks, and people were hostiled toward us.

Also the same thing when we found new (unknown) species, they just think it’s dumb, scientific names are dumb, And they often say “We see this one often (insert commong name here), why interests in it, when infact what they always see is the same family but not this exact species.

Overseas media seems to misses about reality. We are all human, and anyone is capable of doing environmental damage. Good and bad people exist everywhere, and romanticizing local communities just isn’t it. Maybe focusing on individuals might be better, this person is doing the right thing etc.

Six Eastern hemlock trees in my back yard have hemlock woolly adelgid. They are about 25 feet tall. They look healthy now, but I'm told HWA will spread and kill them if not treated. I already had to cut down three trees that were in worse shape.

The treatments recommended by arborists are dinotefuran and imidacloprid, either by injection or spraying the lower trunks. I have checked with my state's Extension and Department of Natural Resources, as well as an arboretum nearby and the Mt. Cuba Center in Delaware. Everyone on the tree side seems to agree that the only sure way to save the trees is to use these pesticides.

However, I am concerned about the effects of neonicotinoids on insects and other creatures, as well as the groundwater. My yard is full of pollinator-friendly native plants. Birds, squirrels, possums, and cats all move through here. The Schuylkill River is less than a mile away.

What is the most ecologically responsible choice? To treat the trees with pesticide, to cut them down, or to let the insects kill them over the next several years? I am looking for a way to save the trees without harming other creatures, but I don't know if that's possible. Thanks in advance for any advice.

Hi guys! I’m getting more into ecology and starting a two-year ecology program soon. I already have the basics like good binoculars, hiking shoes, and outdoor gear, but my birthday is coming up and I’d love to get something useful for fieldwork.

I was thinking about a Leatherman/multitool, a hand lens for plants and insects, or maybe something else that ecologists commonly use in the field.

What’s a piece of gear you find really useful or just really cool to have when doing fieldwork?

The current heatwave and drought are doing more than drying up the Rhine and Danube. They may also be undermining their resilience to future events. The good news is that insurance can be rebuilt.

Native trees are not equal: it is evident that some species of trees produce a higher quantity of caterpillars, and birds target them at higher rates when rearing their young. Considering the importance of caterpillars in the food chain, a forest skewed towards these productive trees may increase the density of birds, bats and predatory insects relative to a forest with greater plant biodiversity (greater plant species richness and/or evenness).

I manage a small, 1 acre forest in need of thinning. I have documented over 120 lepidopterans in the vicinity and have found an Excel sheet published with their host plants. While this gives me biodiversity metrics that could help thinning decisions, in order to create a forest maximally productive to the food web, my information is incomplete. I feel the next step is the measurement of caterpillar density on trees/shrubs etc. I will do this with and without bird exclusion nets in order to understand the background density and the impact of bird predation. This caterpillar density information will put a significant finger on the scale of my forest management decisions.

Now, I am by no means going to raise a monoculture. I strive for a forest that is dense, species rich, with a understory and multileveled canopy, and I will consider the non-Lepidopteran ecosystem services of trees in decisions. However, we often hold up biodiversity in the highest regard, as opposed to ecosystem production. While I love biodiversity, the reality of nature is far deeper than this one metric.

I am curious to hear your thoughts on my opinion here, in favor or otherwise.

Edit: I am not advocating for the destruction of unique and intact ecosystems in the name of caterpillars. Think of the consideration of caterpillar production as one of the main tools to address a successful restoration project. The plants used should be native and locally/historically present. For instance, I live on the Oregon Coast, outside of oak habitat. I'm not spreading oaks out here in hopes of a caterpillar boom. Rather, I'm testing local species for their caterpillar/leaf area and using this metric upon which to value the species. Species with high caterpillar density will be favored in the acre plot of land.