You make a good point, John A. Informed people who have devoted considerable 
thought, research and funding by the American people can be an important voice 
in situations such as this.

The protesters in the current events in Oregon are making statements as if they 
were fact. To wit: “This refuge – it has been destructive to the people of the 
county and the people of the area,” Ammon Bundy told CNN. “They are continuing 
to expand the refuge at the expense of the ranchers and miners.” 

It makes me wonder if — and suspect that — research may indeed have been 
conducted, published and discussed by scientists and those results deserve to 
be heard by the public.

Speaking to issues of public importance requires response at a pace infinitely 
faster — and bolder — than daily science requires. But scientists DO and should 
engage, and universities usually have communications professionals on hand to 
assist. I argue that if you have expertise in this area, consider seeking 
assistance in bringing facts to light.  


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sue Nichols
Assistant Director/Strategic communications
Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability           
Michigan State University


On Jan 5, 2016, at 12:25 PM, John A. <[email protected]> wrote:

>    This morning my local paper ran a strong editorial about current events in 
> Oregon, condemning the armed criminals who have taken over a wildlife refuge 
> with threats of deadly force.  These people may pretend to be 
> family-friendly, but the fact is they've threatened the lives of federal 
> employees and they're preventing the lawful use of public lands.  
> 
>    While I can appreciate there may be local considerations, allowing an 
> armed takeover of a protected area sets a terrible precedent.  When thugs are 
> given carte blanche to threaten other citizens away from public property, it 
> sends the message that weapons and extremist rhetoric can somehow justify 
> gross violations of the law.  It's hard to imagine these takeovers won't 
> become more common as a result, with an increased threat to the lives of 
> natural resource professionals as well as the lands they work on.
> 
>    This is what conservationists have to deal with in developing countries, 
> where corruption is rampant at every level and legal protections are 
> wafer-thin; but what does it say when we allow it to happen in the United 
> States?  Don't we have some responsibility to speak out against it?
> 
>                                                                               
>                                           - J. A.

 

Reply via email to