Hi William, 

We'll learn more about how visitors at the Pismo State Beach site respond to the visualizations during the upcoming winter season. Scientists are analyzing data at this point and will have imagery to share at workshops for volunteers in the fall.

Meanwhile, I can say that at our other sites, we are getting a sense of what impresses the public (based on interpreters' reports)--what the visitors inquire and exclaim about most frequently. At the Barataria Preserve, which is outside of New Orleans (part of Jean Lafitte National Historic Park and Preserve), visitors are hearing about Audubon biologist Katie Percy's research on the Prothonotary warbler. The interpreters using props like geotags and nesting boxes as well as maps of the migration route and photos of the warblers and their chicks. What would you predict would be then the focus of visitors' questions and exclamations? The top 3: 1) are the birds harmed by the tags; is their flight impeded? 2) Wow, they fly so far, going over enormous bodies of water to cross to Columbia instead of taking a coastal route and 3) pleasure at seeing the yellow songbird and understanding the mystery behind the nest boxes (Prothonotary warblers nest in niches, which are hard to spot. Avian biologists can more easily track and observe birds if they set up a bird box not too far from a trail).

The evaluation is tracking the impact of iSWOOP, in terms of the increase in discussions about park-based research. This summer we hope to collect more data on the impact on visitors at currently active sites 

Two people mentioned that you go by Billy and didn't I know you from the Aquarium. Oh, of course. We didn't overlap when you were at TERC, but we have corresponded. I was thrown off by your moniker here, William.

The volunteers at the grove set up scopes, usually one at adult height and one at child height. People try to record onto their cell phones and there's often a volunteer who gives them some tips. I'm always interested in such moments when technology (looking at a tablet or phone screen) draws people into closer proximity than our cultural norms usually allow. Why? Because of what happens next. There's a sense of a shared experience and intimacy that can sustain a question that people might otherwise feel too self-conscious to ask. Or there's an exchange that feels a little more personal and a little less didactic, because you wouldn't hold forth in a pompous way when you are nose to nose with someone. 

 

And yet there is more to the place of visuals in iSWOOP.  iSWOOP is about a conversation a moment of pondering, about a speculation and a follow up.  Likewise, the visuals that we create are just as purposeful and carefully designed.  We strive to create minimal, “clean” visual translations that tend to be cinematic, sparsely labeled, design-informed, narrative-driven, multi-modal, visually impactful and thought-provoking. Bullet points are taboo. Labels, legends and references are carefully considered to prompt curiosity and facilitate thoughtful conversations.  Yet these seemingly minimal visual constructs bring a lot to shape the conversations and interactions that facilitate learning.  We call this style of visual design VIA - Visual Augmentation. VIA is not a science poster, an infographic or a step-by-step recipe.  VIA leaves room for the interpreters, docents and facilitators to craft their own stories and sequence the visuals in a way that fits their narrative and interactions with the public.  The VIA approach has inspired our film as well.  We hope that it does not simply spell-out or inform and instead, that it provokes, evokes, touches and makes people want to come back for more - to see it again, share it with family, a friend or coworker, to engage in a conversation like this one or to offer a few thoughts and words of advice.  It works at the parks and sites where iSWOOP engages with the public.  We are eager to find out if it will work here as well.  Thank you for your thoughts!!

Let's hope there are more butterflies this fall and in the autumns to come. Last year's population was 14,000 and the year before that there were about 20,000. The year before that there were 28,000. Some people think the CA wildfires and a very sudden drop in temperature in Canada were to blame, but the downward trend over the past 20 years must also have to do with losing milkweed to agriculture and development. When I was at the groves, we asked people to show with their hands how they thought the monarchs were doing. ____ stable or sloping down or up. I don't think people know how precipitously the population is dropping. 

Hi Martha, yes this is Billy from the New England Aquarium! Thanks for sharing more of the details of your work. I'd love to hear more about the VIA approach.

The iSWOOP project convened a symposium last year for integrative and comparative biologists. The proceedings will be out this summer with an article by Nick Hristov with explanations of design principles and examples from iSWOOP to illustrate his thinking on ViA. One idea is functional minimalism. Pushed to use space and time economically when presenting or publishing for peers, scientists often layer slides or figures with maps, multivariate data, and sometimes photos on top of all that. For live interpretation with public audiences, we want each element to have breathing room. What appears on any single slide is just what needs to be on that slide to jumpstart a conversation the interpreters facilitates. Minimal labels and elements, sparing meaningful use of color, etc. That's just one example. We want the visitor to make meaning and the interpreter to have questions, ideas, and info ready to add into the conversation as it unfolds. If we were designing stand-alone exhibits, the approach would be different. The aesthetic might be similar, but all the information would have be at hand if not immediately explicit.

Billy, I haven't been to NEAQ for a while. Do your interpreters rove with iPads or tablets ever? If yes, what is on them that enhances visitors' experience? Do some interpreters outright refuse to use them or simply avoid using them?

Hi Rachael, iSWOOP hasn't stepped into that arena. I know that the docents at the state beach talk a lot about helping the monarchs by planting native milkweed (vs other types the local nurseries sell). I do think people leave inspired to DO something. When you say "mitigation" it makes me think of more regulatory efforts. The wildlife biologists will brief US Fish and Wildlife and those folks are working with stakeholders to come up with protocols and plans. As I understand it, most agriculture and developers don't want to see federal regulations for an endangered species enacted. Causes them head-aches. They would prefer voluntary action if they have to do something ... 

I was thinking this very thing tonight, Claire. 14,000 insects is more than most people want to see in one place. It's only compared to 200,000 that the number looks relatively small. Considering a drop by half, as has been the case recently  (from 28,000 to 14,000) makes me worry. If that trend continues, in 10 years, the number won't be terribly impressive at all.

Are you still doing some exhibit design for the Exploratorium, was it? If I'm thinking of the right person, we talked years ago about risk and how people make sense of it. All that was coming back to me this fall when I got to hear Fischoff speak about science communication.

 

Hi Silja, Monarch butterflies pollinate flowers. As far as I know the Monarchs aren't exclusive pollinators of any one plant that relies solely on them. As a species they stand in for lots of not so handsome pollinators. Something about their coloration, journey, and metamorphosis gives them a favored status. The docents at Pismo State Beach tell lots about how they mate and their migration. It's all pretty impressive, from how much the caterpillars eat to how far they fly.

Your question makes me think of a nagging thought I've had related to the deaths of so many bats from white-nose syndrome. Won't some other species take advantage of the opportunity a disappearing species present? Nature abhors a vacuum and all that.    

Importance! Ecosystem role? The creative Team obsessed over these points of the narrative and how much of them and how best to represent them in the film…  The discussions were quite interesting.  What do you all think is the “importance” of monarchs (ecologically and otherwise)?

Hi Julianne, I like Samantha's quote in the video where she says she feels a bit hopeful because so many people care. The overwhelming feelings of hopelessness sadness are not misplaced. As you say, they also aren't helpful. I feel that whenever we can, we have to tell stories of how people made a positive difference. There's such an anti-government narrative at work that the stories of government agencies intervening with community members and scientists are nearly invisible. Let's excavate them! We have examples of species brought back from extinction, the raptors are a good example. It's stupidly expensive and I'm sure every one of your students would know right off that it would be better not to drive a species to the point of extinction, but at least we can say that we humans are responsible for correcting some of our mistakes. You probably already have some local examples where students can make a difference--advocating for sidewalk material that lets the water through, advocating for measures to preserve the night sky, protecting vernal pools that might be affected by development. I suppose before starting any of these conversations about how bad things are, we should have those seeds of hope up our sleeves, ready to go.  

Awesome! This is a really helpful response--and I agree--I should be building up a repertoire of case studies of examples to have up my sleeve. Thank you so much for the feedback! 

I connect with points that both of you, Julianne and Martha, make – about importance of story to celebrate natural magnificence and our fascination with it, but also to make known the seriousness of the challenges and needs for action.  And yet, the importance to recognize and weave into the narratives the success stories that will motivate us to do more.  Broader, systems-approach tackling of such issues has been at the hands of the government.  The Clean Air and Water Acts come to mind at that level with both being recognized as landmark for improving the quality of life for people in North America and inspiring similar initiatives around the world.  I have friends and colleagues from fast-developing East Asia countries and metropolises that have commented on more than one occasion how one of the most precious resources they miss is clean air and water bodies.

We contemplated long and hard how much of each point to represent in the short film, weather it could do justice for all points or if we had to take a specific stance with the film and use it to set up the deeper and broader discussions (like this one) on the other points.  We obsessed over the most minimal but suggestive formulation of the title-card: Scientists, educators and the public collaborate to save the species.

Hidden in the subtle narrative of the film is another point of hope – scientists and the technology that they bring along in their work is not there simply to do a better job at documenting the plight and inevitable demise of the species.  We are here to find the solutions!  There are inspiring examples in history from around the world and in our own efforts that give us hope and audacity to work around the clock and against it.  For example, for decades it was assumed that the free-tailed bats population in the south-central US, one of the largest aggregations of animals in the world, had declined catastrophically from the beginning of the 20^th century to the 1960s.  In the mid 2000s, using thermography and computer vision analysis, a broad collaborative initiative based at Boston University found out that historic estimates of the population size was vastly exaggerated.  Using these data and quantitative 3D modeling we were able to correct the record and indirectly inspire current conservation efforts for the species.  That story is now part of the interpretive programs at Carlsbad Caverns National Park thanks to the iSWOOP Project.  We hope to tell similar stories about monarch butterflies (and other threatened species) in 10 years.  And so the collaboration among scientists, good storytellers like park rangers and docents, and the expert guidance of educators to inform the public is where we put our hope and investment for the future. 

Here's a student whose story I found riveting. 

https://tedxinnovations.ted.com/2016/07/06/a-ne...

 

Wow! Thanks for sharing! I will show this to my Girl Scout troop when we talk about our Take Action Project.

Thank you, Denise. I didn't start out a big fan of the monarchs. They are pretty enough, but I like bats and possums better. Then I spent some time in the grove and was smitten. I hope they have a better year in 2018--maybe if there are fewer autumn fires and a more normal decline in fall temps in their northwest summer and fall habitat, so many won't die before the overwintering and mating seasons. 

Hi Jan! 

I heard a researcher, John Anderson, from College of the Atlantic make this point about gulls a few years ago. It also comes up with amphibians in Indiana--some will thrive with climate change and so many will not. If we don't want to accept a world with just a few common species, we humans will need to be proactive.

I can't say I've seen research on the strategy of using the charismatic species, but that is clearly what the environmental nonprofits do--use the most cuddly, appealing species as a point of leverage. I'll keep an eye out for research on the subject. In Jean Lafitte the rangers were playing with the idea of introducing the concept of an umbrella species. Protect the colorful Prothonotary warbler and you protect the wetlands it needs as well as other species that rely on similar habitat. 

 

I was thinking more about charismatic species and remembered that location and context can easily trump charisma. Here's my example: I think frogs are pretty charismatic. Miss Piggy thinks so too (or at least that Kermit is). But rangers had a hard time captivating visitors' attention with stories about amphibian research if visitors were focused on their excursion to the beach.

In terms of how effective the charismatic species strategy is, I have a new working theory. Randy Olson (in Don't Be Such a Scientist: Talking Substance in the Age of Style), says we need to pay attention to other channels besides directing communication messages to the intellectual channel. He mentions other parts of the body, which make his point memorable. Besides the head, there's the heart (Aw), abdomen (ha ha, humor), and pelvic/groin area (ooh, sexy). Science messages that go to multiple channels can reach beyond a scientifically, intellectually-oriented audience. Okay, I buy that, but lately I've been thinking that people's capacity for compassion is exhausted. Ask me to care about Syrian refugees, foster kids, homeless people, lobsters, gulls, and insects? I can't do it all. And so I have started to wonder if all these channels have the same capacity and capture attention for equal lengths of time. Seen any research on any of this??

Liz, Your house should get recognized with a special status. I didn't know it was a sanctuary for butterflies as well as fox kits.

Try this site for more info on how to help. https://xerces.org/pollinator-conservation/plant-lists/pollinator-plants-northeast-region/

A couple other ideas crossed my mind: Seems as though we should be giving friends with land more pollinator friendly seeds for presents.

We could be more actively pressuring elected officials to limit the use of neonicotinoids. http://www.wbur.org/npr/530028003/two-scientists-two-different-approaches-to-saving-bees-from-poison-dust

I will if you will. Double dare??

 

 

 

 

Hi Benjamin, the method for counting is based on a technology for 3D surveying called Terrestrial Based Laser (TBS or LiDAR more generally) and an analytical method called Subtractive Volume Estimation (SVE).  Here is how it works:  Frist we scan the overwintering sites without the butterflies to produce a very high resolution and accurate 3D model of the entire section of the forest without butterflies.  We then return to the same sites when the butterflies are there to produce a model of that as well.  In the lab we subtract the geometry of the forest without the butterflies from the model with the butterflies.  The difference represents the volume of space occupied by the insects.  We use a carefully derived scaling factor that allows us to estimate the total number of insects.  If we know how much volume a single butterfly occupies, then we can divide the total volume of butterflies by the volume of one of them to come up with an estimate of the colony size and ultimately an assessment of the population.  The method works best if it surveys large clusters of animals (butterflies or bats).  For that reason, it is difficult to apply the TBS/SVE method to smaller and transient colonies but there are other methods to assess the state of the monarch population away from the overwintering grounds.

Everything we know about butterfly colony estimation we learned from cave-roosting bats, including the application of the same technology.  Bats are much easier to work with because the caves in which they roost do not change from one point of time to the next.  Butterflies are harder because the branches on which they roost move under their weight or due to wind so the calculations are considerably more complicated.  We are making good progress and are excited to share the findings soon. 

Nice explanation, Nick. Can we add this to iswoopparks.com as an extra on the Pismo site or under resources: Monarch Butterflies, Counting Methods?

Good idea, let's do it!  We'll run it by a few naive readers/listeners here to make sure that it truly makes sense and we'll put it up on the page as you suggest.