Followup, Nov. 12: And here's part II. Not a bad piece, overall, but it feels kind of empty and lacking in detail. It's not clear to me why they're collecting. The pictures are small and not very interesting. I can think of dozens of geobloggers who would have done a better job with this. But credit to The Times for even making it available. As I said, despite my criticism, it's not bad, I just think it could have been better.
Hmm... looking at the sidebar stuff, I found this:
Are there scientists you would like to see write about their field work? Are you a researcher interested in writing about your own field work? Send an e-mail to email@example.com. If you are nominating yourself, please include a description of your field work and samples of your writing and photographs.Might be a chance for someone to get a little publicity, perhaps even paid, in freelance journalism.