Saw this show last night. Thoroughly recommend.
www.womenofamericanatour.com
28.02.2026 21:57
👍 0
🔁 0
💬 0
📌 0
Saw this show last night. Thoroughly recommend.
www.womenofamericanatour.com
Randy Lewis and a geologist palling around:
youtube.com/playlist?lis...
Timeline cleanse: a Japanese photographer beloved by northern WA Indigenous ppl.
“The story is not just about Frank and his charisma and his incredible body of work. It’s about the way people uphold his memory and still talk about him 112 years after his death.”
www.hcn.org/issues/58-2/...
Field job in the beautiful mountains of NE Oregon doing passive acoustic monitoring and woodpecker demography just went live. Please share!
jobs.rwfm.tamu.edu/view-job/?id...
Really proud of my paper with @ecologyofgavin.bsky.social, @grumpyunclesean.bsky.social, Andrew Stillman, and Courtney Davis out now in @natcomms.nature.com, which looks at the forecasted exposure of bird biodiversity to high severity fire in the western US. www.nature.com/articles/s41...
@terriblemapshq.bsky.social
BREAKING | The Pentagon has suggested it would take over editorial content decision making for Stars and Stripes in a statement from the Defense Department’s top spokesman.
This is a MUST WATCH - you won't regret it.
youtu.be/_FKcP8j010o
Thank you to the Yakima Herald-Republic for helping to spread the word on what community members can do to protect themselves and their loved ones from immigration raids and arrests.
Graph showing the top 20 countries with the most journal articles published on the topic of climate change and landscape fire.
New paper out in Science Advances today on A guide to assessing the impacts of climate change on landscape fire. There are thousands of papers on fire and climate change, and this paper discusses how fire, its drivers, and its impacts are modeled.
www.science.org/doi/epdf/10....
The last of my dissertation work is in Ecosystems! Please reach out if I can share a PDF (or a story about trying to do field work during the two biggest California fire years on record 🥲)
I encountered a Google scholar hit a few weeks ago that seemed to be entirely AI slop. Wonder if I will ever see that slop cited by other slop.
What do houses, energy, and sixty-pound salmon have in common? All of them are currently scarce but could be plentiful with the right changes to policy and practice. 🧪🐟🏘️🔋
How do we get to this "conservation abundance" future for nature and people? I have thoughts!
www.perc.org/2025/12/09/t...
🦉🔥🌲 New Paper 🌲🔥🦉
We used a novel dataset by Dr. Anu Kramer, bioregional passive acoustic monitoring, and Bayesian occupancy modeling to examine the relative effects of disturbances on the distribution spotted owls in the Sierra Nevada. Give her a read!
www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
New paper by Garret Meigs and friends:
"Big trees burning: Divergent wildfire effects on large trees in open- vs closed-canopy forests"
From my read, one of the key take home messages is that dense forests, even if large trees are present, are still burning with a lot of high-severity effects🧪🌎🔥
Extreme Heatwave Causes Immediate, Widespread Mortality of Forest Canopy Foliage, Highlighting Modes of Forest Sensitivity to Extreme Heat
🔗 buff.ly/CfdgwRy
great editorial on risk aversion in forest management particularly on proactive fire management vs reactive fire suppression. Equally relevant to southern Australia. esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10....
A table showing profit margins of major publishers. A snippet of text related to this table is below. 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
A figure detailing the drain on researcher time. 1. The four-fold drain 1.2 Time The number of papers published each year is growing faster than the scientific workforce, with the number of papers per researcher almost doubling between 1996 and 2022 (Figure 1A). This reflects the fact that publishers’ commercial desire to publish (sell) more material has aligned well with the competitive prestige culture in which publications help secure jobs, grants, promotions, and awards. To the extent that this growth is driven by a pressure for profit, rather than scholarly imperatives, it distorts the way researchers spend their time. The publishing system depends on unpaid reviewer labour, estimated to be over 130 million unpaid hours annually in 2020 alone (9). Researchers have complained about the demands of peer-review for decades, but the scale of the problem is now worse, with editors reporting widespread difficulties recruiting reviewers. The growth in publications involves not only the authors’ time, but that of academic editors and reviewers who are dealing with so many review demands. Even more seriously, the imperative to produce ever more articles reshapes the nature of scientific inquiry. Evidence across multiple fields shows that more papers result in ‘ossification’, not new ideas (10). It may seem paradoxical that more papers can slow progress until one considers how it affects researchers’ time. While rewards remain tied to volume, prestige, and impact of publications, researchers will be nudged away from riskier, local, interdisciplinary, and long-term work. The result is a treadmill of constant activity with limited progress whereas core scholarly practices – such as reading, reflecting and engaging with others’ contributions – is de-prioritized. What looks like productivity often masks intellectual exhaustion built on a demoralizing, narrowing scientific vision.
A table of profit margins across industries. The section of text related to this table is below: 1. The four-fold drain 1.1 Money Currently, academic publishing is dominated by profit-oriented, multinational companies for whom scientific knowledge is a commodity to be sold back to the academic community who created it. The dominant four are Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley and Taylor & Francis, which collectively generated over US$7.1 billion in revenue from journal publishing in 2024 alone, and over US$12 billion in profits between 2019 and 2024 (Table 1A). Their profit margins have always been over 30% in the last five years, and for the largest publisher (Elsevier) always over 37%. Against many comparators, across many sectors, scientific publishing is one of the most consistently profitable industries (Table S1). These financial arrangements make a substantial difference to science budgets. In 2024, 46% of Elsevier revenues and 53% of Taylor & Francis revenues were generated in North America, meaning that North American researchers were charged over US$2.27 billion by just two for-profit publishers. The Canadian research councils and the US National Science Foundation were allocated US$9.3 billion in that year.
The costs of inaction are plain: wasted public funds, lost researcher time, compromised scientific integrity and eroded public trust. Today, the system rewards commercial publishers first, and science second. Without bold action from the funders we risk continuing to pour resources into a system that prioritizes profit over the advancement of scientific knowledge.
We wrote the Strain on scientific publishing to highlight the problems of time & trust. With a fantastic group of co-authors, we present The Drain of Scientific Publishing:
a 🧵 1/n
Drain: arxiv.org/abs/2511.04820
Strain: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
Oligopoly: direct.mit.edu/qss/article/...
To learn more about the Cascadia Partner Forum and its work promoting coordinated transboundary conservation in the face of climate change:
Installed sensors at Teakettle this weekend. I broke down 5 times. The District Ranger requested that I tell ‘the truth’ about the fire and the forest. Here you go…
This looks very useful for planning and communicating Dry Forest restoration treatments:
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
If you pay attention, ecological collapse is happening everywhere, in real time.
1/ Like here: Starved of water, taken down by insects, burned by repeated, abnormally intense wildfires, much of the ponderosa forest is turning into permanent grass & shrublands.
orionmagazine.org/article/twil...
Break out the rye bread !!! Whatta game.
Excellent work led by @ttkeller.bsky.social and important for stewarding forests w/ high-severity #fire regimes @esajournals.bsky.social @uwmadscience.bsky.social
Excellent piece by Greg Weaver @fresnoland.bsky.social reporting the problems that led to the loss of Teakettle. We need to future-proof our land management agencies so that internal bureaucratic process and structure does not continue to cause inaction.
fresnoland.org/2025/10/14/g...
#WFFRC member @brian-j-harvey.bsky.social is combining field + satellite data to create an atlas of wildfire burn severity across the Western US, to inform prescribed burning and future fire management strategies. #WFFRC is led by @caryinstitute.bsky.social www.caryinstitute.org/news-insight...
Huh?
Very cool new research from @mekevans.bsky.social and Jamie Yazzie - 'Drought stress detected in tree rings suggests an impending tipping point for forests on the Navajo Nation' www.sciencedirect.com/science/arti...
Drought and insects have killed an unprecedented number of Oregon’s Douglas fir trees during the last decade, costing billions in timber value, damaging infrastructure and ramping up wildfire danger.
What is Douglas fir dieback? Where is it happening? What is being done? tinyurl.com/5n9amvx6
