Both views are valid, and both are too simple. As necessary as is the proper management of institutions within which science is done, to assume that manipulation of organizational structures will provide a complete solution of this problem is to invite disappointment. By the time they enter our institutions of education, they have, to a large extent, already sorted themselves out. Young environmental biologists are the contemporary equivalent of the medieval monastic, the 19th century missionary, the 1960s Peace Corps volunteer. They are, in short, the idealists who have always lived among us.
Idealists are simultaneously a force for good and a threat to social order.
The task of the greater society is to constrain these young people from doing harm and focus their energies on the conservation work that needs doing. The proper response of society to a misbehaving science is not to dismiss it as irreparably damaged, but to focus our evaluations and judgments below its surface on its individual practitioners. We let this problem arise by empowering a generation of weak mentors. And we can repair the damage only by elevating to social prominence the best role models. We must choose to listen not to the loudest scientific advocates but to that quiet corps of practitioners who seek rigorously to purge themselves of bias.