You’ve written several books now based on your adventures as a wildlife biologist and ecologist. What is it about writing books that you find rewarding?

It’s always a challenge for me to translate my vision, thoughts and memories, which in my mind form a complex multidimensional picture, into a linear string of words. I was not a good writer in high school, or as an undergraduate student, and it was difficult to improve when most comments from teachers were not constructive. As a biologist I learned to write scientific articles, but this is not creative; one basically follows a recipe. So at some point I made a conscious decision to try and write more creatively. In my teens and early twenties I went on lots of canoe trips and winter camping trips. One winter I stayed with a friend in a cabin isolated in the Temagami Wilderness. On these trips I always took lots of pictures and kept a diary. I remember showing my slides at a social gathering after spending a winter living in the wilderness at Diamond Lake. In the beginning, people paid only cursory attention to what I was sharing, but pretty quickly the room got quiet as people were drawn into the story of my adventure. Most people are excited by stories of exploration and adventure, and one of the rewards of writing books is knowing that people enjoy experiencing these adventures vicariously through my stories.

In your experience teaching biology and ecology, what are some of the key misconceptions that people have about science and about what scientists do?

I feel the biggest issue that people have with science is that current scientific knowledge may change in the future. Science provides the best understanding we currently have based on the evidence we have at that time. If new evidence comes to light, then our understanding may change. Scientists readily accept this process, but it can sometimes be difficult for the general public to accept. For example, it was once generally accepted that the herbicide known as Round-up was perfectly safe—until evidence began emerging to the contrary and scientists began advocating for a ban. The public also finds it challenging to tease out what science is ‘good’ and what science is ‘bad’. Generally, one should be suspicious of scientific findings when the research is funded by companies that have a financial interest in the outcome. Scientific research is supposed to be impartial, but that’s not always the case.

Your book is about discovery and the way your ideas about ecology developed over the course of your career. What kind of reader did you have in mind when you were writing the book, and what do you hope they will take away from it?

My hope is that many different kinds of readers will enjoy the ‘adventure’ part of my writing. Adventure holds a pretty universal appeal. In this book I use these stories of adventure and discovery to introduce different aspects of biology and ecology to the readers in a way I hope they will find interesting. I discuss how humans have negatively affected nature, suggesting why and how we might do things differently. Some readers may disagree, but I hope that most will stick with me because they enjoy the story, and that they will consider what I have to say. After all, sometimes having good information is not enough to motivate people to change their behaviour. But by presenting the information in the context of a personal story, I feel that people might see things in a new way rather than feel like they have been lectured to. Maybe it will have a positive impact.