[Pollinator] Fwd: FW: Decline of Botany programs

Wed Nov 13 11:06:33 PST 2013

Dear Laurie:

A colleague sent me the same link the other day.  It's very good to see the
research of Dr. Skogen receive public attention.  As for the remainder of
the article, it was badly researched and written.  At worst, it is
deceptive.

If the pool of research botanists is dropping why do administrative members
at the Botanical Society of America insist to me that their membership has
never been higher (and that includes subscription to the American Journal
of Botany)?  If we aren't training enough new botanists why is audience at
the annual symposium at the Missouri Botanical Garden about half graduate
students over the past five to ten years?

People have been predicting the death of research Botany since the mid-70's
due to the closing of botany departments at universities.  In reality, what
we now see are more and more scientists who work on plants exclusively but
don't call themselves botanists.  They call themselves ecologists,
evolutionary biologists, pathologists, cell biologists, etc.  What about
all those people working entirely on genetic expression of physical and
chemical characters of little old Arabidopsis thaliana?  They don't call
themselves botanists either but does that mean they are ashamed or "trying
to "pass for white?"   No, what they have in common is that they are all
members of Biology departments that do not stress specialization on
Kingdoms anymore.  The emphasis is now on protocols to study natural
processes.  At the last symposium at the garden we were immersed in the
bioinformatics of the ecology and phylogeny of plants (no animals allowed
this year) and it was intimidating.  None of the speakers referred to
themselves as botanists either.

There is definitely a problem offering certain types of plant courses in
Biology departments these days,  Many institutions won't teach good old
plant taxonomy anymore (even with a strong collection of ecology
professors).  We are educating a new generation of scientists who, as the
article suggests, have to learn to identify plants by themselves and on the
go but I'll bet that graduate students working on fungi, insects, mollusks,
fish etc. may have the same gaps in their own undergraduate backgrounds.
 It is a shock to learn that most undergraduates in my department still
don't know the technical names of physical structures used to identify
plants, animals and fungi and won't ever learn how to use a dichotomous
key, or learn the rudiments of binomial nomenclature, unless they take my
course in Ethnobotany or a colleague's course in ichthyology (which he
calls The Biology of Fishes).  That's another thing.  We seem embarrassed
by the vocabulary of our own specialties.  Why?

Solutions offered in this article have been in operation for decades, you
know.  Institutions like The Missouri Botanical Garden and New York
Botanical Garden have been taking in graduate students for most of the last
century and they always do so in association with local universities they
regard as sister institutions.  It's fresh and new at the Chicago Botanic
Garden but only because the Chicago Garden is one of the youngest botanical
gardens in America.

Yes, training new botanists could use a financial and intellectual boost in
the arm but training students in almost any discipline emphasizing the
classification of almost every multicellular organism needs a boost in the
arm.  Imposing disaster scenarios on any branch of science to pick up more
state or federal money for education seems unethical to me.

Peter "still a botanist: Bernhardt

On Tue, Nov 12, 2013 at 2:07 PM, <Ladadams at aol.com> wrote:

>
>
>  ------------------------------
> From: lstritch at fs.fed.us
> To: pdl_wo_nfs_rge_bot_reg at ms.fs.fed.us, csrichmond at fs.fed.us,
> bschrader at fs.fed.us, rgiffen at fs.fed.us
> CC: fharty at tnc.org, Jody.Shimp at Illinois.gov, okwong at blm.gov,
> lda at pollinator.org, krupnick at si.edu
> Sent: 11/12/2013 11:40:06 A.M. Pacific Standard Time
> Subj: FW: Decline of Botany programs
>
>
> Please share this widely through your internal and external networks.
>
>
>
> Thank you
>
>
>
> Larry
>
>
>
> Lawrenc e R. Stritch Ph.D.
>
> National Botanist
>
> U.S. Forest Service
>
> 146 Edward Drive
>
> Martinsburg, WV 25404
>
>
>
> 304-274-6947
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Prendusi, Teresa -FS
> *Sent:* Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:42 PM
> *To:* Richmond, Charles S -FS; Cleveland, Alix -FS; Ikeda, Diane -FS;
> Popovich, Steve J -FS; Rankin, Duke -FS; Schultz, Jan -FS; Shelly, Steve
> -FS; Skinner, Mark -FS; Stensvold, Mary -FS; Stritch, Larry -FS; Prendusi,
> Teresa -FS
> *Cc:* Olwell, Peggy (polwell at blm.gov); De Angelis, Patricia (
> patricia_deangelis at fws.gov)
> *Subject:* Decline of Botany programs
>
>
>
> *Fyi – *in today’s US News and World Report --
>
> *The Academic Decline: How to Train the Next Generation of Botanists*
>
>
> http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/11/12/the-academic-decline-how-to-train-the-next-generation-of-botanists
>
>
>
>
>
> Teresa Prendusi, Regional Botanist
>
> U.S. Forest Service, Intermountain Region
>
> 324 25th St., Ogden UT  84401
>
> Ph. (801) 625-5522
>
> Fax (801) 625-5483
>
> Email:  tprendusi at fs.fed.us
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> This electronic message contains information generated by the USDA solely
> for the intended recipients. Any unauthorized interception of this message
> or the use or disclosure of the information it contains may violate the law
> and subject the violator to civil or criminal penalties. If you believe you
> have received this message in error, please notify the sender and delete
> the email immediately.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pollinator mailing list
> Pollinator at lists.sonic.net
> http://lists.sonic.net/mailman/listinfo/pollinator
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sonic.net/pipermail/pollinator/attachments/20131113/2f1d901b/attachment.html>