cfrnl.html

CFR Quarterly, College of Forest Resources, University of Washington
Volume 2, No. 1, Fall 1998

Faculty

•	Anne Kearney
•	Faculty News
•	Faculty Reports

Staff

•	Kelley Duffield
•	Staff News
•	Staff Reports

Students

•	Richard Robohm
•	Student News
•	Student Reports
•	Scholarship Profiles: James Ridgeway Endowed Scholarship

Centers

•	CINTRAFOR
•	CSS
•	CUH
•	ONRC
•	SMC

Alumni Notes
Committees
Events
Libraries
Pack Forest
Outreach
Other News
Past Issues

Sneak Previews

Claus Family Portraits!

Treed Students!

Dean's Notes

Dear Colleagues,

As Autumn Quarter draws to a close, a number of exciting new possibilities for the College are under development. I'm pleased to report that:

• The College forwarded three strong UIF proposals to the Provost for consideration (the Urban Ecology Initiative; the Sustainable Resource Sciences Initiative; and the Ecological Gardens Initiative). The College also is a supporter of a number of initiatives originating in other schools and colleges.

• The Urban Ecology Initiative is finalist for NSF Integrated Graduate Education Research and Training (IGERT) funding.

• The Private Forests Forum held its first meeting on November 13, 1998, at which it formed a steering committee and developed a statement of purpose.

• A College of Forest Resources Technology Initiative on "precision wood processing and resource management" is under consideration by the UW for submission to the legislature under the Advanced Technology Initiative.

I'd also like to report on the College of Forest Resources Visiting Committee meeting held on October 23, 1998. A good turnout of Committee members with additional participants from center and curricular advisory committees brainstormed broad issues concerning challenges and future opportunities for forest and natural resources institutions. George Brown, Dean of the College of Forestry at OSU, also attended the meeting and provided a regional perspective and a benchmarking opportunity. The meeting concluded with a discussion of a new structure for the Visiting Committee. There was a consensus that restructuring into small working groups, each focusing on a specific task related to the College's strategic goals, would be a useful and productive experiment. Development, communications and public relations, and outreach were proposed as tasks for initial working groups.

The broad themes discussed by the committee provided important insight into the issues to be tackled by these working groups. They also provide an ongoing "reality check" for the strategic directions of the College and its current goals and objectives. Points raised and discussed included:

Projections for the future:

continuing urban growth
major urban universities must be centers of expertise in rural-urban interface issues
landscape-scale decision making will become increasingly important
challenge of how to deal with forestlands in a multi-ownership context
changing nature of jobs in natural resource fields, stressing "whole-system" approach
increasing need for successful consensus building to solve problems
increasing need for balanced environmental education that begins at an early age.

Public's perception of forestry:

in some sectors quite negative, although improvement since "wake-up call" in about 1990 resulted in significant changes in "action on the ground"
often a disconnect between competing values
lack of clear and focused consensus on priorities for forest and natural resource use
perceptions are constrained by lack of balanced point of view
perhaps a coordinated, national media campaign could improve forestry's public image.

Role of academia in public policy:

stakeholders should look to universities as a credible, unbiased source
research results should be translated into policy contexts
proactive or reactive role in providing information to policyholders: which is appropriate?
no reason to assume that scientific facts will or even always should "win" in policy decisions; decision-making process includes many other factors
should be more interdisciplinary cooperation in natural resources issues to provide a credible and integrated resource to policymakers

Elements constituting top forestry schools today:

ability to attract and retain top quality students and faculty
relevant curriculum
recognition of global context
effective strategic planning
strong faculty buy-in
emphasis on social and communication skills, as well as technical skills
strong relationship with external stakeholders
adequate funding and facilities
strong research program

Elements constituting top forestry school ten years from now:

ability to effectively facilitate research implementation, i.e., technology transfer
increased integration in knowledge and skills relating to natural resource management
better consensus on forestry issues
lifelong learning opportunities
student diversity
increased endowment funding.

What needs to be "fixed":

public's negative perception of forestry
inadequate research focus on today's questions and problems
research results need to be more quickly available
inadequate outreach
not enough collaboration between academic units and institutions
not enough alumni involvement
inadequate assessment of educational outcomes
need to increase sense of commitment and responsibility to the College by current students and recent graduates
the College and "forestry" need better sense of identity
increased interaction between faculty and students

I think you will agree from these discussions by meeting participants that strategic thinking and our work of the past three years remains ever more vital to the health of the College and to the profession.

I hope you had a joyful holiday season and my best wishes for a Happy New Year!

David B. Thorud

Photo Credits this issue: Carl Harrington, Bob Beer, Cecelia Paul, Al Wagar.

The CFR Quarterly is published four times annually, at the close of Autumn, Winter, Spring, and Summer Quarters.

Please send comments or submit news items to Cecilia Paul: cece@u.washington.edu; 3-3075; 107E Anderson, Box 352100.