SYSTEMATIC REVIEW

Chloe Frick

WORDS BY MAXIM BUCKLEY

Very sorry to all the fans of the series (shoutout to Tash Moy), I took a two month hiatus and so therefore the series took a two month hiatus. For the final edition of Systematic Review I have my very good friend and fellow scientist Chloe Frick. Chloe is a PhD student studying ecology, her chief task is to restore brush-tailed bettong populations in Innes National Park, South Australia. This project is a flagship reintroduction from a 20+ year rewilding program and as such is very important. But since Chloe is a scientist, she definitely downplays it.

“Typically, if I’m in the office, I concern myself with paperwork, grant proposals, any external commitments, and naturally I allocate some time to be distracted by my lab mates. While I’m out I also collect swabs, so those need to be processed so I can gather data on the microbiome and genetics of the animals. When it gets interesting is when I spend time doing field work. For myself, since I’m studying mammals, I’m typically up very early checking traps and letting the little fellas go before the sun’s up. But you’re also encouraged to help other students so you can graduate with an employable skill set, so I’m frequently helping with projects outside of my scope.”

I think whenever I meet someone who I’m impressed with, I’m always super curious about how they got to where they are. How does someone go from undergraduate studies to running a large portion of a rewilding program? “Basically my undergrad was what it was, and then I did my honours. My honours project focused on the non-invasive monitoring of genetics of an extant brush-tailed rock wallaby population in far east Victoria. Fancy words

for saying I slogged through a steep gorge for a week, picked up critically endangered animal poo, smuggled it across the border, then spent an obscene amount of time in a lab.” Chloe’s research provided male and female population numbers, the population’s movement in/out of the gorge, and how inbred they were. These data provided for policy suggestions to better manage the population to the point where they no longer require human involvement. The too long didn’t read is that you need to be dedicated to ecology, like any other science, because there are some pretty strenuous requirements, though it can be very rewarding, and you don’t have to break yourself to get there.

Beyond the normal study related barriers, Chloe also faced some resistance that shouldn’t be present but is unfortunately still all too real. “There were a myriad of people that didn’t support me and often openly sledged the idea of me studying wildlife because of the lack of projects and jobs. Also I was at times passed over due to my female presentation, since projects can frequently be physically demanding. Myself and some of my colleagues have had our relationship statuses questioned, our plans for parenthood probed, and how these factors would affect our ability to complete field work. People often don’t keep their crappiest opinions to themselves”. Chloe also told me once that she had to pull 80 ticks off her research idol after a three hour bush bash, which just sounds pretty gross and something I personally would try to avoid at all costs.

Something that came up whilst Chloe and I were chatting was the need to congratulate yourself and recognise how far you’ve come. “Undergrad, honours, and then PhD: it feels like one big slog at times. It’s important to look back and pat yourself on the back. These things aren’t easy, and you come a long way in a relatively short period of time. It’s worthwhile congratulating yourself because far out, you’ve done it and done well”. My personal recommendation to anyone going down a similar path is to think back to a time you remember distinctly a year or two ago, think about what you were thinking then and whether or not you expected to be where you are now. Even if you predicted the outcome, it still feels pretty bloody good.

Anyway, the real question of this article is where the bloody hell is Chloe getting all these bettongs. The answer is Western Australia, and apparently they have too many. But this is all according to Chloe, who I would argue has a vested interest in the acquisition of bettongs, so do with that information what you will. Chloe will allegedly be involved in the acquisition (theft) of other animals, though I cannot share the project details with you at this time. Just know that the very idea of the project made a 5-year-old I met whilst galivanting around Tasmania very upset, to the point where she requested that I tell Chloe off.

Chloe hopes that her project results in the bettongs spreading and becoming a selfsustaining and co-existing population in Innes National Park, as their niche and roll in the landscape currently remains unfulfilled. The project’s success is also necessary for the continuation of the Marna Banggara program. The data gleaned from this project will influence future projects in the region but also future projects Australia wide. Chloe doesn’t necessarily know her next steps after the completion of her PhD since this is awhile away, though she hopes to continue her work with species reintroduction.

Finally, a small amount of self-indulgence. Systematic Review was an idea I had when I edited On Dit in 2019 but didn’t have the time for. I’ve always maintained that On Dit should focus more on student affairs, particularly those that occur on our own campus. Though it certainly doesn’t come with the glitz and glamour of covering student politics, writing about my fellow researchers has been a joyous undertaking and I’d gladly do it again, though it may be time for someone else to take the reins. If you’ve enjoyed the series, I’d encourage you to keep up with what research is conducted at the university, since I’ve only really scratched the surface.