Faculty Meeting Minutes
College of Forest Resources
Anderson Hall Room 22
Monday November 5, 2007, 10:30 p.m.
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting was called to order at 10:37 a.m. by Gordon Bradley, College of Forest Resources Faculty
Chair.
ATTENDANCE
PRESENT
Bolton, Susan
Bradley, Gordon
Briggs, David
Doty, Sharon
Eastin, Ivan
Edmonds, Robert
Ettl, Gregory
Ewing, Kern
Ford, E. David
Halpern, Charles
Hinckley, Thomas
Lawler, Joshua
Mabberley, David
Manuwal, David
Rabotyagov, Sergey
Sprugel, Douglas
Strand, Stuart
West, Stephen
ABSENT
Allan, G. Graham
Agee, James
Bakker, Jonathan
Bare, Bruce
Brown, Sally
Bura, Renata
Franklin, Jerry
Fridley, James
Gara, Robert
Glawe, Dean
Greulich, Frank
Gustafson, Richard
Hanley, Donald
Harrison, Robert
Hodgson, Kevin
Johnson, Jay
Kim, Soo-Hyung
Lee, Robert
Lippke, Bruce
Marzluff, John
McKean, William
Moskal, Monika
Paun, Dorothy
Perez-Garcia, John
Peterson, David
Reichard, Sarah
Ryan, Clare
Schiess, Peter
Schreuder, Gerard
Torgersen, Christian
Toth, Sandor
Turnblom, Eric
Vogt, Dan
Vogt, Kristiina
Wott, John
Zabowski, Darlene
ALSO IN ATTENDANCE
Wagar, Al
Lewis, Sidney
Smith, Nevada
The names that are grayed out are not eligible to vote.
ANNOUNCEMENTS
Dr. Bradley introduced the agenda for today’s meeting by saying that no action would be taken at the
meeting. The meeting will be dedicated to discussion. It was thought by the faculty that they would like
to have an opportunity to discuss different topics. Dr. Bradley thought we’d try it out and see how it
works.
C:\Web\cfrmain\internal\committees\minutes\All_College_Faculty_Meetings\facminutes110507.doc
College of Forest Resources
Faculty Meeting Minutes
November 5, 2007
Page 2 of 4
PRESENTATIONS
No presentations were scheduled.
FACULTY ACTIONS
No action items were brought forward.
DISCUSSION
CFR 509
We thought it would be a good idea to talk about what is proposed for Winter 2008. Dr. Ford is lead
instructor for the upcoming quarter. He plans to teach the course with an outline similar to his former
Scientific Methods Class. It was noted though that CFR 509 is more than a research methods course. It
is one of two required courses for our graduate students. It serves to develop intellectual community
amongst the new graduate students. Winter is a good time to offer the course. The students find the
course challenging and worthwhile. The faculty find that after taking the course students are grounded
in similar material which a common starting point. The students develop skills in inquiry assessment
and establish interdisciplinary communication and a culture of ethics. The course also meets
institutional mandates. Steve West commented that since we have our graduate review next year having
this course as part of the curriculum can lend rigor to CFR’s program. If this course is not required, it
would be difficult to present common information to graduate students.
Students in this course develop basic focus and a research plan, they outline general questions, and are
introduced to peer review. No other course offers this kind of information.
ESRM 201
Bob Edmonds provided a very brief overview of ESRM 201 because he will present the course syllabus
at the November 26, 2007 meeting.
COLLEGE PLANNING COMMITTEE ACTION ITEMS
1. Undergraduate Research Fellowship
It is hoped the Dean could provide $1000 for each award to be used for a research project to be
presented at the Undergraduate Research Forum. This would be separate from Psi Sigma Pi. Faculty
would review and award up to a total of $5000 of undergraduate research fellowship awards. This
would not be a stipend, but would directly support research costs. It would be different from anything
else currently in place.
2. Internship Opportunities
Internships are currently listed in hard copy in Student Services. It is hoped the internship opportunities
will be posted on the web. The purpose of posting on the web would be to make sure opportunities are
identified and information is distributed to students. It is hoped that each internship would have a
champion to explain and market it to the students. Faculty oversight is needed to work with Curriculum
Committee and advising office regarding the internship opportunities. The Chair of the Curriculum
Committee (Clare Ryan) is working with options groups to see if internships are available that would
link up with the various options.
3. Incubator Groups
This concept was brought up at the Strategic Planning Retreat. There have been incubator groups in
CFR in the past, in fact one of the IGERT grants came out of an incubator group. The purpose of the
incubator group is to identify areas where we can create synergy, focus and assistance, and put together
proposals to raise more money. The thought now is to merge the New Initiatives and New Money
groups. It is hoped the Dean might hire someone to help write proposals.
4. Develop and Practice Leadership
C:\Web\cfrmain\internal\committees\minutes\All_College_Faculty_Meetings\facminutes110507.doc
College of Forest Resources
Faculty Meeting Minutes
November 5, 2007
Page 3 of 4
The discussion from the retreat regarding this concept defined leadership as taking initiative on
important CFR actions and to serve the College when things need to get done, such as last year, faculty
took on leadership roles to develop the options, to establish the MFR, and to codify the College’s bylaws. Dr. Bradley took leadership into account when he made recommendations to the Dean for merit.
Should or can this be formalized or explicit in the PMT procedures? There is more than one way to
recognize leadership such as at the Spring recognition event or perhaps to earmark or “find” money to
establish an award like the Burlington Northern Teaching Award which provides $1000 one time
stipend. It may be limiting to only link it to PMT. If faculty feel strongly about this being part of PMT
procedures they should talk to Dr. Briggs.
5. Research Forum
Over the years faculty have not been as aware of what their CFR faculty colleagues are doing as they
could be which could limit the opportunity to collaborate. How to organize an event has been an issue.
Should it be an annual one time shot or a regularly scheduled event throughout the year? Since the
faculty already have Monday mornings at 10:30 a.m. set aside for faculty meetings Gordon thought
we’d give the “off weeks” from faculty meetings a try for scheduling the Research Forum. Two faculty
will present at each meeting. The object is to present 1-2 ideas or projects to give folks a brief overview
or “taste” of what you are doing. There’ll be time for discussion and opportunity for folks to chat about
collaboration. Gordon Bradley will chair the meeting and Sharon Doty will co-chair. He’ll get things
set-up and it will roll out next quarter.
ALTERNATIVE LOCATIONS FOR TRANSGENIC PLANT RESEARCH
The main issue regarding placement of transgenic plants is security. Stuart Strand participated in the
meeting because he wants to use UWBG’s green house to develop trees. He wants to develop a field
test of the rabbit gene poplar and needs to have green house space. Dr. Strand says the Dean refuses to
allow use of UWBG green house. Dr. Strand wants to understand its use. He says there has been a good
response to publicity regarding the rabbit gene poplar. No threats have been made. He believes the hot
heads have cooled down, and he pointed to the crack down on ELF. ELF no longer has a presence on
the web. If the climate has loosened up Dr. Strand asks: should we be allowed to use green house at
UWBG? And, if it is still unsafe for plants in UWBG then he believes it must be considered that
Winkenwerder and Bloedel are also at risk. Dr. Strand brings this issue forward today to have it
discussed in the open. He believes it has never been discussed in the open. Gordon asked Dr. Bare to
come to the meeting today to provide his perspective. Bob Edmonds is also in attendance as well as
David Mabberley. Bob: there is a security difference between UWBG and main campus. The College
is not anti transgenic research but the security situation is always about what is the right thing to do.
Bruce is reluctant to have controversial research take place at UWBG greenhouse because he can’t
supply adequate security and doesn’t want it burned down again. UW Police do not provide support
down there, and they are not prepared to provide security. UW Police advises us: don’t advertise.
UW’s position is that with issues of security it is about who pays and UW says “your research your
problem.” In other words, if we undertake the research it’s our cost to provide security. Currently there
is a camera on the back side of Bloedel, black out windows, and grow lights. Supposedly no one can see
Winkenwerder lab because it is shielded by evergreens, but there are no cameras on the vulnerable side.
It is a wooden building. Obviously both Bloedel and Winkenwerder are vulnerable. Stuart thinks the
possibility of an attack has lessened. He wants to have the reason why transgenic research is not yet
allowed at UWBG explained. Faculty asked him do his grants request money for security. Dr. Bare
stated security doesn’t get paid by RCR. The security in Bloedel room is paint on the windows. If it is
not a risk in Bloedel then why is it a risk to use UWBG? Dr. Mabberley: As far as UWBG site is
concerned lots of folks from outside the UW come through all the time, which seems to point to a
C:\Web\cfrmain\internal\committees\minutes\All_College_Faculty_Meetings\facminutes110507.doc
College of Forest Resources
Faculty Meeting Minutes
November 5, 2007
Page 4 of 4
greater risk. He believes the risk is still apparent. He also said there is still concern by neighbors about
having this research on their doorstep. He’s not willing to take a risk without proper security.
Summary: It comes down to a question of resources, folks who do the research don’t have the resources
to provide security. The discussion may need to go to higher level. It might be something to consider
making a case for a new secure green house with the College of the Environment.
It’s not clear that faculty can take action on this because it comes down to what the administration
decides to do. UW has never viewed overhead as prerogative of faculty. Could we contract trees to be
grown outside of the University? Are there other options that could be explored? It seems our hands are
tied. While we support the ability to undertake transgenic research, the question of security rests with
the P.I. Getting UW to spend money, has not met with much success. Is there money to support more
security in Winkenwerder such as lights and cameras, a keypad entry lock has already been installed.
UWBG problems have been identified by the police and community. It seems the most likely solution is
to find a facility outside the UW. Dr. Strand stated he will ask that this issue be discussed again.
COLLEGE OF THE ENVIRONMENT
Are we doing all we should be to be effective, more at the table? College has been at the table at
Charette, community discussion, meetings over summer with Provost, concept workshop in late
summer, Provost came to meet with small group participants, and we had a faculty meeting with
Provost. David Mabberley and Steve West are on the organizational committee and Josh Lawler is on
the mission and vision committee. Other faculty are attending the committee meetings. Should we do
more? Steve West said discussions have been general and not specific, theoretical approaches and
potential models have been discussed with the idea of developing a small set of potential models. New
Dean would decide from these models. College units participating so far are CFR, SAFS, Ocean,
Anthropology, Engineering, Environmental Engineering, Nursing, Biology, and all people at the table
saw themselves as participants in the new College; this represents a wider range than was initially
expected. Time line—Provost go to Regents in week or two. She might want OK and she won’t have
details. She was there to try to put her stamp on it. Perhaps we should take a straw vote: Do we care if
Forestry is a unit in the new College or should we go into Biology as part of the new College. Are we
perceived as guarding our turf? Dean can put out what he thinks is important. The Dean pointed out
one thing useful to come out of the meetings and conversations—recognition that the College of Forest
Resources is doing inventive things.
UPCOMING EVENTS
Next Faculty Meeting: Monday, November 26, 2007, 10:30 to 11:30 a.m. in Anderson Room 22.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 12:22 p.m.
C:\Web\cfrmain\internal\committees\minutes\All_College_Faculty_Meetings\facminutes110507.doc