Written by Mark Tercek & Peter Kareiva | May 5th, 2014
What does it mean for The Nature Conservancy to be “science-based” today? To always be casting a wider net for better solutions supported by evidence, write Mark Tercek and Peter Kareiva.
Written by Trevor Martin | August 23rd, 2013
Written by Matt Miller | October 10th, 2012
Follow bison herds; record bison as they fight, bellow and urinate on themselves; collect bison bones; repeat. It’s just another “day at the office” for these student researchers from Gustavus Adolphus College.
Written by Eddie Game | August 27th, 2012
Replanting forests to improve water supplies only works depending on the type of tree, according to a new study. Conservancy scientist Eddie Game explains the findings.
Written by Bob Lalasz | January 27th, 2011
When scientific study results get harder to reproduce, does that mean science is in crisis? Conservancy scientists Rob McDonald, Doria Gordon and Joe Fargione respond to a New Yorker article.
Written by Bob Lalasz | January 21st, 2011
Are scientific studies proving harder and harder to replicate — and what does that mean for conservation? Conservancy scientists Jon Hoekstra and Jensen Montambault respond to a New Yorker article.
Written by Eddie Game | August 19th, 2009
Conservation is often a game of numbers. Numerical goals, such as protecting 10% of all habitat types, often form the backbone of both international and national conservation policy. Within The Nature Conservancy, numbers like these appear in our 2015 goal (to effectively conserve 10 percent of every major habitat type on Earth by the year […]
Written by Bob Bendick | January 14th, 2009
In my role as director of U.S. Government Relations for The Nature Conservancy, I have been asked to blog on my perspective on national conservation policy issues. And so, with some anxiety, this is my first installment. I understand that the Internet and new media have become an important part of discussions about U.S. public […]