At the Midwest Fish and Wildlife Conference in Kansas City this past January, I noted the absence of many University graduate students that once represented the cutting edge of natural resource research. The programs that have nearly all but vanished are from large research institutions that followed the path Mike described below. In fact, one major university in my area has fisheries students - yes, fisheries students, that graduate with both B.S. and M.S degrees that have never once set a net, measured a fish, or run a boat. It is very shocking to potential employers when these "trained" fresh employees are put in the field and are basically helpless. The good students are securing those experiences through summer internships, etc... but many are not.
The programs that were prominent at the Midwest, those that are not only surviving by thriving, are mostly small to mid-sized academic units that continue to have a strong foundation in field labs, field research, and applied sciences. I was told that during a past North-Central Division Presidents Luncheon for the American Fisheries Society, that our incoming President even made note of the changes she has seen in the prominent programs. Those large programs are no longer leading the way in field biology/ecology, and she called out specific smaller programs that were truly represented at the conference. Even here, however, where we can show success of our field/applied sciences graduates, there is constant pressure to move faculty lines to other programs. I, along with a few other faculty, are doing everything we can to not only maintain, but grow our field and applied sciences program. It is a tough battle, though, because we are one of those "biology" departments and field faculty positions are almost always prioritized very low. For example, we have a solid foundation of plant, wetland, environmental science, and ecology-based courses, and we are in one of the richest crop-producing areas of the world, but yet we do not have a soil scientist within the faculty, and our colleagues do not make this expertise a high priority - when it is needed so badly. Kudos to all that brought this issue up and have commented. Dr. Shannon J. Fisher, Professor and Director Water Resources Center Minnesota State University, Mankato -----Original Message----- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mike Nolan Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2014 10:23 AM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Loss of field-based courses Thanks for bringing this topic up Dr. Inouye. You know what they say...."Specialists learn more and more about less and less until someday they will know everything about nothing". It's even happening at the High School level. I was once given carte blanche to to re-design an ailing advanced Biology program at a high school. Was heavily criticized for choosing Ecology and some of the classic discoveries in Biology as the theme of the class. Parents were the biggest critics. They just didn't see how the content of my course was going to get their children in medical school. They got over it and it was a good decision. I tried to use Biochemistry and Genetics without losing focus on the bigger picture. It was a fairly large, rural high school and I was quite surprised every spring when I would put a small bowl of tadpoles on my desk, and count the number of kids that didn't have a clue as to what they were. Pretty sad state of affairs.... Have a now retired friend from Penn State who did most of his research on Peccaries, he told me on several occasions that he was what was left of a dying breed. I found his work, and especially that dealing with hibernation biology and physiology to be incredibly fascinating. Thank for anyone's feedback on this all important issue. Am copying this to several High School Bio lists and am curious what their feelings are on this. Thank you. Mike Nolan On 5/14/2014 10:07 AM, David L. McNeely wrote: > I have been observing this for some time now. Organisms and their habitats > are being written out of biology, so far as direct experience with them is > concerned. We soon will have no means of knowing what is going on in nature, > as no one will be investigating nature, or even have a clue as to how to do > so. It is somewhat disconcerting to attend conferences and witness paper > presentations where it is clear that the presenter has never seen a living, > wild specimen of the organism being reported on and would not know how to go > about finding one. > > The Southwestern Association of Naturalists has recently approved, to be > awarded for the first time at its annual meeting in San Diego next April, a > new Student Field Natural History Award. Details concerning this competition > will be available on the SWAN web site and in the annual call for papers, but > essentially it provides a prestigious award and a monetary prize for the > outstanding paper which includes a substantial field component presented by a > student member at the annual meeting. More details will appear on the SWAN > web site and in the annual call for papers for next year. To qualify for the > competition, the investigation reported on must have been carried out on the > natural history (essentially ecology and evolution) of organisms in the > southwestern portion of North America (as defined by SWAN) where they occur > in their environments. > > I would encourage ESA and other societies to consider implementing awards for > field based studies. > > David McNeely > > ---- David Inouye <[email protected]> wrote: >> I'm posting this for a colleague who wanted to remain anonymous but >> would be interested in your comments. We've suffered the same loss of >> field-based courses at the University of Maryland, but I think for >> other reasons. >> >> David Inouye >> >> My ecology/evolution/plant diversity students are always shocked when >> I tell them about one way in which the shift towards genomics in >> ecology and evolution is largely responsible for the disappearance of >> almost all field courses in my department (and probably elsewhere). >> I don't think that this is exactly what you had in mind regarding an >> example of "how rapidly and significantly ecological science and >> evolution are changing", but I don't think it's too off-track. >> >> We now have six evolutionary biologists in my department (including >> myself), and only one of us (me) does any field work other than to >> find-and-grind organisms for genomics work. The rest is computer >> modeling and lab work, conducting Petri-dish and vial-based >> experiments with flies or microorganisms. Not surprisingly, these >> lab-based faculty are not only pale and wan, but they're completely >> uninterested in -- and dismiss as too "noisy" -- field experiments >> aimed to detect the process or outcome of natural selection in wild >> populations. So, not only are they unable to teach field-based >> courses (or even to run local field trips), but they're now raising a >> cohort of graduate students who are exactly the same. While genomics >> can answer certain kinds of questions in evolutionary ecology and >> detect phylogenetic patterns that population-based studies of natural >> selection cannot, I think it's really important to inform >> undergraduates about this major political and financial shift in >> evolutionary research, and to point out the kinds of questions that >> cannot be addressed with genomics. >> >> Invariably, these students are very surprised to learn that this is >> part of the story explaining the demise of field courses. At my >> institution, their lack of field experience prevents them from being >> outraged, as they don't know what they're missing. > -- > David McNeely > > -- If we are on another line or away from the phone, please leave your number, best time to return your call and your e-mail address. After hours and weekend phone appointments are available upon request. Sincerely, J. Michael Nolan, Director Rainforest and Reef Try to learn something about everything and everything about something. -Thomas H. Huxley PLEASE CONFIRM THE RECEIPT OF THIS E-MAIL. THANK YOU. ***************************************************************************************************************** "Outstanding-Affordable Field Courses in Rainforest & Marine Ecology" References/Comments from past Group Leaders and Individual Participants can be found at: http://rainforestandreef.org/comments.htm, many more available upon request. U.S.: Rainforest and Reef 161 Main St. Coopersville, MI 49404 International Phone from outside the U.S. or Canada: 011.616.604.0546 Toll Free U.S. and Canada: 1.877.255.3721 Cell Phone: 1.616.312.5744 Skype: rainforestandreeffieldcourses E-mail: [email protected] or [email protected] Note: Please send inquiries to both e-mail addresses Web: http://rainforestandreef.org (under revision for 2014 and beyond) Europe: Rainforest and Reef Haguenau, France Att: Marion Stephan Local/International Phone: 49.0.177.1747485 Skype: walli044 E-mail: [email protected] *****************************************************************************************************************
