You have to have the proper equipment to do the job or don't do the job. It is time to do things correctly, funding source or not. Educate them if necessary or you don't get the project if you can't provide the proper equipment. When you get stuck and have to call in (if you have cell service, most times you don't) someone to tow you out you have wasted time and resources. This happens multiple times when the proper vehicle is not provided. My point is fact... most off road projects require four wheel drive. I have worked on enough projects to know. I have also worked with many PI's that don't know much about field projects yet they get thousands of dollars to run them. Many PIs skimp and then expect their techs to take up the slack. That is not right. Some techs may not say anything to you about it (brown nose factor) but they are definitely saying it. Most PI's are not the ones in the field so they (sitting in their AC cooled labs) don't realize the needs of the field tech. If you can't do the project correctly (enough funding) then don't do the project. I wonder how skimping effects the data?
Take Care, Michael E. Welker Herpetologist / Wildlife Scientist 3105 Eads Place El Paso, Texas 79935 (915) 595-8831 home (352) 256-4000 cell [EMAIL PROTECTED] ----- Original Message ----- From: "Malcolm McCallum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Michael E. Welker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <ecolog-l@listserv.umd.edu> Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 12:52 PM Subject: Re: Four wheel drive vehicles are a REQUIREMENT for most field projects! > You are making an assumption too that all funders will pay for a vehicle. > IF a vehicle is an eligible expense then any proposer is going to put one > in if needed. Fact is, vehicles typically are not eligible expenses and > even if they are the budget ceiling is often too small to allow budgeting > such vehicles. AN average state grant may be 30-60K and limited to 1 yr. > OFten state grants are much smaller. Cost shares through federal agencies > may not exceed 5-10K. Many grantors will pay to rent a vehicle but not > purchase. Thats a hoot. So you rent a 4 wheel drive and use it out in > the field, get it all scratched up and dinged, now bring it back. Reminds > me of the scene in "Jackass: the movie." > > This idea that you can just budget anything into a grant and get it if > justified is complete naivity. I suspect you were talking in absolutes, > but clearly not meaning it as such! Every RFP has its rules. Every > project has its needs. When 4 wheel is needed, you must have it. But you > don't always need it and it is definitely a gas-hog vehicle running up > your expenses should you use it when not needed. > > > On Fri, August 10, 2007 12:10 pm, Michael E. Welker wrote: >> All, >> >> Most of the herp projects I have worked on have required four wheel drive >> vehicles. Some of the PI's I have worked for were so inexperienced in >> field >> work that they "didn't realize" that a four wheel drive was a necessity. >> Many of the others tried to get by with "very used" four wheel drives >> because they didn't put enough money in their grant to get a decent field >> vehicle. And on some projects they wanted us to drive our personal four >> wheel drive vehicle. I would suggest the following: >> >> 1. Put enough money in your grant to get what you need and consider >> those >> that will be in the field. Don't skimp on the resources it takes to get >> the >> job done! >> 2. Any off road project requires four wheel drive. Even dirt roads >> (especially NF roads) become very muddy during rains and many also have >> sugar sand. >> 3. If you are not inexperienced enough with field projects to plan >> properly >> get some advice. >> 4. Get out of your lab and go to the field sites. Things look great on >> paper but that doesn't mean they work in the real world. >> 5. It is not your research techs job to provide a field vehicle it is >> yours! >> >> Take Care, >> >> Michael E. Welker >> Herpetologist / Wildlife Scientist >> 3105 Eads Place >> El Paso, Texas 79935 >> (915) 595-8831 home >> (352) 256-4000 cell >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: "Malcolm McCallum" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> >> Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 5:33 PM >> Subject: Re: Field-worthy SUV >> >> >>> Doesn't it strike anyone kind of strange that this discussion about >>> which >>> SUV to choose popped up right amidst a discussion about wastefulness? I >>> suggest that 90% of us using 4-wheel drive SUVs for research really >>> don't >>> need them. How often do you actually need to put it in 4-wheel??? >>> >>> Just stoking the fire here! >>> >>> >>> On Thu, August 9, 2007 3:33 pm, Mike Marsh wrote: >>>> Robert, if you don't mind something old, find (with difficulty >>>> nowadays) >>>> a pre1985 Toyota land cruiser, also known in Australia as a "troopie". >>>> these are instantly recognizeable by the completely box-like cabin, and >>>> the long-wheelbase model was designed to carry a squad of 8 soldiers >>>> in >>>> the rear sitting sidewise on two parallel benches, with a bench seat in >>>> front. The chassis and suspension is mor reminiscent of a locomotive >>>> than a truck completely solid. There is a manual, low-hi range >>>> transmission. You have to get out to lock or unlock the front hubs for >>>> 4 >>>> wheel drive. A diesel model will chug down the road at 55 mph forever, >>>> cross rivers, tow less bush-worthy vehicles, etc. >>>> We went to Australia in 2001 to cross the continent with local friends >>>> from Sydney to the Kimberleys. We bought a used long wheelbase 1984 >>>> troopie, had oil leaks in the front hubs fixed, and set out on a 3 week >>>> expedition. We covered 10,000 kilometers, perhaps 1/3 of it on unsealed >>>> (unpaved) roads of various degrees of roughness, had no breakdowns >>>> (well >>>> ,the clutch was slipping the last 600 km), one flat tire, and came away >>>> loving our vehicle, which we sold to a friend. You must not need to go >>>> fast, as the fuel economy drops. With 2 fuel tanks you have 400+ mile >>>> range. >>>> Mike Marsh >>>>> Subject: >>>>> Re: field-worthy SUV >>>>> From: >>>>> William Silvert <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> Date: >>>>> Tue, 7 Aug 2007 18:16:59 +0100 >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> I'm no expert on this, but colleagues who have worked in Africa swear >>>>> by the Toyota pickups. They run circles around Land Rovers and the >>>>> like. >>>>> >>>>> Bill Silvert >>>>> >>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Robert Long" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >>>>> To: <ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU> >>>>> Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 1:23 PM >>>>> Subject: field-worthy SUV >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> Hi folks, >>>>>> >>>>>> This is a fairly general question, but I'm looking for a small- or >>>>>> mid-sized >>>>>> SUV to serve as a field vehicle. It will be used extensively both on- >>>>>> and >>>>>> off-highway, although need not be capable of truly ruggged >>>>>> off-roading. A >>>>>> good amount of rear cargo space would be best (which eliminates some >>>>>> of the >>>>>> smaller SUVs like the Honda CRV), and decent gas mileage will be a >>>>>> strong >>>>>> plus. >>>>>> >>>>>> Can anyone recommend a few makes and models based on personal >>>>>> experience in >>>>>> the field? >>>>>> >>>>>> Thanks, >>>>>> >>>>>> Robert >>>> >>> >>> >>> Malcolm L. McCallum >>> Assistant Professor of Biology >>> Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > > Malcolm L. McCallum > Assistant Professor of Biology > Editor Herpetological Conservationa and Biology > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
