-5 - 
 
 
in wildlife management, natural history, ecology, and land use. 
He should be aware of the personalities represented in that liiera- 
ture.   While his knowledge of the literature will naturally be 
greatest in that of his own country, he should be aware of the work 
in all countries, and he should have-dug out the essential ideas of 
at least one foreign group, comparing their work with his own, 
 
          He should speak well enough in public to be able to de- 
 scribe his readings, observations, and ideas at professional or 
 conservation meetings. 
 
     4.   How He Thinks.   These technical skills are the tools for 
a proT-essioona career, but they are useless or even dangerous unless 
guided by a mind of professional calibre.   To create such a mind is 
the aim of all education, including wildlife education; to define 
such a mind defies the best efforts of all committees, including 
this one. 
 
          There are indicators of scholarship which are useful but 
by no means Infallible#   They are here given for what they may be 
worth: 
 
          One indicator is output.   To receive a professional de- 
gree, the student should have outlined, executed, and reported on a 
research project which the faculty is willing to recognize as a con- 
tribution to professional knowledge.   This means he should have 
composed an account of his original work good enough to be accepta- 
ble to professional journals.   (This does not iriply that~every pro- 
fessional student must rush into print; only that is work be good 
enough to print. 
 
          The student's account of his original work is usually his 
thesis for a degree.   A thesis is not a specialty which the student 
should know to the exclusion of other subject matter.   Rather, it 
is a vantage point, gained by his own effort, from which the stu- 
dent should scan his new professional world and try to understand it. 
 
          He should have developed his own views on simple questions' 
of wildlife policy and should be able to expound and defend these 
views in public.   He should have developed some appreciation of the 
ethics and esthetics as well as of the economics of wildlife. 
 
          In viewing the landscape, he should habitually infer its 
past and foresee its future;  that is to say, he should think in 
terms, not of plant and animal species alone, but of communities; 
not of types alone, but of successions.   In this lies the differ- 
ence between the static natural history of yesterday and the dynamic 
ecology of tomorrow. 
 
          He should have developed enough familiarity with the basic 
sciences to know when, where, and how to seek scientific advice on 
questions arising from his work. 
 
          Last and foremost, he should have developed in some degree 
that impor e ble-combination-f cu     s=    skeptic   a  a- 
i__known as the Tscentifc-t titdu o.