Why humans kill animals and why we cannot avoid it.

Killing animals has been a ubiquitous human behaviour throughout history, yet it is becoming increasingly controversial and criticised in some parts of contemporary human society. Here we review 10 primary reasons why humans kill animals, discuss the necessity (or not) of these forms of killing, and describe the global ecological context for human killing of animals. Humans historically and currently kill animals either directly or indirectly for the following reasons: (1) wild harvest or food acquisition, (2) human health and safety, (3) agriculture and aquaculture, (4) urbanisation and industrialisation, (5) invasive, overabundant or nuisance wildlife control, (6) threatened species conservation, (7) recreation, sport or entertainment, (8) mercy or compassion, (9) cultural and religious practice, and (10) research, education and testing. While the necessity of some forms of animal killing is debatable and further depends on individual values, we emphasise that several of these forms of animal killing are a necessary component of our inescapable involvement in a single, functioning, finite, global food web. We conclude that humans (and all other animals) cannot live in a way that does not require animal killing either directly or indirectly, but humans can modify some of these killing behaviours in ways that improve the welfare of animals while they are alive, or to reduce animal suffering whenever they must be killed. We encourage a constructive dialogue that (1) accepts and permits human participation in one enormous global food web dependent on animal killing and (2) focuses on animal welfare and environmental sustainability. Doing so will improve the lives of both wild and domestic animals to a greater extent than efforts to avoid, prohibit or vilify human animal-killing behaviour.

Attracting Diverse Students to Field Experiences Requires Adequate Pay, Flexibility, and Inclusion.

Access to field experiences can increase participation of diverse groups in the environmental and natural resources (ENR) workforce. Despite a growing interest among the ENR community to attract and retain diverse students, minimal data exist on what factors undergraduate students prioritize when applying for field experiences. Using a nationwide survey of US undergraduate ENR students, we show that attracting most students to field experiences-especially racial or ethnic minority students-will require pay above minimum wage. However, the concurrent landscape of pay in ENR fell short of meeting many students' pay needs. Aside from pay, ENR students valued training in technical field skills and analytical or research skills, working with their desired study species or taxa, and working near school or family. Additional barriers beyond limited pay included incompatible schedules and noninclusive work environments. Our findings provide important insights for attracting a diverse workforce to this critical stage in career advancement for students in ENR.