Subject: ECOLOG-L Digest - 30 Jan 2003 to 31 Jan 2003 (#2003-31)
There are 17 messages totalling 1092 lines in this issue.
Topics of the day:
1. Research and Environmental Conservation
2. Research and Conservation
3. RFP: Conservation and sustainable use of tropical peat swamp forests an
associated wetland ecosystems
4. News: The Ecological Impacts of War In Afghanistan
5. Environmentlism and Conservation (2)
6. AIBS meeting: Bioethics in a changing world
7. Graduate research assistantships
8. Conservation Ecology manuscript competition
9. Setting of Lab Fees
10. more on research, regulations and environmental conservation
11. Ph.D. candidate
12. Ph.D. candidate (nutrient cycling)
13. Ph.D. candidate forest productivity
14. Two positions available immediately
15. concept of shade tolerance - ECOLOG-L Digest - 29 Jan 2003 to 30 (revis
d)
16. Tree growth phenology
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 22:01:29 -0500
From: "Henshel, Diane S." <dhenshel@INDIANA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Research and Environmental Conservation
WRT why we are not taken seriously...
I do believe it is the political climate. When anyone more
environmentally conscious than Christy Whitman is considered a "radical
tree-hugger" and not to be taken seriously, then we have a real PR
problem with the general public. When the "wise use" folks can label
themselves environmentalists, and be taken as the middle ground because
they believe in "sharing resource use", then we have a huge problem
because, as the lorax implies, no one can speak for the trees any more
and be heard. Because the political climate is forcing the impression
that "all environmentalists are radical democrats and thereby are
un-American", then we have a problem because we are not reframing the
discussion to remove it from the political arena and put it back in the
science arena where it belongs.
I know environmentalists who are liberal Democrats, and those who are
conservative Republicans. But the administration has all but overtly
labeled all people who object to environmental raping and pillaging
without balance as radical leftists, when in fact members of both sides
of the political spectrum consider the environment to be an important
consideration. And somehow, Bush just got away with stating outright
that his policy is to trade the environment for the economy (I hope
everyone caught that line in his State of the Union speech), as if that
is the trade-off, and somehow that statement was mostly ignored by the
commentators. In making that statement he has totally negated, or
denied, the improved bottom line that many companies realized when they
used green chemistry or tried to recycle or reuse many former waste
products. Waste less resources, waste less money, improved bottom line.
And the reduced costs to our medical system from the improved public
health is ignored by statements like that. And the future economy,
which is also predicted to be adversely impacted by resource depletion,
is similarly being ignored and left out of the cost-benefit equation.
And (while I am on this soapbox) where in all the discussions of the war
and the potential impact of the war on the economy (which I notice is
mostly being pointed out by European commentators somehow) is any
comment on the potential impact of the war on the global environment and
on the health of the populace, including our military personnel who
fight and live in that environment. Desert Storm did a wonderful job of
spreading depleted uranium and the oil fires caused absolute havoc to
air quality over a large region (and probably lowered global
temperatures a tad, though I haven't seen the definitive data to that
effect, though it may well exist). And Bosnia similarly devastated a
large urban and rural area, and again spread DU. Iraq is guaranteed to
include DU weapons and will again increase the spread of DU. And our
military folk are exposed to chemicals used by both sides, as well as to
whatever our military chooses to give them to "protect them" against
whatever chemical weapons they think might be used. Every war or "peace
action" from at least Vietnam onward has led to mysterious illnesses
among our military personnel that is then usually traced to some
chemical one side or the other uses, including chemicals that are used
defensively.
Whatever happened to free speech and a bilateral discussion of public
policy anyway?
Diane Henshel
-----Original Message-----
From: Oliver Kilian [mailto:ollie@ACCESSV.COM]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 6:44 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: Research and Environmental Conservation
> In my case, I am adamantly opposed to violent groups, ....,
Time for another penny:
I, too, am opposed to those who resort to violence or other
unlawful/disreputable activity in the name of environmentalism. In my
neck of the woods, we have another term for such radicals -
"eco-terrorists". Their activities, admittedly borne out of a
combination of frustration and indifference to rights and laws, taint us
all. Just thought I'd toss that term into the mix, since I haven't seen
it come up yet in this, what is to my awareness, one of the most lively
threads I've ever seen on this listserv.
For those who read and/or responded to my earlier post, I'm still trying
to explain to myself why I have a gut feeling that its harder to be
taken seriously today (versus 10-15 years ago) when one articulates an
environmentally-conscious point of view, whether one's line of work is
research, consulting, or whatever. Somehow, regardless of our science or
intuitiveness, those of us who work or study in environmental fields are
being lumped in with the archetypical doomsday prophesizers (you know,
the ones wearing long gray beards and carry signs that say "the end is
near"). I have no doubt that our work is respected by the citizenry at
large - we're just not being listened to as well as we know we need to
be. I find precious little consolation in the fact that, when "the end"
does come (and environmental degradation by humans is a very plausible
cause), we will all be able to stand up and say: "told you so".
Eagerly anticipating further posts on this topic,
Oliver K. Reichl, B.E.S.(Hons.)
Consulting Arborist, Forest Ecologist
7 Oaks Urban Forestry Consultants, Inc.
143 Pemberton Rd.
Richmond Hill, Ontario
L4C 3T6
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 22:48:48 -0500
From: "Henshel, Diane S." <dhenshel@INDIANA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Research and Conservation
This is an interesting thread to me. It mirrors one I read on the
Indoor Air Quality list from time to time. Seems all the honest
environmental/environmental health consultants ought to get together and
at least know who each other is and support each other. You all seem to
be feeling equally wistful, and at times, equally without moral support.
Cliff - you reading this out there? Is this something ESA could help
facilitate across the subdisciplines and beyond the ecologist-focused
environmental consultants?
Diane
-----Original Message-----
From: Joe Gathman [mailto:jgathman@PETERSONENV.COM]
Sent: Thursday, January 30, 2003 5:32 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: Research and Conservation
I'm pretty new to this business, but the company I work for is usually
called in on the controversial calls or gray areas. Based on what I've
seen here, clients generally are not particularly interested in
environmental protection, especially if it will cost them. They hire
us to find out what is legal and what isn't (Minnesota has comprehensive
wetland protection legislation). They aren't very interested in
niceties like environmental protection, especially in the "gray" areas
where we are called in. These usually involve expanses of reed canary
grass that may or may not have partly-broken drain tiles effectively,
maybe partially, draining them. "Is it wetland or not" is all they are
interested in, and we do our best to tell them, which is often
difficult. It's hard for anybody to get excited about preserving these
areas, yet here in the Twin Cities area they are a very common landscape
element, given the rapid, sprawling growth out into former farmlands.
It would be nice to get in on projects from the beginning, but you can't
force that on anybody. The larger and smarter developers have figured
out that it is more efficient to get us in relatively early so we can
look at their site plans and recommend changes before details are hashed
out. But they still want to push to the legal limit on the amount of
land they can develop. They only willingly set aside wetland area if
they can be convinced that it will be a profitable mitigation bank.
Just what I've seen in my limited experience.
Joe Gathman
Peterson Environmental Consulting
St. Paul, MN
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 10:15:27 -0500
From: David Inouye <inouye@umd.edu>
Subject: RFP: Conservation and sustainable use of tropical peat swamp forest
and associated wetland ecosystems
MALAYSIA
UNDP GEF BIODIVERSITY PROJECT
CONSERVATION AND SUSTAINABLE USE OF TROPICAL PEAT
SWAMP FORESTS AND ASSOCIATED WETLAND ECOSYSTEMS
REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS
The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) calls for proposals to
undertake Multi-Disciplinary Assessments (MDAs) of peat swamp forests
(PSF), for the abovementioned project.
1. MDA for South-East Pahang PSF MAL/99/G31/MDA/001
2. MDA for the Loagan Bunut National Park (Sarawak) and the Klias
Peninsula (Sabah) MAL/99/G31/MDA/002
The MDAs are expected to take up to six months to complete, and will
incorporate specific analyses of flora and fauna, hydrological
characteristics, socio-economic uses as well as policy, institutional
and management issues. The MDAs will be expected to provide detailed
profiles of PSF ecosystems and comprehensive baseline data of the
project sites and identify information gaps and areas in which further
in-depth analysis is required, as well as to develop an Interim Action
Plan outlining immediate initiatives and interventions required to
sustainably manage the relevant project site pending development and
implementation of comprehensive Management Plans. The design and
implementation of an on-going site monitoring programme will also be
required.
The complete documentation concerning this request for proposals may be
obtained from the Business Service Centre, UNDP Malaysia office (address
below), or from its web page http://www.undp.org.my
Proposals should comprise both technical and financial aspects. All
proposals are to be delivered in two separate sealed envelopes at the
UNDP Malaysia office (address below) no later than 1600 hours (Malaysian
time), on 20 February 2003. Envelopes must be marked Offers to
undertake the Multi-Disciplinary Assessments (MDAs) of peat swamp
forests (PSF) Do Not Open Before 20 February 2003 at 1630 , and each
envelope must be marked as follows on the left hand corner: Envelope 1
Technical Proposal and Envelope 2 Financial Proposal
Bids will be opened on 20 February 2003 at 1630 hours, in the presence
of the bidders representatives who choose to attend, at the UNDP
Malaysia office (address below)
UNDP Malaysia , Wisma UN, Block C, Kompleks Pejabat Damansara
Damansara Heights, 50490 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Thank you.
------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jan 2003 20:40:47 -0800
From: Ashwani Vasishth <vasishth@USC.EDU>
Subject: News: The Ecological Impacts of War In Afghanistan
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/2704989.stm
Wednesday, 29 January, 2003, 09:55 GMT
War 'has ruined Afghan environment'
By Alex Kirby
BBC News Online environment correspondent
Photograph Omitted:
Snow leopards and other species suffer as well as people
Two decades of war have laid waste Afghanistan's environment so badly that
its reconstruction is now compromised, the United Nations says.
A UN Environment Programme (Unep) survey found more than half of Kabul's
water supply is going to waste.
"In urban areas the most basic necessity for human wellbeing - safe
water - may be reaching as few as 12% of the people."
- Unep's Post-Conflict Assessment Unit
It found children working 12-hour shifts in dangerous factories, and
sleeping at their machines.
More than half the forests in three Afghan provinces have been destroyed
in 25 years.
A team from Unep's Post-Conflict Assessment Unit worked with the
Afghanistan Transitional Authority to carry out the survey.
It involved 20 Afghan and foreign scientists in visits to 38 urban sites
in four cities, and to 35 rural sites.
Basic resources
The team's report says the years of conflict have led to the "collapse of
local and national governance, destroyed infrastructure, hindered
agricultural activity and driven people into cities already lacking the
most basic public amenities".
It says: "Three to four years of drought have compounded a state of
widespread and serious resource degradation: lowered water tables,
dried-up wetlands, denuded forests, eroded land and depleted wildlife
populations."
Photograph Omitted:
Children are at special risk
Two million refugees returned to Afghanistan last year, and 1.5m more are
expected in 2003, putting further strains on the country and its natural
resources.
Dr Klaus Toepfer, Unep's executive director, said the report showed
environmental restoration must be a major part of Afghanistan's
reconstruction.
He said: "Over 80% of Afghan people live in rural areas, yet they have
seen many of their basic resources - water for irrigation, trees for food
and fuel - lost in just a generation. In urban areas the most basic
necessity for human wellbeing - safe water - may be reaching as few as 12%
of the people."
The report says Kabul's water system is losing up to 60% of its supply
because of leaks and illegal use.
Waste back-wash
In Herat, only 10% of the 150 public taps were working. There, and in
Mazar-e-Sharif, Kandahar and the capital, the team found medical waste
from hospitals being disposed of in the streets and an abandoned well.
In some cases it contained syringes and human organs. Urban drinking water
had high concentrations of bacteria contaminants, coliforms and E.coli
from sewage.
Photograph Omitted:
Growing crops, like these pomegranates, is now harder
Solid waste disposal, Unep says, is "one of the country's most glaring
problems". Dumps are often sited above cities, where heavy rain can wash
the waste back into the streets.
The report says: "Unep investigations of oil refineries and transport
terminals, and brick, asphalt and lead battery factories revealed acute
environmental and human health risks.
"In a plastic recycling/shoe factory in Kabul the team found children
working without protection from toxic chemicals and sleeping at machines,
or in factory alcoves, between their 12-hour shifts."
Wildlife pressure
In the countryside, it says, satellite imagery shows conifer forests in
the provinces of Nangarhar, Kunar and Nuristan have shrunk by more than
half since 1978.
Pistachio woodlands in northern Afghanistan, valuable money earners, have
been devastated. The report says: "Almost no trees could be detected in
Badghis and Takhar provinces in 2002 by satellite instruments, compared
with 55% and 37% land cover respectively in 1977."
Inevitably, wildlife suffers: several hundred families had taken over an
island in the Amu Darya river which was formerly home to otters, wild
boar, Bactrian deer and birds of prey.
The team also spent two weeks on horseback in a remote area grazed by
Kyrgyz and Wakhi herders, where there are snow leopards, Marco Polo sheep,
wolves, brown bears and Asian ibex.
Unep says hunting, mainly for meat and furs, was significantly reduced
during the Soviet occupation, but has increased since then.
* * *
*** NOTICE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material
is distributed, without profit, for research and educational purposes
only. ***
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 08:27:22 -0500
From: Andrew Park <andrew.park@UTORONTO.CA>
Subject: Re: Environmentlism and Conservation
For Oliver and others mystified as to why environmental concerns seem to be
taken less seriously these days.
One reason, in my opinion, lies in the squalid battles for the control of
language that are waged by opposing protagonists over nearly every political
and social issue. For example, there was a time when to be a socialist was
o
be a concerned individual with an interest in the collective future of
humanity. Over time, as political power has drifted further to the right, be
ng
a socialist has become demonized. The logic follows the following form,
socialism = communism = central control and repression = evil. So if your
debating opponent wants to discredit you, all he has to do to discredit youi
call you a "socialist". The negative steretype follows naturally in the mind
of onlookers.
By extension, environmentalists have been transformed, by appropriation of
language, from citizens (who may or may not be activists) into hairy, tree-
hugging wackos who want to take away precious freedoms to save a few trees (
r
fish, or birds). It does not matter that we have The Union of Concerned
Scientists as ewll as Earth First, Conservation International as well as
GFreenPeace. The appropriation of language by those who oppose environmenta
protection has tarred all environmentally concerned citizens with the same
brush.
The media have aso taken part in this general demonization of
environmentalism. Here in Canada, the Globe and Mail (our excuse for a qual
ty
newspaper) cannot describe environmental regulation without tagging it with
he
epithet "draconian". And it is very difficult for a Globe columnist to
say "environmentalist" wihout saying "extremist".
Having said all that, I am not sure what the solution is. In Europe,
environmentalism is taken more seriously; the Green Party is a part of the
government in Germany. European nations have also ratified Kyoto, institute
Pro-Natura, taken sweeping steps to combat acid and other emissions, have
decent public transport (except, for the moment, the UK), and generally seem
to
have a more sophisticated engagement with environmental issues than we do ov
r
here. So maybe we should look closely at Europe and learn from their exampl
.
However, I have a feeling that reinstituting respect for environmental issue
will take a lot of hard work over a long time......
All the Best
Andy Park Ph.D.
Post-Doctoral Researcher,
Groupe de Recherche en Ecologie Forestiere,
University of Quebec at Montreal.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 11:03:01 -0500
From: David Inouye <inouye@umd.edu>
Subject: AIBS meeting: Bioethics in a changing world
You might be able to get reduced or free registration in exchange for
working part-time at this meeting.
PROGRAM * SCHEDULE * REGISTRATION * POSTER SUBMISSIONS
2003 ANNUAL MEETING OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
6 p.m. Friday 21 March to 12:30 p.m. Sunday 23 March 2003
BIOETHICS IN A CHANGING WORLD
- Responsible Conduct of Science: Collection, Analysis, and Reporting of Dat
- Public Dissemination of Sensitive Scientific Information
- Training the Next Generation
See the program and schedule, register online, and submit a poster online
via www.aibs.org or direct at www.aibs.org/meeting2003. Need help
registering? Call 703-790-1745 or 800-992-2427, email:
meeting2003@aibs.org. Early registration in effect until 3 March
2003. $130 for students, $150 for K - 12 educators, $200 for AIBS members,
$250 for non-members (non-member rate includes automatic one-yea
membership in AIBS). Attendance is limited to 250, so register now to
assure yourself of a seat!
All sessions take place in the Key Bridge Marriott Hotel (across the Key
Bridge from Georgetown DC, in the Washington DC metro area). Contact the
hotel directly to arrange for accommodations: 1401 Lee Highway, Arlington
VA 22209, www.marriotthotels.com/waskb, 1-703-524-6400 or
1-800-228-9290. The AIBS room rate until 2/27/03 is $125/night.
SUMMARY:
The 2003 AIBS annual meeting, Bioethics in a Changing World, presents an
excellent opportunity for biologists to discuss new and continuing
challenges in the ethical practice of their profession. The primary
subtopics are (1) Responsible Conduct of Science: Collection, Analysis, and
Reporting of Data, (2) Public Dissemination of Sensitive Scientific
Information, and (3) Training the Next Generation. Attendees will hear
distinguished plenary speakers and panelists present synthesizing lectures
from the forefront of their fields, then will join those speakers and other
equally notable scholars in informal discussion groups. Group topics
include the plenary subjects as well as broader
professional, public-policy, social, and pedagogical aspects of
bioethics. The rest of the meeting=92s program includes a poster session;
diversity scholars competition; a public policy workshop; field trips; a
film showing; and a performance by Kaiulani Lee of her acclaimed one-woman
play, "A Sense of Wonder," based on the life and works of Rachel Carson.
PLENARY SPEAKERS:
Paul Ehrlich, Stanford University
"Bioethics: Are Our Priorities Right?"
Arturo Gomez-Pompa, University of California, Riverside
"The Role of Biodiversity Scientists in a Troubled World"
Stephen Kellert, Yale University
"A Biocultural Basis for an Ethic Toward the Natural World"
Philip Kitcher, Columbia University
"Responsible Biology"
Carl Leopold, Cornell University
"Ontogeny of the Land Ethic"
Paul Risser, Oregon State University
"Responsible Science and Responsible Scientists"
Kristin Shrader-Frechette, University of Notre Dame
"Public Citizenship and the Duties of Scientists: Avoiding the Best Science=
=20
Money Can Buy"
PANELS:
Panel 1: "Training the Next Generation"
Panelists:
Bruce Alberts, National Academy of Sciences
"Why We Should Pay More Attention to Young Scientists"
Ellis Cowling, North Carolina State University
"Knowledge, Wisdom, and the Moral Dimension of Intelligence"
Richard Boohar, University of Nebraska
"Making Ethical Thinking Real"
David Magnus, Center for Bioethics, Philadelphia
"The Meaning of Graduate Bioethics Education"
Panel 2: "Public Dissemination of Sensitive Scientific Information:
Media, Internet, and the Civic and Ethical Responsibilities of Scientists"
Panelists:
Randall Murch, FBI Academy
"Disclosure of Scientific Information, National Security and Law=20
Enforcement: A Government Perspective"
Jane Alexander, Office of Naval Research
"How to Aid and Abet the Enemy: What the Terrorists Don't Want You to Know"
Steven Aftergood, Federation of American Scientists
"Challenging Government Secrecy, and Promoting Public Oversight"
Howard Schachman, University of California, Berkeley
"Openness in Academia is Essential"
DISCUSSION GROUPS:
Led by plenary speakers, invited guests, AIBS Board members, and AIBS=20
staff. There are eight discussion groups, with no formal presentations;=20
rather, the leaders will facilitate informal discussion of the topic with=20
the attendees by, e.g., identifying three or four core aspects to be=
addressed.
- Thinking like a mountain in political-economic time
- Integrating ethics in science education, from high school to graduate=
school
- Responsible use of chemicals and fertilizers
- Developing a professional code of ethics
- Training the next generation
- Ethical challenges faced by journal editors
- The integrity of the research process
- Environmental justice
LUNCH-BREAK SESSIONS:
- Workshop with AIBS staff on effective public policy for biologists
- Film showing, "Hotel Heliconia," John Kress, National Museum of Natural=20
History
POSTER SESSION:
There are no restrictions on poster topics, all aspects of biology and=20
bioethics, are eligible. To submit poster abstracts online, go to=20
www.aibs.org/meeting2003. Deadline is 3 March 2003.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 10:52:10 -0500
From: "Henshel, Diane S." <dhenshel@INDIANA.EDU>
Subject: Re: Environmentlism and Conservation
Based on the Jared Diamond piece Wirt Atmar sent yesterday, I would say
that all we need is a change of administration. Environmentalism was
not held high, but wasn't vilified in the last administration. And the
greening of business did march on, albeit somewhat slowly. However,
we're running backwards these days...
-----Original Message-----
From: Andrew Park [mailto:andrew.park@UTORONTO.CA]
Sent: Friday, January 31, 2003 8:27 AM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: Environmentlism and Conservation
For Oliver and others mystified as to why environmental concerns seem to
be taken less seriously these days.
One reason, in my opinion, lies in the squalid battles for the control
of language that are waged by opposing protagonists over nearly every
political and social issue. For example, there was a time when to be a
socialist was to be a concerned individual with an interest in the
collective future of humanity. Over time, as political power has drifted
further to the right, being a socialist has become demonized. The logic
follows the following form, socialism = communism = central control and
repression = evil. So if your debating opponent wants to discredit you,
all he has to do to discredit youis call you a "socialist". The negative
steretype follows naturally in the minds of onlookers.
By extension, environmentalists have been transformed, by appropriation
of language, from citizens (who may or may not be activists) into hairy,
tree- hugging wackos who want to take away precious freedoms to save a
few trees (or fish, or birds). It does not matter that we have The Union
of Concerned Scientists as ewll as Earth First, Conservation
International as well as GFreenPeace. The appropriation of language by
those who oppose environmental protection has tarred all environmentally
concerned citizens with the same brush.
The media have aso taken part in this general demonization of
environmentalism. Here in Canada, the Globe and Mail (our excuse for a
quality
newspaper) cannot describe environmental regulation without tagging it
with the epithet "draconian". And it is very difficult for a Globe
columnist to say "environmentalist" wihout saying "extremist".
Having said all that, I am not sure what the solution is. In Europe,
environmentalism is taken more seriously; the Green Party is a part of
the government in Germany. European nations have also ratified Kyoto,
instituted Pro-Natura, taken sweeping steps to combat acid and other
emissions, have decent public transport (except, for the moment, the
UK), and generally seem to have a more sophisticated engagement with
environmental issues than we do over here. So maybe we should look
closely at Europe and learn from their example. However, I have a
feeling that reinstituting respect for environmental issues will take a
lot of hard work over a long time......
All the Best
Andy Park Ph.D.
Post-Doctoral Researcher,
Groupe de Recherche en Ecologie Forestiere,
University of Quebec at Montreal.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 10:38:42 -0600
From: "Daniel D. Magoulick" <danmag@UARK.EDU>
Subject: Graduate research assistantships
Ph.D. and M.S. Graduate Research Assistantships
Arkansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Arkansas
Responsibilities: I seek two graduate students for related projects pending
funding. A Ph.D. student will use a bioenergetics approach to determine the
relationship between prey production and production of brown and rainbow
trout in Arkansas tailwaters and the effectiveness of gut content analysis
and stable isotope analysis in developing a bioenergetics model. A Ph.D. or
M.S. student will work on a project examining factors affecting movement and
mortality of rainbow trout in Arkansas tailwaters. Both projects will
involve substantial field work in the Ozark Mountains on the Bull Shoals and
Norfork tailwaters. In addition, the bioenergetics project will involve
experiments and observations in the lab.
Qualifications: Applicants should have a B.S. in fisheries, ecology,
biology, or a related field and; 3.0 GPA (minimum); 1100 (V+Q) or 1650
(V+Q+A) minimum GRE. Additionally, Ph.D. assistantship applicants should
have a M.S. in one of the fields noted above. Previous research experience
with fish and/or streams is preferred, but not essential. Applicants must
be responsible, motivated, and able to work independently in remote field
locations.
Salary: Stipend will be $15,000 for Ph.D. and $12,000 for M.S. plus full
tuition waiver. Excellent Ph.D. candidates will also be able to compete for
additional University of Arkansas fellowships of $10,000-$20,000.
Closing Date: March 30, 2003. August 15, 2003 starting date is negotiable.
Contact: Contact me for information or send (email preferred) 1) a letter
describing your interests and career goals, 2) your resume (including GPA
and GRE scores), 3) names and telephone numbers of three references, and 4)
transcripts to:
Dan Magoulick
Arkansas Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Arkansas
Fayetteville, AR 72701
danmag@uark.edu
http://biology.uark.edu/coop/dmagoulick.htm
479-575-5449
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:39:16 -0500
From: Michelle Lee <mlee@CONSECOL.ORG>
Subject: Conservation Ecology manuscript competition
Conservation Ecology (http://www.consecol.org) invites our 10,000+
subscribers and all other readers to participate in a manuscript
competition that exploits novel ways of performing integrative science
and policy research. Beginning in 2003, an annual 'Ralf Yorque
Memorial Prize' of 5,000 Euro will be awarded to the most novel paper
that:
1) integrates different streams of science to assess fundamental
questions in the ecological, political, and social foundations for
sustainable social-ecological systems, and
2) employs unique advantages of electronic publishing and facilities
of the WEB to help communicate complex ideas simply.
The contributions of the winner and others that pass the normal
peer-review process will be published in CE. We want to see your novel
ideas of scientific endeavors for the future. Simply indicate if the
paper submitted is intended for the Ralf Yorque Competition
For more details about the manuscript competition, please go to:
http://www.consecol.org/Journal/ads/announcements/ry2003.html or send
your questions to questions@consecol.org.
regards,
Michelle Lee
Managing Editor
Conservation Ecology
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 12:12:12 -0600
From: "Klawinski, Paul" <klawinskip@WILLIAM.JEWELL.EDU>
Subject: Setting of Lab Fees
To all,
Not to distract from the current thread on environmental conservation,
but...
My college is considering instituting lab fess in Biology and the other
sciences for the first time in their 154 year history. I have been asked to
solicit opinions from colleagues about what lab fees are being charged at
Colleges and Universities and, more importantly, why a certain fee was set
at a certain level. The first will be easy but I suspect that the second
will be more difficult.
The infomration I am really looking for is:
Current lab fee:
Rational for that amount:
Name of School:
Total Enrollment of School:
Total number of majors in the department charging the fees:
Thanks for any input you might give.
Paul
Paul Klawinski, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor
Department of Biology
William Jewell College
500 College Hill
WJC Box 1040
Liberty, MO 64068-1896
816.781.7700 ext 5568
klawinskip@william.jewell.edu
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 15:59:14 -0500
From: Adrienne Froelich <afroelich@AIBS.ORG>
Subject: Re: more on research, regulations and environmental conservation
Greetings Ecologgers -
I've followed this conversation with a lot of interest. Part of my job as
Director of Public Policy at the American Institute of Biological Sciences
is to help scientists more effectively communicate with policy-makers. As
someone else pointed out, one of the best ways for scientists to do this is
through commenting on proposed regulations. We are in the process of
modifying the AIBS website so that we can continually post Federal Register
notices of interest to biologists (i.e., local meetings of fishery
management councils, comment periods for proposed rules on wetlands
mitigation, etc.). I will be sure to post a note to ecolog when we get this
system in place.
In the meantime, the government has tried to set up a way for people to
keep track of comment periods of interest. If you go to
www.regulations.gov, you can type in a keyword of interest. For example, if
you type in "wetlands", you'll notice that there are 9 different
opportunities to comment (including several major ones regarding wetland
mitigation regulations and whether or not isolated wetlands should be
included in protection). The site is far from perfect, but it's a start.
Also, if you hear of a regulation of interest, but the deadline is about to
close, you can often ask the contact person (on the FR notice) if there
will be an extension. Sometimes they are so hungry for any comment that
they will extend the deadline (worked for me twice this past summer).
I'd also like to note that there's more to policy than environmental
policy. There's a lot of policy-making that has direct implications on the
amount and type of funding for biological research and education.
Nonmedical biology has been taking a real beating in D.C. lately because of
the perception that the NIH doubling has taken care of all of biology's
needs (which is obviously not the case). AIBS sends out a biweekly report
and action alerts on science policy issues- if you'd like to subscribe,
please let me know.
I hope this information is useful. One of our office's goals is to make it
easier for researchers to get involved in the policy process, so if you
have specific ideas on how we can do so, please let me know.
Cheers,
Adrienne Froelich
AIBS Director of Public Policy
Washington, D.C.
Phone (202)628-1500 x232
Email afroelich@aibs.org
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 16:10:25 -0500
From: Daniel Lesieur <lesieur.daniel@UQAM.CA>
Subject: Ph.D. candidate
*** Graduate Student Fellowship ***
We are currently seeking a PH.D. student in forest nutrition and
silviculture. The candidate=92s research program will investigate tree =
and
stand response to commercial thinning and fertilization in black spruce
and jack pine stands, with emphasis on mechanisms such as foliar
response, crown efficiency, biomass allocation, water and nutrient
availability.
The candidate will interact with industrial partners involved in the
project. The candidate will enrol in a PH.D. in Environmental Studies at
UQAT <http://www.uqat.ca> (Universit=E9 du Qu=E9bec en
Abitibi-T=E9miscamingue, Rouyn-Noranda). She or he will joint the
Industrial NSERC <http://www.crsng.ca> -UQAT-UQAM <http://www.uqam.
a/>
Chair in Sustainable forest management, a multidisciplinary team of
researchers and students. She or he will also have the opportunity to
spend one year with the Groupe de recherche en biologie foresti=E8re =
(CRBF
<http://crbf.rsvs.ulaval.ca> ) at Laval University (Qu=E9bec city). UQ
T
is a small regional University with strong ties to industrial and
governmental partners. It is also an active member of the Groupe de
recherche en =E9cologie foresti=E8re interuniversitaire (GREFi
<http://www.unites.uqam.ca/gref> ). French is the spoken language but
our group include graduate students from Russia, North Africa, Europe,
and USA. Minimal French abilities are required. The project is financed
by NSERC, forest Industry and the Canadian Forest Service. An annual
income of $16 500 (CDN) is provided through stipends.
For more information :
Suzanne Brais
(819) 762-0971 #2349
suzanne.brais@uqat.ca
Claude Camir=E9
Universit=E9 Laval
(418) 656 2131 #3337
claude.camire@sbf.ulaval.ca <mailto:claude.camire@sbf.ulaval.ca>=20
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 16:47:32 -0500
From: Daniel Lesieur <lesieur.daniel@UQAM.CA>
Subject: Ph.D. candidate (nutrient cycling)
Area : Forest ecology
Discipline : Nutrient cycling and forest soil biology
Description of project :
^Ő Describing nutrient cycling rates and ecophysiological properties of
soil microbial communities under various types of boreal forest
canopies, in the Abitibi region of Québec.
^Ő Exploring the relationships between nutrient cycling patterns, soil
microbial communities and aboveground productivity and diversity.
Duration of project : January 2003 ^Ö Dec. 2005
Profile of the candidate:
^Ő M.Sc. degree in a forest ecology related field
^Ő Strong academic standing
^Ő Knowledge of appropriate field and laboratory research techniques
^Ő Skilled in the statistical analyses of ecological data
^Ő A knowledge of the French language is an asset
Stipend : $15,000 (Cdn) per year
To express your interest, please contact Professor Robert Bradley or Dr.
David Paré by email: robert.bradley@courrier.usherb.ca or
dpare@exchange.cfl.forestry.ca
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 16:46:05 -0500
From: Daniel Lesieur <lesieur.daniel@UQAM.CA>
Subject: Ph.D. candidate forest productivity
We are currently solliciting candidacies for a Ph.D. project in the area
of forest resources. The successful candidate will take part in a
project on the spatial modelling of forest productivity in the
Abitibi-Témiscamingue area of the Province of Québec, and will develop
his or her project around the estimation of the drainage class from
spatial information, the inclusion of this drainage information in a
model of forest productivity operating at the site and landscape scales,
and the comparison of productivity estimates with those obtained from
currently used forest management tools.
The candidate will ideally possess basic knowledge in forest hydrology,
soil science, forest growth and modelling, or in related fields. The
candidate will be supervised in his of her project by Pierre Y. Bernier,
adjunct professor at the UQAT and researcher for the Canadian Forest
Service (CFS), Québec region, and will be co-supervised by Yves
Bergeron, professor at the UQAT. The candidate will split his of her
time between both institutions. At the SCF, the candidate will be
integrated within a research group on forest productivity: André
Beaudoin (remote sensing and GIS), Frédéric Raulier (modelling of forest
growth) and David Paré (soils).
The candidate will be eligeable to a yearly grant of 15 000$. This grant
is supported by a project of the «Initiative Régionale Stratégique en
Abitibi-Témiscamingue» funded by « Développement Économique Canada » for
the first two years of the project. Funds are available starting on
April 1 2003, but arangements can be made if an earlier starting date is
desirable.
Candidates should sent their CV to yves.bergeron@uqat.ca
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 14:34:07 -0800
From: "dg090134, dg090134" <dguttilla@STUDENT.FULLERTON.EDU>
Subject: Two positions available immediately
Please post:
SHORT NOTICE - Two positions available immediately
1) Field technician, feral cat project, Catalina Island Conservancy (Februar
-August 2003) (See attached announcement in Word format).
In addition to primary responsibilities on Catalina Island, the technician m
y be expected to assist occasionally with small-mammal research on nearby Sa
ta Barbara Island, which may include live-trapping rodents, arthropod pitfal
trapping, tissue collection, vegetation sampling, etc. Technician will be
aid an additional weekly stipend for work on SBI, which is expected to be li
ited to a total of four weeks or less spread throughout the period of employ
ent.
Transportation to and housing on (shared, dormitory-style bunkhouse or possi
ly, tent-camping) SBI will be provided; however, limited boat access will re
uire a week-long stay on SBI.
STIPEND: $1000/month plus housing
2) Field technician, Santa Barbara Island (mid-February - mid-July, 2003)
Enthusiastic, hard-working assistant needed for field study of interactions
etween deer mice and threatened Xantus' murrelets on Santa Barbara Island (S
I), a small, remote island in Channel Islands National Park (CINP), Californ
a. Time will be divided between small-mammal research and assisting NPS sea
ird biologist with monitoring of breeding biology of murrelets and other sea
irds. Field responsibilities will include rodent live-trapping and marking;
rodent tissue collection; seabird nest searches and surveys; arthropod pitfa
l trapping; vegetation sampling; collecting and analyzing owl pellets; monit
ring owls by radio-telemetry; and other field tasks as needed while on SBI.
Office responsibilities may include data entry (Excel), basic word-processin
, library research or laboratory processing of samples. Possible opportunit
for future graduate (MS) student research.
Must be able to work independently and with little or no supervision at a re
ote island location. Must be in good physical condition, as work will requi
e extended hiking and carrying heavy loads on steep, rugged terrain and poss
bly, in inclement weather. May involve night work. Previous field experien
e, especially with small mammals and/or seabirds, strongly preferred.
Boat transportation from CINP Headquarters in Ventura, California to SBI, an
dormitory-style shared housing on SBI will be provided. Because NPS boats
ravel to SBI once per week, the technician must be willing to stay on the is
and for a week at a time, on an every-other-week basis. Remaining work-days
will be spent on the mainland assisting with office or lab tasks.
STIPEND: $800-1200/month, depending on availability of funds, plus housing
n SBI
****************************************************************************
*
For more information on either position, contact:
Dr Paul Stapp, Department of Biological Science, California State University
PO Box 6850
Fullerton, CA 92834-6850. Telephone: 714 278 2849, Fax (Dept): 714 278 34
6,
Email: pstapp@fullerton.edu; Webpage: http://faculty.fullerton.edu/pstapp/
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 16:13:06 -0700
From: Robert Sanford <rsanford@DU.EDU>
Subject: Re: concept of shade tolerance - ECOLOG-L Digest - 29 Jan 2003 to 3
(revised)
Interestingly, Kimmins (1997) starts his discussion of shade tolerance (p
168) with the following sentence: "For many centuries, foresters have
classified plants as shade tolerant or light demanding (shade intolerant)."
but gives no reference. I expected to see references in Spurr and Barnes
(1973) but none are from the 1800's. They DO give a rather complete (p 302)
(but somewhat dated) definition; "This use of the term tolerance to refer to
the relative capacity of a forest plant to survive and thrive in the
understory is a restricted application of the general botanical meaning of
the term, which deals with the general capacity of a plant to live under
unfavorable conditions. Thus, a salt-tolerant plant is one that can grow in
a soil with a high salt content, a fume-tolerant plant is one that can grow
in the presence of gases noxious to most other plants. In forestry however,
the unmodified use of the term tolerance refers to a plant's vigor in the
forest understory; understory tolerance is a more precise term." They go on
to give several different criteria for assessing tolerance. Perry (1994) as
well as Waring and Running (1998) do not mention shade tolerance, while
Barbour et al. (1999) have a 3 paragraph (+ 3 figures) description of
tolerance but very little on shade tolerance (pp 33-35). I've selected these
texts because almost are all 2e or 3e, and the authors have (presumably) had
the chance to go back and add in or revise what may have been missing in the
first editions.
Spurr, SH and BVD Barnes 1973. Forest ecology, 2nd edition. Ronald Press,
New York, NY.
Perry, DS 1994. Forest ecosystems. Johns Hopkins University Press,
Baltimore, MD
Kimmins, JP. 1997. Forest Ecology, 2nd edition. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle
River, NJ.
Waring, RH and SW Running 1998. Forest Ecosystems. 2nd edition. Academic
Press, San Diego,CA.
Barbour, MG, JH Burk, WD Pitts, FS Gilliam, MW Schwartz 1999. Terrestrial
Plant Ecology, 3rd edition.
Robert L. Sanford Jr., Professor
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FAX 303 871-3471 Phone 303 871-3534
E-MAIL rsanford@du.edu
http://www.du.edu/biology/sanford.html
Robert L. Sanford Jr., Professor
Department of Biological Sciences
University of Denver, Denver, CO 80208
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
FAX 303 871-3471 Phone 303 871-3534
E-MAIL rsanford@du.edu
http://www.du.edu/biology/sanford.html
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jan 2003 19:13:56 -0800
From: David Bryant <dmb@IO.HARVARD.EDU>
Subject: Tree growth phenology
Does anyone know when quercus and acer spp. stop radial stem growth
relative to retranslocation?
Where would I go to find out?
Thanks
David
David M. Bryant
Dept of Earth and Planetary Sciences
Harvard University
20 Oxford St.
Cambridge, MA 02138
dmb@io.harvard.edu
617-496-6246
------------------------------
End of ECOLOG-L Digest - 30 Jan 2003 to 31 Jan 2003 (#2003-31)
**************************************************************
˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙˙
Thanks to discussion with TVR, I have decided to put a link to back files of the discussion group. This months back files.
The link to complete archives is available elsewhere.
This text was originally an e-mail. It was converted using a program
RUPANTAR- a simple e-mail-to-html converter.
(c)Kolatkar Milind. kmilind@ces.iisc.ernet.in