Education in Natural Resources, Proceedings Andrelated Papers from a Seminar Series at Coloradostate University 1963 -64

,IPM.,*

R E P O R T R E S U M E S

ED 020 135 SE 004 629 EDUCATION IN NATURAL RESOURCES, PROCEEDINGS ANDRELATED PAPERS FROM A SEMINAR SERIES AT COLORADOSTATE UNIVERSITY 1963 -64. BY- FOSS, PHILLIP O. COLORADO STATE UNIV., FT. COLLINS PUB DATE 64 EDRS PRICEMF-$0.50 HC-$4.06 100P.

DESCRIPTORS- *CURRICULUM, *CONSERVATIONEDUCATION, *EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS, *HIGHER EDUCATION,' NATURAL RESOURCES, CONFERENCE REPORTS, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,GRADUATE STUDY, SCIENCES, SOCIAL SCIENCES, STATE FEDERALSUPPORT, UNDERGRADUATE STUDY,

REPORTED ARE THE SEMINAR PAPERS ANDPROCEEDINGS OF A. CONFERENCE WHICH INVESTIGATED THE FIELDOF NATURAL RESOURCES AND MADE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE COURSE ANDDIRECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES STUDY AT THE COLLEGEOR UNIVERSITY LEVEL. THE CONFERENCE AND SEMINARS HELD ATCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY DURING 1963-64 GAVE PARTICIPATING FACULTYMEMBERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DRAW UPON THE IDEAS ANDEXFER:ENCE OF KNOWLEDGEABLE PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE STUDYAND PRACTICE OF RESOURCES MANAGEMENT. PART 1 IS A COMPENDIUMOF A CONFERENCE, "TRAINING IN NATURAL RESOURCES FORGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL," ATTENDED BY REPRESENTATIVES FROM THEVARIOUS UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS AND FROM STATE ,ND FEDERALAGENCIES. PARTS 2-5 RELATE THE TEXTS OF SEMINAR PAPERS,PRESENTED BY RECOGNIZED AUTHORITIES WHO DISCUSSED PROVISIONS FOR 41(ob. DEVELOPING TRAINED, PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL IN THE NUMEROUS FIELDSOF NATURAL RESOURCES. UNANIMITY WAS NOT PRESENT FORALL ISSUES. HOWEVER, IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT (1) AN UNDERGRADUATECURRICULUM IN NATURAL RESOURCES IS DEFENSIBLE ANDMAY BE DESIRABLE AS A "GENERAL EDUCATION" OR "LIBERAL ARTS" TYPEPROGRAM,(2) MOST PRESENT UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS ARE INADEQUATEIN PROVIDING NECESSARY TRAINING FOR RESOURCE MANAGERS,(3) A SPLIT-MAJOR MIGHT BE. AN ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMPOSED IN ITEM 2,(4) THERE IS A NEED FOR REVISION OF THE GRADUATEPROGRAM (SUGGESTED REVISIONS ARE INCLUDED),(5) INCREASED EXCHANGES OF PERSONNEL BETWEEN RESOURCE ORGANIZATIONS AND THE UNIVERSITYWOULD BE DESIRABLE, AND (6) THERE SHOULD BE BETTERCOORDINATION OF RESEARCH BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITIES ANDCOOPERATING AGENCIES. (DS) REPOR TR ESUMES

ED 020 135 SE D04 629 EDUCATION IN NATURAL RESOURCES, PROCEEDINGSAND RELATED PAPERS FROM A SEMINAR SERIES ATCOLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY 1963-64. BY- FOSS, PHILLIP 0. COLORADO STATE UNIV., FT. COLLINS PUB DATE 64 EDRS PRICE MF -$D.50 HC -$4.D8 100P.

DESCRIPTORS- *CURRICULUM, *CONSERVATIONEDUCATION, *EDUCATIONAL PROGRAMS, *HIGHEREDUCATION, *NATURAL RESOURCES, CONFERENCE REPORTS, FEDERAL GOVERNMENT,GRADUATE STUDY, SCIENCES, SOCIAL SCIENCES, STATE FEDERALSUPPORT, UNDERGRADUATE STUDY,

REPORTED ARE THE SEMINAR PAPERS ANDPROCEEDINGS OF A CONFERENCE WHICH INVESTIGATED THE FIELDOF NATURAL RESOURCES AND MADE RECOMMENDATIONS ON THE COURSEAND DIRECTION OF NATURAL RESOURCES STUDY AT THECOLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY LEVEL. THE CONFERENCE AND SEMINARS HELDAT COLORADO STATE UNIVERSITY DURING 1963-64 GAVE PARTICIPATINGFACULTY MEMBERS AN OPPORTUNITY TO DRAW UPON THE IDEASAND EXPER:ENCE OF KNOWLEDGEABLE PERSONS ENGAGED IN THE STUDYAND PRACTICE OF RESOURCES MANAGEMENT. FART I ISA COMPENDIUM OF A CONFERENCE, "TRAINING IN NATURAL RESOURCES FORGOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL," ATTENDED BY REPRESENTATIVES FROM THEVARIOUS UNIVERSITY DEPARTMENTS AND FROM STATE AND FEDERALAGENCIES. PARTS 2-5 RELATE THE TEXTS OF SEMINAR PAPERS,PRESENTED BY RECOGNIZED AUTHORITIES WHO DISCUSSED PROVISIONS FORDEVELOPING TRAINED, PROFESSIONAL PERSONNEL IN THE NUMEROUSFIELDS OF NATURAL RESOURCES. UNANIMITY WAS NOT PRESENT FORALL ISSUES. HOWEVER, IT WAS CONCLUDED THAT (I) AN UNDERGRADUATECURRICULUM IN NATURAL RESOURCES IS DEFENSIBLEAND MAY BE DESIRABLE AS A "GENERAL EDUCATION" OR "LIBERAL ARTS"TYPE PROGRAM, (2) MOST PRESENT UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS AREINADEQUATE IN PROVIDING NECESSARY TRAINING FOR RESOURCEMANAGERS, (3)A SPLIT-MAJOR MIGHT JEAN ANSWER TO THE PROBLEMPOSED IN ITEM 2,(4) THERE IS A NEED FOR REVISION OF THE GRADUATEPROGRAM (SUGGESTED REVISIONS ARE INCLUDED), (5)INCREASED EXCHANGES OF PERSONNEL BETWEEN RESOURCE ORGANIZATIONS AND THEUNIVERSITY WOULD BE DESIRABLE, AND (6) THERE SHOULD BE BETTERCOORDINATION OF RESEARCH BETWEEN THE UNIVERSITIES ANDCOOPERATING AGENCIES. (CS) MAY- 3 1968

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, EDUCATION& WELFARE OFFICE OF EDUCATION

THIS DOCUMENT HAS BEEN REPRODUCED EXACTLY AS RECEIVED FROMTHE PERSON OR ORGANIZATIONORIGINATING IT. POINTS OF VIEW OROPINIONS STATED DO NOT NECESSARILY REPRESENT OFFICIAL OFFICEOF EDUCATION POSITION OR POLICY.

EDUCATION IN NATURAL RESOURCES

Proceedings & Related Papers from A Seminar Series at Colorado State 'University 1963-64

Edited by Phillip 0. Foss

O O EDUCATION IN NATURALRESOURCES

Proceedings & RelatedPapers from

A Seminar Series

Colorado State University

1963-64

Library of Congress CatalogCard Number 64-64914

Sponsored by

Committee on Educationin Natural Resources

Natural ResourcesCenter Colorado State University

and

The ConservationFoundation

Edited by

Phillip 0. Foss 2

4 Committee on Education

Natural Resources 1963-64

Colorado State University

Norman A. Evans Head, Department of AgriculturalEngineering

Rufus B. Hughes Chairman, Department ofEconomics

Clinton Wasser Dean, College of Forestry andRange Management

Robert Whitney Head, Department of Agronomy

Phillip 0. Foss Professor of Political Science,Chairman

A 3

Table of Contents

Introduction000000 OOOOO 000000000000OOOOOOOOOO4 Mlf Seminar I Proceedings of Seminaron Training in Natural Resourcesfor Government Personnel000 OOOOOO 00000000OOOOOOOOOOOOOO 000 6 Seminar II Education in NaturalResources Stephen H. Spurr OOOOO 000000000000*OOOOOO18 Seminar III Education in NaturalResources Sol D. Resnick. 00 OOOOOOOOO0000000000000000 28 Seminar IV University Programsin the Field of Natural Resources Irving K. Fox.000000000 OOOOO000000000010000 36 Seminar V Natural ResourcesPrograms in the University Curriculum Norman Wengert 57 Concluding Statement ...... OOOOO000004100 95 4

INTRODUCTION

In the Fall of 1962a Task Committee in Natural Resources was appointed by thePresident of Colorado State University to generallyinvestigate the field of natural resources and to makerecommendationson the course and direction of naturalresources studies in the university.

The Task Committee recommended theestablishment of a Natural Resources Centerto coordinate research and educationprograms with aresources content. This recommendationwas adopted and the

basic organizationalstructure hasnow been established.

Partiallyas a result of theinterest generated by the Task Committee, a separateCommitteeon Educa- tion in Natural Resources was formedto study the subject "Natural Resources: What toteach and how to teach it."

Since a substantial proportion ofgraduates in the various resources specialtiesare employed by government, the Committeefirst solicitedthe advice of the various Federaland State ofColorado resource agencies inthe form ofan all-day conference held on August 8, 1963. Proceedings of that Conference and a roster of participantsare included in this report.

The Committeenext arrangeda series of faculty 5 seminars on thesame subject (NaturalResources: What to teach and howto teach it.) with each seminar

session chaired byc recognized authorityin some field of natural resources. The paperspresented during this seminarseries comprisethe major portion of the report. Seminar chairmenwere supplied with copies of previous papers in an effort to obtaina cumulative effect.

The principalpurpose of the Conferenceand the seminar serieswas to provide thefaculty of Colorado

State Universitywith an opportunityto draw upon the ideas and experience of knowledgeablepersons engaged in the study and practice ofresources management. However, the Committee believes that thethinking of the participantsin this endeavormay be of value to both resource managers and educators andhas consequ- ently compiled and made availablethe proceedings and

related paperscontained in thisreport.

The seminar serieswas supported in part bya

grant from theConservation Foundationof New York City. Views expressedin this reportare those of the

speakers and do notnecessarily reflectthe opinions of the Conservation Foundation or ofColorado State University.

June 1964Phillip 0. Foss Professor of Political Science ColoradO State University 6

SEMINAR ONE

SUMMARY OF PROCEEDINGS SEMINAR ON TRAINING IN NATURAL RESOURCESFOR GOVERNMENTAL PERSONNEL

Colorado StateUniversity August 8, 1963

Participants

A roster ofparticipants followsthis report. Representatives were present from: Councilof Economic Advisers, Office of the ChiefExecutive; 'orestService, USDA; Bureau ofLand Management,USDI; Public Health

Service, HEW; Bureauof Sport Fisheriesand Wildlife,

USDI; Bureau ofOutdoor Recreation,USDI; Economic Research Service, USDA; Soil ConservationService, USDA; Bureau of Reclamation, USDI; Corps ofEngineers, Dept. of the Army; Colorado WaterConservation Board;Colorado Department of Game,Fish and Parks;and Colorado State University.

Guidelines for.Discussion

Since participationin the seminarwas restricted to government agency representativesand faculty, the disuassion was oriented towardsthe training needsof personnel in governmentresource managing agencies. Prior to the seminar,agency representativeswere given the list of questions whichfollows as a guidefor discussion. SOME MATTERSWHICH SHOULD RECEIVETHE ATTENTION OF THESEMINAR ON TRAINING IN NATURALRESOURCES FOR GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL

Note: We hope agency representatives willbe prepared to commenton these items.

1. Are training programs, conducted byuniversities, for governmentpersonnel of highpotential, necessary or desirable?

2. If so, whatkind of trainingshould be offered? a. Training to advancethe student in hisspecial- ization,eg. a soil scientistmight undertake graduate work inthe same field.

b. Broadeningor "gap-filling,"eg. a budget officer in theBureau of LandManagement might benefit most fromwork in RangeManagement, Technical Writingor Politics.

c. Training in Managementor Public Administration. The personwhose training andexperience has been specializedin a technicalfield is not likely to possess the skills andunderstandings needed inan administrative position.

d. All three ofthe above. 3. Should trainingbe carried out inregular established university courses?

a. At the graduatelevel?

b. At theundergraduate level?

0. Is formalcourse creditnecessary or desirable? d. Should trainingbe aimed towardsa degree? e. Does the quarter system (approximately12 weeks) fit intothis type ofprogram? 4. Would a "core curriculum" plusenrollment in regular courses be preferableto item 3 above? (Core curriculum wouldbe composed oftwo or three courses open only toin-service trainingpersonnel) 8

a. What should bethe content ofsuch a core curriculum?

b. How should itbe taught?

S. Should an entirelynew curriculum be devised especially forpersonnel the resource Note: the cost agencies? of sucha program would becon- siderably higherthan that suggested 3 and 4 above. under items

a, What should bethe content,orientation,or approach in sucha curriculum?

b. Most desirabletiming and lengthof course? c. For universitycourse credit?

d. Leading to,or culminating ina degree? 6. Would anew major and anew graduate degree in Natural Resourcesbe desirable?

a. What should bethe content ofsuch a major? b. Would graduatesbe employable bythe resource agencies ata level equal to holdersof more specialized traditionaldegrees?

c. Would graduateshave equalor better promotional opportunitiesin the agency%

7. What is thevalue of shortcourses or institutes? a. What time ofyear is best?

b. What kinds ofsubject-matterare best suited to the shortcourse?

c. What kinds ofteaching approachesseem most effective for theshort course? 8. From theviewpoint ofyour agency what kinds of research do you consider to havehighest priority? 9. What kinds ofuniversity not restricted programs, including but to the above,would youragency be most likelyto support interms of sponsoring students forin-service training?

Proceedings The morning session was devotedmainly topresen- 9

tations by Colorado StateUniversity personnel. Vice

President A. R. Chamberlaindiscussed the present and

anticipated role of CSU in theColorado System of state

supported higher education and itsadvantages for

education in naturalresources.

Dean Clinton Wasser outlined existingprograms in the departments of ForestManagement and Utilization,

Forest Recreation and WildlifeConservation, Range

Management and in the WatershedManagement unit and

commented on possibilities foradditional graduate work in these areas.

Professor D. B. Simons describedthe work of the

engineering departmentson campus including present and

planned research activities andthe additional research

opportunities made possible by thecompletion of the new Engineering Research Center.

Professor Donal D. Johnson outlined thecontri-

butions and possibilities ofthe agricultural sciences,

including Soil Science andGenetics, for natural resources study and research possibilities.

Professor Don Seastone emphasized theneed for,

and possibilities of, increasedparticipation of

Business Administration and theSocial Sciences in natural resources training.

Professor Phillip 0. Foss suggestedsome alter-

native kinds of inservice trainingfor natural resource managers and developed a series of questions for 10

commentary from representatives of thevarious government agenciespresent at theseminar. Undergraduate Training

The seminarwas intended to focuson the training needs of matureresource managers orresource staff personnel with high growthpotential. :However,

several participantsstressed the needfor improvement in undergraduatetraining. Deficiencies in verbal

skills and inthe social scienceswere most frequently mentioned. The need fora broader base of "basic

scientific courses"also receivedconsiderable attention. In the words ofone participant "ifyou will educate them,we will train them." The basic problem in undergraduate trainingappears to be mainlya problem of time i.e., howcan professional standardsbe attained plus the neededadditional trainingin basic sciences, verbal skills and thesocial sciences inthe time available? In the words ofan old folk song,we are "fighting thebattle of time."

Necessity forAdditional Training

There was generalagreement thata real need existed for training to upgrade presentor potential

resource managers andstaff personnel ofhigh capa- bility. According toone seminar member, "Weare eight to ten years late in initiatingsuch a program."

Participants alsogenerally agreed thatthe sooner the individual of high potentialis recognizedand given additional trainingthe greater willbe his contribution to theagency.

Advanced Trainin'in OriginalSpecialty

There was generalagreement that additional

training to advancethe student in hisfield of orig-

inal specializationis desirablemainly for research personnel and technicians. In the later instance, short, specialized courses to up-date thetechnician may be most desirable. For the researchscientist,

formal specializededucation to the Ph.D., and beyond, is becomingmore common.

Broadening and GaFilling Education

There appeared tobe unanimousagreement that the greatesteducational needwas of a broadening and "gap- filling" nature. The need for trainingin verbal skills, basic sciencesand social scienceswas again emphasized.

Several memberswarned, however, thatsuch training should havethe effect of "addingto" rather than

"diluting" thestudent's field ofspecialized knowledge. It appeared thathe governmentagencies represented desired most theindividual whowas trained in depth in a particular specialtyplus additionalbroad training in both the artsand sciences. Public Administration

One discussantemphasized the needfor the kind of person who couldsupervise personneltrained in 12

several differenttechnologies without "abdicating"to any of them because oflack of knowledge.

There was generalagreement that administrators and potential administrators couldbenefit greatly from

courses in PublicAdministration. It was pointed out that the technician turned administratorhas had no training or experience inadministration and thatthe effective administratorpossesses a "battery" of skills and understandings which the techniciancannot acquire

except throughchance observationof administrators. Courses andCurriculum

Most members ofthe seminar believedthat train-

ing might bestbe carried forwardthrough existing university courses with some possibleadditions in the field of conservation principlesand ecology. One member pointedout, however, thata new curriculum would probalby grow out of the effortto develop high- levelresource managers andstaff personnel. The. Core CourseConcept

With oneor two exceptions, theconcept of the core courses(s) received generalacceptance. Such a course(s) would presumablybe restricted toagency personnel. Several memberswarned, however, thatthe core course(s) must not becomea "social hour," desirable as that might be, butthat it must bea

"rough," "hard,""challenging"experience. There was some disagreementas to whether acore ±77.,.....

course(s) should begiven for formal academic credit.

The restricted membershipof the course and varying

content might present problemsin awarding credit.

It was suggested thata considerable portion of the core course(s) bedevoted to the consideration of

real, currentresources problems. It was further

suggested that membershipbe held down toa number that would be conducive toa seminar approach.

Formal Academic Creditand Graduate Degrees

A majority of the confreresbelieved that formal academic credit shouldbe granted for work completed

and that working towarda graduate degree was generally

desirable. However, course credit forshort, special-

ized courseswas not considered to benecessary. The Quarter System

The quarter arrangementseemed to be most satis-

factory especially fortraining programs of short duration.

A New Major in NaturalResources?

A proposal to establisha new curriculum and a new degree in naturalresources met with a mixed

response. Some agency representativessaid they would be glad to employa graduate of such a program and

that his promotionalprospects in theagency would be

as good, or better, than those ofpersons trained along more specialized lines.

Other agency representativesexpressed doubts as to both the employability andpromotability of sucha person.

However, thereseemed to bealmost unanimous agreement that a person possessingone of the conventional, specialized undergraduatedegrees plusa graduate degree in naturalresources wouldpossess a most desirableeducational background. Short Coursesand Institutes Short courses or "institutes"were considered to benecessary and desirable mainly forintroducing new techniques or equipment andfor generallyupdating personnel in their field of work. There wassome disagreementas to whether or not such shortcourses should beconducted bya university. Recurrent Themes

The recurrent theme of theday's discussionwas the need for "broadening"and greaterunderstanding of

interrelationships. Participants stressedthe need for "de-specialization," for appreciationand understanding of the problems of otheragencies and jurisdictions, and the need forpositive andinnovative problem solutions. "We needpeople whocan utilize technology in the socialmilieu in whichthey must function" seemed to summarisethe viewpoint ofmany confreres. "Getting thejob done inan arena of many sharply contending factions" mightbe anotherexpression of the desires of some seminarparticipants. 15

A second matter thatwas mentioned several times

was the need forcross-fertilization notonly among government agenciesbut also betweenagencies and universities. It was noted thatuniversity faculty frequently work ingovernment but thatthe reverse seldom happens. The kind of trainingconsidered by the seminar wouldprovide one channelfor a kind of

"delayed feedback"from agency personnelback to the university. 16

ROSTER SEMINAR ON TRAINING IN NATURAL RESOURCES FOR GOVERNMENT PERSONNEL August 8, 1963

Colorado State University amp

Byron Beattie Director, Division ofWatershed Management, Forest Service, USDA.

Calvin M. Bowen Chief, Employmentand Training, Bureau ofLand Management, USDI. M. F. Brewer Council of EconomicAdvisers, Office of theChief Executive, Washington,D. C. A. R. Chamberlain Vice President,Colorado State University Leonard B. Dworsky Assistant to the Chief,Division of Water Supply& Pollution Control,Public Health Service,HEW. Phillip 0. Foss Associate Professor,Political Science, CSU. John L. George Research StaffAssistant, Bureau of SportFisheries & Wildlife, Fishand Wildlife Service,USDI. D. M. Itch Rocky Mountain Forest& Range ExperimentStation, Forest Service,USDA. Donal D. Johnson Professor of Agronomy,CSU. Keith Kelso Division of PersonnelManagement, Forest Service, USDA.

Kenneth Nobe Bureau of OutdoorRecreation, USDI. George A. Pavelis Economic ResearchService, USDA. L. R. Reed Soil ConservationService, USDA.

rio... 17

Laurence E. Riordan Assistant Director, ColoradoDepartment of Game, Fish, and Parks. Don Seastone Professor of Economics andActing Head,Department of Economics and Sociology,CSU. D. B. Simons Professor of Civil Engineering,CSU. Felix L. Sparks Director, Colorado WaterConservation Board. Charles Terwilliger Professor of Range Management,CSU. J. V. K. Wager Professor and Head, Departmentof Forest Recreation & Wildlife Conservation.

Clinton H. Wasser Dean, College ofForestry and RangeManagement. Ira A. Watson Chief, EconomicsBranch, Bureau of Reclamation, USDI.

Eugene W. Weber Deputy Director ofCivil Works for Policy,Corps of Engineers, U.S. Department of theArmy. 18

SEMINAR TWO

EDUCATION IN NATURALRESOURCES Stephen H. Spurr Dean and Professor, School of NaturalResources The University ofMichigan Presented at Colorado State University February 6, 1964

Before discussing thegeneral topic of Education

in Natural Resources,it is necessary todefine the phrase "natural resources"because it is a phrase that

has meanings andinterpretations at variouslevels of integration.

In the broadestsense, natural resources refers to all of the humanaspects of the human environment

that relate to man'swelfare and happiness. In this sense, we may think ofhuman ecology in the broadest

possible terms andcan concern ourselves with the

human ecosystem inwhich mankind is interrelatedwith

all of the factorsof his environment,whether atmos-

pheric, terrestrial,or biotic. In the study of this

human ecosystem,our natural resources havean important bearing upon the history,development, and welfare of

human communities. This is a valid definitionof natural resources; but we should notethat at this level of

integration, naturalresources deals with a greatpor- tion of humanknowledge, and education innatural 19

resources becomes almostsynonymous with education in general.

At a somewhat lessinclusive level ofintegration, we thinkof naturalresources as the specific products of the earth needed forhumans, industry, and even life. Here weconcern ourselves withwater, air,

minerals, agriculturalproducts and the soilupon which they are grown, forests, andthe land formsupon which we live. At this level ofintegration,we are dealing witha subject matter roughlyakin to that

covered by theconventional departmentof geography in a university. A program ofeducation in natural

resources at this levelwould be akin toa major in geography in a literary or liberalarts college. The very fact that we would be consideringan educational program in natural resources might be takento imply a criticism of the existing programin geographyon the basis thatit is too descriptiveand not sufficiently philosophical or scientific; but doesnot imply thatwe are necessarily doing,somethingnew or original in the establishment ofa natural resourcescurriculum.

At the thirdlevel of integrationof the natural resources concept, we are reduced to theconsideration of relativelyfew naturalresources which seem capable of being managedor regulated soas to specifically affect human wealth and welfare. Here we talk ofthe "renewable" natural resources and of "conserving"those 20

natural resources in danger ofdepletionor otherwise in shortsupply. At this level,naturalresources becomes somethingof a synonym for conservation,a synonym that is being proposed andadopted becausethe new term isa better one than the oldone. Conserva- tion simplymeans the act of saving orpreserving, and this impliesto our modern intellectualsociety a "lock the door" or "put a fencearound it"sort of policy that isinconsistent with management underscientific, economic, and ecologicalprinciples. We may redefine conservation as "wise use",but ourdefinition will not be understood or accepted bya large share ofour listening public. In thissense, naturalresources is simplya new and better term thanconservation; but yet a termthat requires an understandingboth on the part of thespeaker and the listwer as to thespecif- ic definition and meaningimplied. I take it that it is withthis third andmore strictly limited level ofintegration thatwe are concerned today. Before exploringit further,howe-er, we should realize that incommon practice,we normally restrict the term of naturalresources even=re. NaLiural resources is, inmany uses, nota synonym for conservation but a synonym for certainaspects ofcon- servation. The School ofNatural Resourcesat The University of Michigan isconcerned formallyonly with forestry, wildlife management, fisheries,natural 21

resource planning and administration,and outdoor

recreation, although thefaculty is expandingits

interest into closely relatedfields. Similarly, it

is currently proposedto rename the MichiganConserva-

tion Department, theMichigan Department ofNatural

Resources along thelines pioneered inCalifornia and

several other states. In contrast, the NaturalRe-

sources Institute at OhioState University is but

little concernedwith forestry andagriculture.

Finally, it has beenseriously proposed thatland-

grant collegesrename their shcools of agricultureas

schools of naturalresources. Certainly, agriculture

and agriculturalproducts constitute perhapsour

single most importantnatural resource,one in which

human civilizationis indeed primarilybased. Thus, the field ofnatural resourcesas viewed by one per-

son or organizationmay be quite different from that thought of byothers.

It follows fromconsideration of these levelsof

integration of thenational concept of naturalresources, that there are an infinite number ofeducational pro-

grams possible that couldcarry the name. I suggest we

consider very brieflythe possibility ofprograms in

natural resourcesfirst as a philosophicalor liberal arts subject and secondas a professional subject.

As a liberal artscurriculum, the conceptof natural resourcesseems to offer a valid base foran 22

undergraduate educationeither at the firsttwo-year or at a four-yearlevel. In such a philosophical

program leading to theA.B. or B.S. degree,the uni- fying theme would be thehuman-- natural resource

ecosystem, and thestudent woulddevote a major portion of his time as anundergraduate tounderstand- ing not only the variouscomponents of thisecosystem but the interrelationshipsthat exist betweenthem. Such a program would have fewrequired courses but would rather be builton the distributionand concentration requirementscharacteristic ofliberal arts programs everywhere.

Many existingcollege courses wouldform the basis for study of theexisting portionsof the ecosystem-- courses in anthropology,history, sociology, economics, geology, meteorology, biology,etc. The chief new contribution thatwould have to bemade would be toprovide instructionin the interrelationships. We would haveto providecourses at the various levels making clear thenature of thehuman-- natural resource ecosystem andthe way in whicheach part is dependent upon every other part. It should be obvious to all of us thatit is extermelydiffi- cult to find faculty competentto teach suchcourses, and even when selected, itis difficult for themto adequately define what and how theyshould teach.Yet a start can be made. At The Universityof Michigan, we are offering a course in "naturalresources ecology" taught by faculty in the Schoolof NaturalResources but offered in the College ofLiterature, Science,and the Arts and accepted by thecurriculum committeeof that College as meeting thenatural sciencedistribu- tion requirement. Thiscourse, taught the firstyear by Professor Stanley A. Cainand to be taughtthe second year by Professor JohnBardach, representsour first effort to intrigue theunderclass studentin the human ecology relating ournaturalresources to mankind. We hope thatit will intriguea portion of our entering college classes to continuetheir study of natural resources, either ata philosophic ora professionallevel. As I think that I havealready imp lied, this philosophic curriculum innaturalresources could be either essentially on a two-year basispreparing students to enter into professionalprograms, or it could constitute in itself a four-yearundergarduateprogram leading to a liberal artsbaccalaureate. In any event, it would be broad and farranging in itssubject matter and its philosophicalimplications, andI believe that it would provideas good a liberaleducation as could be obtained in any disciplineor any interdisciplinary subject thathas yet beenproposed. Broadly based interdisciplinaryprograms such as I have suggested above have theirattraction and their 2L. value. Nevertheless,many of us are concerned with

earning a living,and many ofus feel the need of

leaving ourconsideration of thegeneral to become

competent in theparticular. For thesepurposes,

professionalcourses in specific naturalresources areas can be built upon the philosophic base ofthe

liberal artscurriculum in naturalresources to provide professional training in specificareas. At The University ofMichigan, wherewe depend to a very

large extentupon transferringcolleges from liberal arts, we normally conceive of theseprofessional courses as beginningwith thesummer camp between the sophomoreand junioryear or at the beginning of the junior year. Obviously, however, forpractically minded andprofessionally directedstudents, it is

desirable tointroduce professionalcourses earlier in the collegecareer. Otherwise, the practically- oriented student may have difficulty maintaininghis

interest throughearly broadly basedstudy until he can arrive at themore specific and vocationally-

directed professionalcourses.

Of the variousprofessional optionsopen to the undergraduatestudent, whetheror not he enters them at the junior yearor with a courseor two taken earlier, agriculture is obviously thefirst and most important. At thesame time, many of the programs in undergraduate agriculture availabletoday 25

in land-grant colleges are notas broadly based in

their liberalarts backgroundnor as professional in the highestsense of the termas I am suggesting that such aprogram should be.

Forestry in itsbroadestsense is also a natural resource profession that iswell established, that has philosophicas well as a practicalbasis, and that has consistently turnedout men that have

provided leadershipto the entirenatural resource movement. Wildlife management,range management, and fisheries managementare other wildarea natural resource disciplinesrapidly developingand rapidly

reaching professionalstatus. Outdoor recreation may not be a discipline in itself, but itsurely is a measure of the urban interest inspace and the

out-of-doors, andthe human needof gettingaway from the city. It is a movementthat must be broughtto bear upon our naturalresource programs inour colleges anduniversities. Water resource management dealswith our most

important singlenaturalresource. Urban development, agricultural production and humanlife itself, of course are all dependentupon water. The importance of water is beingbelatedly recognizedin our universities but ithas not yet beenaccorded the recognition ofspecificprograms leading to specific professional employmentthat it deserves. I suggest 26

to you that the professionof the water resources

manager is potentially the most importantof the

natural resource professions. Finally, air management

is becoming increasinglyimportant.

Air management is alreadya practical problem in such urbanareas as Pittsburgh, Los Angeles, and

London. It is becoming increasedlycogent and of

immediate human importancethroughout much of the

rest of the civilizedworld. Whether we arecon-

cerned simply with theelimination of the impurities

in the air, with thecontrol and regulation of radio-

active fallout,or with the management of weather in

the broadestsense, we must agree that weare on the threshhold ofan era when air management will be

equally important to watermanagement and landmanagement in controlling humandestiny.

In closingmy formal remarks, then,mythesis is a simpleone: first, that the study of the human

natural resource ecosystemis a valid basis fora

liberal arts educationeither on a two-yearor four-

year basis. Second, that professionalprograms beginning at approximatelythe junior year of the undergraduate curriculumwould provideyoung men and women the opportunity ofcombining a liberal arts training in the philosophicand scientific basis of the human ecosystemwith a practical andprofessional specialty that wouldenable them to participate 27

actively in themanagement of a portionof this system. There will bemany such specialties falling

under the generalareas of land, water, andair management. Some of thessprofessions are already well establishedalthough the subjectmatter in their presentday curriculashould be constantly under review and revision. The need forothers is already here, andwe should begin activelyto develop curricula to meet these needs. Still others will be with us in thenear future, and it isnot too early to begin thinking as to how we may bestanticipate human needs infuture naturalresource management. 28

SEMINAR THREE

EDUCATION IN NATURAL RESOURCES Sol D. Resnick Hydrologist and Professor Institute of WaterUtilization The University ofArizona Presented at Colorado State University February 17, 1964

The Senate SelectCommittee on National Water Resources severalyears ago concluded that by 1980

the numberone natural resource shortageof the nation will be freshwater. This shortage is resulting mainly because ofa steadily rising population, in-

creased use of waterper capita, pollution of existing supplies and increaseduse of arid regions for irri- gated farming.

To solve thesewater resources and associated natural resourcesproblems, there will beever increasing need fortrained personnel in thesefields.

To set forth theneeds in education innatural resources, with emphasison water resources, the problems of the aridSouthwest will be examined.

Increased Efficienc in the Use of ExistinWater Resources

The waterresources problem of the Southwest can be at least partiallyalleviated by increased efficiency inuse of existing supplies.Following are some of the programs forachieving increased 29

efficiencies and thetype of trainedpersonnel required to accomplishtheseprograms.

Considering lossesof about 850,000acre-feet of water on an average annuallyfrom Lake Mead alone, one can readily appreciate theimportance of the efforts to suppress evaporationfrom both water and land surfaces. In the limitedefforts of theInstitute of Water Utilization ina cooperative agreementwith the U. S. Bureau of Reclamationin this regard,the talents of physical chemists,chemical and civil engineers, and agriculturalists, suchas soil phys- icists, have been utilized. Of course, economicsis an underlying factor in all of theseprograms.

One of themost criticalproblems in the South- west today is the diminishinggroundwater supply. The average yearly overdraft on thegroundwaterreserves in Arizona alone isapproximately threeand one-half million acre-feet. By means ofartificial groundwater recharge, flood waters thatare normally lost bynon- beneficialevapotranspirationare placed in the underground reservoir. For thisprogram, the Institute has required the talents ofgeologists, civilengineers, and agriculturalists, such as soilphysicists and chemists, Our major problemshave not beentechnical however; economics is againa major factor, butob- taining legal right to utilizeeven flood waters that would otherwisebe lost is themajor problem. 30

Irrigators in the middlereaches of the GilaRiver insist on the waternot being usedeven though their flood rights essentially lost theirmeaning when trib-

utaries to theGila River, like theSanta Cruz, became

intermittent withthe drop in groundwaterlevels. This points up the need for politicalscientists and

lawyers withan understanding ofhydrology.

Since onlya small part of the waterthat falls

as precipitation inthe Southwest iseffectively used, research is being conducted in watershedmanagement to determine if eradicationof non-beneficialplants will increase timber, forage, andwater. Over one million dollarsis being spentannually in Arizona alone in cooperative studies involvingThe University of Arizona, Arizona State LandDepartment, the United

States ForestService, GeologicalSurvey, and the Bureau pf Indian Affairs. The program consistsof block and stripcutting ofspruce and fir, thinning of ponderosa pine, and eradicationof juniper, pinyon,

phreatophytes, andnon-beneficial chaparral. A program like this, of course, requires personnelof varied training in naturalresources. Technical procedures, economics, waterrights, relative importance and value of increasedwater yields, ifany, grass and timber production, erosioncontrol, and recreation are some of the factorsthat need to be considered. 31

On an 18square mile watershednear Tucson, Arizona, the average runoff for thepast threeyears has been barely three p.Jr cent ofthe precipitation-

the rest of thewater is essentiallylost by non-

beneficialevapotranspiration. To increase water yields, small areas are being pavedwith variousma- terials such as asphalt. Chemical sprays, whichcan be applied fromairplanes,are being considered for

large areas. As above thisprogram requires personnel of varied training in naturalresources. Among the many factors to be considered, specialattention would have to be givento location ofpaved areas and water rights.

The largestsingle use of waterby far in the

Southwest is forirrigation; yet, Dr.O. W. Israelsen,

one of the mosteminent authoritieson the subject,

estimates thatonly about 35per cent of the water

diverted forirrigation isever used by the growing crop. A 10 per centincrease in irrigationeffi-

ciencies in Arizonaalone would resultin a saving

of 700,000acre-feet of water- this is nearly five times the yearly amount used by bothTucson and Phoenix. Some of thespecial factors thatneed to be considered are: (1) Adjustment ofwater rightsas physical irrigationsystems becomemore efficient and through researchmore efficientcrop varieties, with regard to water use, are developed. (2) Means of 32

convincing irrigators thatthe last acre-foot of pumped

water applied althoughproviding an increment to hir

yield could bemore effectively used in thefuture.

And (3) value of water,if not a replenishablesupply, for future domestic andindustrial use.

The reuse of domesticand industrial waste waters affordsmany different special considerations.

Sanitary engineers,microbiologists, and medical

technologists withan understanding of hydrology and

agriculture are required;social scientists also

trained in thesefields are needed to convincethe

public that properlytreated reused water hasa place in their life,as well as to vote for those bond

issues insuringpollution control. While Maricopa

County politiciansargue, approximately 50,000acre- feet of treatedsewage effluent annually is essentially wasted by beingdumped into the Salt River- water is

thrown aroundas though it were onlymoney.

Increasing the Amountof Available WaterResources Following aresome of the programs for increasing the amount ofavailable waterresources and discussed are the typeof trained personnelto accomplish theseprograms.

Increasing precipitationif possible by cloud seeding brings into playa host of special problems that require theattention of personnel withwidely different interestsbut all witha fairly thorough 33

understanding of waterresources. Besides the mete-

orologist responsible forthe technical manipulations

and evaluations, forexample, lawyers, politicians,

political and socialscientists would have tosettle local, state, national,and international disputes over water rights and damages.

Demineralization ofsea and brackish water

involves both technicaland economic problemseven

though onecan sympathize with the sanitaryengineer, associated withan interior plant, who has carloads of unwanted salton his hands.

Increasing available waterresources by im- portation, ofcourse, presents many interesting

problems. The technicalaspects seem simple when

compared to theeconomic, social and politicalaspects. Political andsocial scientists and lawyers

trained with referenceto waterresource management are urgently needed toresolve the problems, for

example, within andbetween Arizona, California,and Baja, Mexico. Even in a briefexposure to a water

suit, such as therecently concluded ColoradoRiver case between Arizona andCalifornia, a scientist quickly learns thatthe scientific method isnot necessarily the universalapproach to the solution of naturalresource problems.

Sug ested EducationalTraining in NaturalResources

To train the personnelto cope with theproblems 34.

presented in the development,conservation and utilization of natural resources, the followingeducational program is suggested.

Split majors on both the undergraduateand graduate levels in fieldscovering the physical,biological, and social aspectsof naturalresources are suggested.A single coordinator concernedwith both education and research in naturalresources responsible directly to the presidentof the university but operating with a committeeof deans andone of subject-matter personnel isdesirable. However, the training itself could beaccomplished probablywithin the existing framework ofdepartments.

The coordinatorand committeeswould be responsible for determining thenature of thecore courses, establishment of specialbroadly conceived courses tosurvey a resource field, andcoordination in both education andresearch. In the physical sciencesa flexible core curriculum could be establishedfor split majorsin hydrology with geology, engineering,agriculture,or meteorology; in*waterresource management withwater- shed management, agriculturalengineering,or soils and agronomy; and inwaterresources economics with geography or agriculturaleconomics. Basic courses should be stressed but otherwiseflexibility is desirable. Specially conceivedcourses, for example,

:*/ 35

in soils, plant physiology,meteorology andclima- tology, geology, geography, fluidmechanics, watershed

management, economics,political science,law, and even in social studies are necessary tobroaden the outlook of the student in thefield of nationalre- sources. Text books forthispurpose need to be developed and teaching personneltrained. Perhaps six month seminars on beginning andadvanced levelsshould be establishedto train the teaching personnelrequired for a program like theabove. For example,a plant physiologist already wellversed inplant-soil-water relationships may be given furtherintensive training in hydrology, climatology, etc. With this additional training, he no doubt coulddevelop acourse suited, for example, to the engineeringhydrologists. Similar consideration shouldbe given to developing split majon3in thebiological and social sciencesas required. As the population of the countryand of the world continues to grow, it issafe to predictin- creasing emphasis on the study andunderstanding of problems associatedwith natural resources in all . . theirmany forms and a continuing expansionof employment opportunities for those broadlytrained in the development, conservation, andutilization ofnatural resources.

71 36

SEMINAR FOUR

UNIVERSITY PROGRAMSIN THE FIELD OF NATURAL RESOURCES Irving K. Fox* Vice President Resources for theFuture, Inc. Presented at Colorado StateUniversity March 5, 1964

Since about 1950American universitieshave given increasingattention toprograms in natural

resources definedas a broad field. Prior to that

time manyinstitutions haddeveloped important

programs dealing withan individualresource or activity -- such as forestry or irrigation-- but

in more recentyears there has beena growing interest in the field as a whole or in largercomponents of it than were previously considered.As a result, at least one university hasa school of naturalresources and several haveinstitutes or departments

of naturalresources or conservation. Here in

Colorado Stateyou have initiateda program in

watershed managementand nowyou are seeking to

integrate withincreasing effectivenessall of the

University's activitiesin the broad fieldof natural resources.

These changesthat have beenunder way atmany

The viewsexpressed are thoseof the author and not necessarilyof his organization. 37

education institutionsreflect a growingrecognition

throughout the UnitedStates that therelation of man to the natural environment and theoperation of the primary industries remainimportant, that relationships are changing rapidlyand resulting inboth complex and serious problems in theUnited States and throughout the world. We havecome to appreciate that the relationship ofman to naturalresources will continue to changeand openup new problems and

opportunities whichwill merit scientificstudy and consideration.

But the effortsof the universitiesto initiate broader programs in the fieldof naturalresources have enccuntered a number of difficulties. Financing has not been easy, in part becausethe major universities havebeen facingso many new and pressing demands. Fitting a naturalresource program into the university structure anddetermining whatpurpose and who it should be designed toserve has been a complex question. Organizing and managingan integrated research effort has beendifficult in viewof the fact that numerous traditionaldisciplines are involved.

The purpose ofthis paper is tooffer a few observationson these somewhatperplexing problems. In view of my own limited experienceon these matters and the relatively brief study Ihave given to them, 38

I do not presume to have definitiveanswers.

The Function ofthe University

In searching forsolutions to theproblems of designing natural resources programs and fittingthem into the university structure, it isimportant to keep in mind the historic role ofthe university in American society.

The majoruniversities of theUnited States

are the product oftwo somewhatdifferent conceptions of higher education. One conception Iwill call the classic ideal of the university. According to this

conception thepurpose of the universityis the quest for knowledge. The objective isto stimulate intellectual endeavor of thehighest order. To accomplish this the scholar isleft free topursue whatever avenues of study andthought challenge his interest, unhampered by administrativeresponsibility, a teaching load,or pressure to meeta given time

schedule in theproduction of results. His only trainingresponsibilitiesare to work with mature individuals who aspire to advancedscholarship and who could beexpected tocarry on scholarly activity into the future. According to theadvocates of this conception, institutions of thiskind are ofmajor importance because "civilizedmankind looks tothis quest for matter-of-fact knowledge as itsmost valued achievement." It is thecornerstone ofwestern 39 civilization; itis the foundationfor the loftiest

ideals andstandards of valuethat are the aspiration of western society.

The secondconception which providesthe basis for the modern university isreflected in the motivations which resulted in theestablishment of theland grant colleges. These institutions,promoted by egalitarian ideals characteristic of thisnation, were designed to serve the broad andvaried educational requirements of peoplegenerally. Research and education was directed in thefirst instance to the needs of a particular state or region. This type of research, focussed upon the practicalproblems of

particular areas, hasmet with strikingsuccess as reflected in thedramaticprogress of American agri-

culture. Educational activitieswhich emphasize professional training andextension have produced an enormous number of effectiveindividuals and assured the wide applicationof knowledge topro- ductive enterprises.

As time goeson, these two conceptions-- the classical ideal of theuniversity and thecollege as an advanced training institutionand service center for people generally-- have merged and we haveas a consequence the great land grantuniversities which serve our nation so well.Yet amid thepressures that bear upona university today, it isimportaat O

not to lose sight of the twosomewhat different and often competitivepurposes a good university must

serve. On the one hand, it Mustcontinue to provide

both the support and theenvironment in which scholars

will have the opportunityfor development. On the

other hand, it must provideon an expanding basis to

an ever more complex society,professional training and practical researchresults for people generally.

My impression is thatuniversities face a very

difficult task inperforming these functionson a

fully satisfactorybasis. The rapid growth in demand for higher educationas reflected in rapidly increas-

ing enrollmentscause one type of difficulty. The

rapid advance of scienceand technology quickly alter

the requirements ofup-to-date professional training.

The enormous amounts ofmoney made available by the

federal government andthe foundations in support of

research have tended todetermine the patterns of

scholarly effort ratherthan the pattern being determined by the interestsof the individual scholar.

In designinga university program of research and education in thefield of naturalresources, it behooves us to remainfaithful to the basic objectives of the modernuniversity, and in particular not to lose sight of theclassic ideal because the task of the university isconsiderably more than the solution of practical andimmediate problems; it must also contributerina very substantialway to the ethical andphilosophicalprogress of mankind.

Financing Researchand Education Programs in the Fieldof Natural Resources

I am sure thatyou would be pleased if Icould tell you howto secure the fundsyou require to sup-

port research andeducationalprograms in the field of natural resources without encounteringsome of the difficultiesyou now face. Instead of trying

to do that, Ipropose to commenton the responsi-

bility of theuniversityon those who grant funds

to the universityin support ofsuch programs.

Implicit in the classicideal of the university is the view that the individualscholar will have considerablefreedom topursue lines of inquiry which he findsattractive. Those of us interested in higher education areconfronted with theproblem of maintainingthat freedom inview of the amounts of money available to foster predeterminedlines of research. It is probablyno exaggeration tosay that we face the question of whetherdetermination of the lines of inquiryto be pursued isto pass completely from the scholarto governmentalagencies and foundations. To suggest thatthis result wouldbe unfortu- nate is not toimpugn the motivesor question the ability of agency or foundationrepresentatives,nor am I implying thatgrants and contractsto support particular lines of researchare undesirable. What I mean to indicate is that theable scholar should not be limited to suchsources of supportbecause the scholar himself deserves a voicein the decisionas to the type of study that meritshis attention. The only logical answer to this problemis for university budgetsto include fundsfor general

support of researchby facultymembers which cannot

be supported underappropriate conditionsin other ways. This is essentialif the universityis to per- form one of its most importantfunctions, namelythe provision of an environment wherethe quest forknowledge for its on sake may be pursued. I know that this view is widely recognized,but I wish to addmy voice to those of the otherswho are concernedabout the extent towhich researchemphasis is determined by programs ofmomentary popularity.

The fund grantingand researchcontracting

institutions alsohave a responsibilityin this regard. I am wellaware that universitiesand university

faculty memberswould prefer tohave more general support grants than theynow receive. The realities are that organizations, such as Resourcesfor the

Future, have beenestablished toserve specific objectives and theirown continuance isdependent upon the effectivenesswith which theyachieve those objectives. At the same timeI feel that the fund granting institutioncan administer its support in

such a way that it doesnot do violence to the basic objectives of the university.

At Resources for theFuture it is our objective

to matchour interests with those of theresearch

scholar who is independentlyinterested in the kind

of researchwe wish to encourage;we do not go out

to buy research. Then by handlingour grant relation-

ships-- the exploration of the objectives andcontent of the research profit-- through our own scholars

who are activelyengaged in related linesof research,

we feel that a good andsympathetic understandingcan be achieved betweenourselves and the principalswho undertake the research. Although we expect funds to

be effectively used,comments on and criticism ofre-

search resultsare given and we hope receivedas the comments and criticisms ofone scholar to another.

We believe throughthese processes better research

results are achievedand universitiesare strengthened.

The Design of Educationalirograms

I am not qualifiedto speak about the details

of the various curriculathat might be established in the field of naturalresources. There are, however, some fairly general observationsabout the nature, objectives and content ofeducational programs which I would like to offer. 44

The NaturalResources Generalist

A question thatfrequently arises iswhether the university should be providingtraining for what might be called naturalresources generalists. Some

universitiesare granting degrees inthis field,

particularly at themasters level. One possibility is to establish a specializedprogram in publicor

business administrationas related to naturalresources. My observationson this point are quite

subjective inasmuchas my own training isin the field of political science and publicadministration.

My viewsmay appear rather traditionalor old fashioned. The university trainspersonnel toengage in professionalwork or in research.For professional

work, the immediatequestion is whetherthere are

suffflient employmentopportunities ofa given type to merit a special kind ofprofessional training. My

impression is thatthere is relativelylimited employment opportunity for theindividual who hasgeneralized training through, let us saysa masters degree. I

recognize that thefederal government andsome state and local agenciesemploy a few peoplein which a general backgroundis desired. Yet, in comparison with the demandfor specialists-- economists, foresters, engineers,etc.-- the demand appears to be very limited. The person who hasa degree in public administration,and who hasa general bac round 45

in naturalresources, tends to find himself limited

to budget work, personnelwork, general services

administration, and similaractivities. For the

person substantively interested in thefield of

natural resources, such assignmentsare limiting and frustrating.

For research work,my feeling is that speciali-

zation in a particulardiscipline is almost essential.

Effective research requiresa body of theory and a system of analysis.A person with generalized train-

ing, by definition,seems to lack the essential tools for effective research activity.

Government.? Economics and ProfessionalTraining

In my own work in the federalgovernment and the contacts that I have madeabout the country since

I have been with Resourcesfor the Future, it ismy impression that the professionaltraining generally provided in the naturalresources fields is deficient

in at leastone important respect in view of the kinds

of resi. ;ibilities individuals in theseprofessions are expected to assume. I am referring to suchpro- fessions as engineering,forestry, range management, etc. These professions havea public service charactir

The individuals who work inthese fields are either employed by governmentor if not employed by government, they engage in activitieswhich directly affect the public interest inan important way. The construction 14.6

of a dam, the managementof a forest, the installa-

tion of a sewage treatmentfacility not only affects

the values realized bythe owner of the landor the

project, but almost invariablyhas an effect upon others in society. I seriously question whether

individuals trained in theseprofessions todayare

adequately prepared for thepublic responsibilities which are thrustupon them.

To be more specific, Ibelieve that serious

consideration should be givento strengthening the training of people in thesefields in two respects. For one thing, they shouldhave courses e instruc-

tion in political scienceand public administration

so they may gain a better understandingof the political foundations ofour society, of governmental

processes, and of the ethical responsibilitiesof the

public servant and the citizen. The professional in

the field of naturalresources also should have some

training in what is usuallycalled welfare economics.

He needs to understandeconomic consequences which

extend beyond the facilitywith which he is speci-

fically concernedor whiah arise under conditions

when the market does notfunction effectively.

Since I've arrived I've beenasked whether I

felt that engineers shouldhave some training in the biological sciencesso they might gain a better appreciation of the naturalenvironment which the structures they buildinfluence and altersogreatly. I do not have a clear answer to thisquestion. I do

feel that thosewho engage in thenatural resources

professions shouldreceive a kind oftraining through which the individual learnsthat a majorconsequence of his work isto influence thenature of the human

environment and thathe has a majorresponsibility to be sensitive to environmentalvalues no less than the other valueswith which hedeals.

In short, individualswho work in thenatural resources professionsare more than technicians.

They are dealingwith matters whichhave a direct and significant bearing upon publicvalues withina

political .environment. These responsibilitiesshould be recognized inprofessional trainingeven though this necessitatesa longer training period.

Advanced Trainingof the Ex eriencedProfessional

One of the realopportunities for theuniversities in the field of naturalresources education is in the provisionof additionaltraining for those who

are already engaged inthe naturalresources professions. Three kinds oftraining might beenvisaged, namely (1) retooling,(2) trainingfor public responsi- bility and (3) trainingfor administrativeand policy responAbility.

As aconsequence of rapid scientificadvance- ment and technological change the professionalneeds 48

to up-date anddiversify his trainingfrom time to

time in order tokeep abreast of advancesin his

profession. Such retoolingmay be necessary at five

or ten year intervals fora given individual, depend-

ing upon what ishappening in his fieldand the kind

of work he is doing. Certainly this need isno less

important in thenatural resourcesprofessions than

in other fields. I'm in no positionto suggest how such programs should beorganized and administered.

Circumstancesvary from profession to profession

and individual toindividual. It seems logical that

everything from short,intenseive, refresherprograms

to those ofa year or more meritconsideration. Of foremost importanceis the need for remedy-

ing what I considerto be the basicdeficiency in much

professional trainingtoday and in the past,namely that of providingindividualF with the background

necessary to discharge the publicresponsibilities

inherent in naturalresources professional work. If

we are to achieve the degreeof sophistication to

which we aspire, inplanning programs of naturalresources development andmanagement, in evaluating

theirconsequences and in relating themto the

realities of Americanpolitical processes,a fairly substantial number ofpeople throughout thenatural resources professions requirea kind of training in governmentseconomics and publicpolicy which they did not receivewhen they got theirtraining initially

and which they donot acquireon the job. I have no

well developed formulafor a program designedto

achieve this objectivebut I believe thatuniversities,

in cooperation withgovernment officials inparticular,

might well give carefulconsideration to what sucha program might include and howit should be organized, managed and supported.

The university shouldbe prepared to aid the

specialist, the individualwho has been trained and who has worked inone field, such as forestry, to

become an administratoror to occupy a staff position

or a planning post ina natural resourcesagency. It is at this pointthat quite intensivetraining in administration, publicpolicy, public decisionmaking, and economics becomesof paramount importance. Public agencies generallyselect their administratorsfrom among the professional ranks. This is an appropriate as well as a naturalphenomenon. However, my own experience has indicatedthat many individuals well qualified in theirown professions are ill prepared to assume the dutiesof supervision, staffanalytical work, or general planning. The government agencies, industry and theuniversities should worktogether to develop strongprograms to equip individuals trained and experienced inthe professions tooccupy positions of this nature. 50

It is self-evident that someprograms might be designed to serve all three ofthepurposes I've described. An individual might returnto dosome retooling in his ownspecialty, toadvance his understanding of government andeconomies, andto prepare himself for an administrativeor policy position. The DoctoralProgram In developing a program in thefield of natural resources, the doctoral orresearch degreeprogram should notbe neglected. If a dynamicintellectual environment isto be provided, research andadvanced study isessential. It is importantto theyoung scholar who chooses researchas his career; itis both anobligation and an opportunity forthe faculty member to help develop thenew generation ofthose interested in the advancementof knowledge;it is what makesthe university an attractive andworth- while location for advancedprofessional training. Again, I wish to emphasizethat I do noten- visage a doctors degree in naturalresources generally but in adiscipline which has a body oftheory anda system ofanalysis. The focus ofthe research,however, can be on naturalresources problems. FacultyDevelopment A university which seriouslyundertakes educa- tionalprograms in the field of naturalresources faces the question of howbest to equipits faculty 51

for theseresponsibilities. Among the thiugs that

might be done,I would rank highon the list, an

arrangement wherebyfaculty membersactually gain )xperience in theresource agencies and firms.

Summer employment,consulting assignmentsare useful but of distinctly limited value,because the faculty member gains so little insight andunderstanding in this way. Leaves-of-absence forappointments ofa

year or more in governmentand industryare prefer- able. It is difficultto exaggeratethe importance of this kind ofexperienceso that faculty members will understand the environmentfrom whichmany of there students come and to which theyeventually go.

Design of theResearch Program

Before offeringsome comments on spicificlines of research, Iwish to make clearthat I recognize fully that any research program ata university must be built around the interests andqualifications of the faculty and students. The research interestsof the universitymay have some bearingupon the qualifi- cations and interestsof the facultymembers the university seeks toemploy, butonce a man is selected and on the staff it is essentialthat he be givena great deal of freedom toengage in the kinds ofre- search which attracthis interest.

Also, I wish toemphasize the importanceof 52

cooperative activityamong the disciplines in the field of natural resources. Our own experience atResources

for the Futureclearly indicates thatsubstantial gain

in understandingfrequently can onlycome through the joint and collaborativeefforts of social scientists,

physical scientistsand biological scientists. I

believe the socialscientist canserve in'a key role

in the designand functioning ofa research program.

A substantialmotivation for much ofthe research

in the field ofnatural resources willcontinue to

be the desire toimprove the welfare ofmankind.

Implicit in thisgeneral objective is theconcern

for values andthe functioning ofhuman institutions in realizingthese values. The social scientist who

is scientificallyinvolved with thesematters can aid

in clarifyingand sharpening thequestions that must

be answered by thephysical and biologicalscientist as well as the socialscientist if valuesare to be

increasedor institutions are to beimproved.

Four considerationshave loomed large in the

design of ourown research program at Resourcesfor the Future. These considerationsmay be of some interest in designingyour own programs.

One of these is thatsome of our most pressing and urgent problemsin the field of naturalresources today in the UnitedStates stem from rapidurbaniza- tion and the growthin per capita incomerather than 53

from the growth in populationby itself. These factors have hadfar-reaching effectsupon the demands

for land, waterand air withinlimited geographic areas. These concentrationsof demand havetended to

threaten deteriorationin the quality ofthe human

environment atmany locations, whileat the same

time risingper capita incomes havebeen increasing the demand for improved quality ofthe resourceen-

vironment whether itbe in and aroundlarge citiesor in rural areas. Furthermre, valueoptimization in dealing with these problems is not achievedthrough simpleoperson of market forces. There is a need of

growing importanceto understand allaspects of these

complex phenomenabecause of theirsignificance to th3 quality of lifein America.

Closely related tothe foregoing isthe fact

that one ofour major needs, ifwe fire to deal with emerging natural resources problems effectively,is for institutionaladjustment. Here at Colorado State

Universitysome of you have beeninterested in water law and its variousconsequences. I personally feel that this is one of the major waterresources problem areas of thewhole West. In addition,we need a variety of institutionalimprovements to deal with such matters as water pollution, airpollution, pesticide contamination,improvement of the urban environment, andpreservation of therural countryside, 54

In other words, in additionto the study ofthe physical, biological and economicconsequences of a variety of natural resources activities,we also need to understand much better thanwe now do how societymay function to realize the potentialvalues available from naturalresources. A third consideration is therelation ofnatural resources activitiesto the economicprogress of the depressed regions of theUnited States. Many of these regions - such as Applachia- are in large part dependent on the primaryindustries. How can these industries be developed andmanaged to aidin the economic adjustments necessary to improvethe well being of thepeople who livein these regions? A fourth consideration whichinfluences the RFF programis the importance of internationaltrade and investment in meeting bothour own domestic needs for resource commodities,and the requirementsfor economic developmentof many countriesabout the world Currently our program givesconsiderable attention to investments and trade inthe field ofenergy and minerals.We are tryingto gaina better understanding of the implications ofalternative policiesfor both exporting and importingcountries. The issues that ariseare of significant importance to theU.S. domestic economy, to the economiesof the developing nations and tointernational relations. 55

Finally, RFF hasdecided to initiatea modest research effort dealing with naturalresources in the economies of the developingnations. It is focussed upon LatinAmerica. Certainly the primary

industries playa major part in theeconomies of these nations and the task thatlies ahead ofthem is formidable indeed. The intellectualchallenge is great because resource developmentoccurs under

different conditionsthan those whichexist in the United States andWestern Europeand has not been subject to a high degree ofsystematic study. The humanitarianopportunity andresponsibility is

enormous because theviability ofreasonably satis- factory societiesin these regionsdepends in large

measure upon the abilityto developindividuals and

institutions withina relatively short timewho can deal with theproblems they face. It is difficult for any institution oflearning to remainaloof to what is happening in the developingregions. Colorado State Universityhas been keenlyaware and deeply involved insome of the problems ofthe developing nations.

Conclusion

I hope that theforegoing observationswill be helpful in deciding how to proceed withyour programs in the field ofnaturalresources here at Colorado State University. In my judgment,there areenormous 56 opportunities andI feel thatyou are particularly well equipped and situated totake advantageofthem. SEMINAR FIVE

NATURAL RESOURCESPROGRAMS IN THE UNIVERSITY CURRICULUM Norman Wengert Chairman, Department of PoliticalScience Wayne State University

Presented at Colorado State University April 1964

In my comments I hopeto discuss several topics

which are of vitalimportance to the questionof the

place of NaturalResources Education inthe University Curriculum:

First, I want toraise some operationalquestions particularlyrelated to curricular

planning at both theundergraduate and graduate levels; and

Second, I want todiscuss my own special in-

terest, namely, thepolitics of natural

resources as related to theeducation of

students withcareer aspirations in fields

dealing with naturalresources. Curricular Problems-- Undergraduate

The operationalquestions with respect tocur- ricular planningon which I want to focus reflectmy ten years of Governmentservice inresource agencies, my activities over theyears on curriculum committees at several universities,and most recentlymy position 53

as acting associate dean of the LiberalArts College at Wayne State University.

In addition, ofcourse, my' own investigations

in the field of naturalresources politics have shaped what I will be saying.

One question which must bedealt with concerns

the very nature ofan undergraduate education, and

more particularly of the undergraduatemajor. Just what does itmean when we say that a student "majors"

in this or in that? What are the criteria which govern the shaping of college majors.

It seems to me, first, thatthere are certain

internal administrativecriteria or requirements for a major, which serve as guides to studentsin select-

ing the subjects theyare to study. Frcm this point

of view, the rationalizationof a major is largely that of administrators andfaculty, and reflects their values. Often, Iam afraid, the construction of major concentrations is based,upon attempts to correct mistakes which particular facultymembers or administrators feel were made in theirown educational programs years before; or conversely merelyrepeat programs of twenty or thirtyyears ago, with a course or two added. In any case, I doubt whetherstudents very often share these internalizedvaluations.

At most schools, to completean undergraduate porgram requires at least 180 quartercourse credits 59

(120 semester course credits). Of these, approximately 45 quarter course credits willbe in theso- called major field, with thebalance distributed among what are often called "basic"or "core" requirements (English, Speech, Mathematics,Science, Foreign Languages, etc.) and electives. In someundergraduate programs the student is, in addition.required to complete a certain number of minoror cognate credits. (e.g. the Physics majormust completecertain Math courses, etc.) There arevariations, ofcourse. In certain scientific fields, thecourse credits required for the major may be considerablemore than 45, and in professional schools thenumber of electivesare usuallyvery few. Within thisstructure, theterm "major" indicates in a roughway the courses andor subject matter which providethe organizingprinciple for the student'seffort. In addition to these internalor administrative criteria which shape theundergarduate major,there are also external professional criteriarelevant to particular disciplines. In a fieldlike chemistry, the American Chemical Societyapproves and certifies undergraduate programs, justas in a number ofprofessional fields professionalaccrediting agencies 4* prescribe much ofthe courseprogram for the student. Most other disciplines followa more or lesstradi- tional approachto thecourse content of their 6o

respective majors. Thus, when a student says he has

majored in economics,one can infer within not too

broad a range the kinds ofcnnrses he has completed.

Similarly, when a studentsays he has majored in

Zoology or in Agronomy, itis possible to reconstruct his programon an approximate basis.

A third kind of criteria determingthe content

of the major come from thestudent himself. These criteria reflect hisown personality, his own ego

needs and his training andexperience. There criteria

may often be unarticulated, but perhapscan best be characterized by suggestingthat to the student his

program of course work must "make sense". There must

be a certain internal logicto the courses he is tak-

ing, as well asan external relevance. The externe_ relevance may be simplya career or employment orien-

tation or it may also berelated to what parents

expect, what peers expect,etc.

Within this contextwe might ask the question whether an undergraduatemajor in naturalresources has validity, whether itmeets the criteria identified above.

It would, of course, meetinternal administrative criteria since theseare established more or less by fiat. But the external, professionalcriteria, those which arise from the natureof a discipline, would probably not be metbecause (in my opinion) 61

natural resources is nota discipline. Programs dealing with naturalresources involve many disciplines,

and hence the termis only avery general rubric, not

even as specific as educationor engineering or, (in the humanities),art, or music.

With respect tothe cryiteria which arisefrom the studentsown personality andego needs, it is

most difficult togeneralize. The student's own

background and pre-collegeexperience will be quite

relevant, as willa host of individual factors. The

one aspect of this set ofcriteria whichmay be sub-

ject to generalizationare, perhaps, those that

concern career or employmentpossibilitiesand these, I willdiscuss subsequently.

In discussingundergraduate curricula,we must always remindourselves thatwe are dealing with a

very finite universe of 180quarter hours of credit.

It has beenmy experience thatmany curricular prob-

lems might be solvedsuperficially ifwe extended the undergraduateprogram by a year or two,as has in fact been proposedfor some engineeringcurricula.

I think we mustdistinguish also betweencurricular problems of "A"students, and those ofaverage student.i'. I sometimes thinkthat it really doesn'tmake too much difference whatcourses the "A" students takeprovided merely that theyare challenged and that thecourse work is rigorous anddemanding. Almost by definition, 62

they are self-motivating,and illustrate most clearly that the learningprocess is a highly personalized,

individualprocess. The teacher and thecourse provide only the occasionand a stimulus to learning.

But the averagestudent poses a host ofdifferent

problems, both in termsof pedagogy and in termsof ultimate employmentand career development.

To most students, itseems to me, the obvious

importance of theundergraduate major is in its

relevance to hiscareer expectations and perceptions. Although many ofus still subscribe to liberal education goals, highschool counselling, commercial advertising (e.g.such as the New YorkLife Insurance Company's pamphletson careers), early marriage: and the acquisitiveemphasis in our society,all combine to press thestudent to choose hismajor study as preparation fora career r&ther than frommore abstract points ofview, of knowledge forknowledge's sake. The high cost ofhigher education togetherwith the aspirationsof parents for theirchildren strength- en the "what will I bewhen I grow up" focusof undergraduate education. So I want to turnnow to this question ofemployment.

Employment Opportunitiesfor the UndergraduateMajor in Natural Resources

If these generalizationsabout the interests of students in career goalsare reasonably accurate, then 6,3

the answer to thequestion of whetheran undergraduate;

major in naturalresources can be successfulmay lie

in large part inan appraisal of thecareers open to such majors.

Most of theconcern with naturalresources

problems lies withgovernment, althoughthere seem to be a growing number ofresource us'ng companiesvery

much aware ofresource conservation problems. But

in my discussionI am assuming thatmost employment

opportunities in thenatural resources fieldare and will tontineto be in government. This is partly

because of theway in which we have definednatural

resources problems inthe United States;partly, it

reflects governmentownership of the publicdomain; and partly itreflects the historyof the conservation movement andresource programs.

Public jobopportunities in thenatural re-

sources area are of twogeneral types. The first type is technical, that is, theconcern is with themanagement, study,or manipulation ofa particular resource, and would include such traditionalspecializations as ornithology, forestry,weather science,geology, etc.

More recently itwould also includeresource economics and resourcemarketing.

The second typeof job opportunityis at a more general level. Here the emphasis isnot on a specialty, but on understanding the interrelationof a number of specialties, on intergration,on synthesis, and by definition, on trainingwhich is interdisciplinary.

These job opportunitiesput a strong emphasisupon

generalization, on planningand programming,on

writing and verbalfacility, on effectiveinterper-

sonal relations,on coordination of people anddata, on analytical abilities,etc. These jobs would, in

the British civilservice system, be inthe so-called "administrative clase.

Present job opportunitiesfor so-calledgener-

alists stem from thefact that today in governmentas well as in the privatesector there is increasing

need for a type ofgeneralist skill at lowerlevels. Sociologists have writtenabout the new white collar

class, and itsexpansion inresponse to automation

and changes inproduction processes. The same phenomena are bringingabout changes in the nature

of public employment,and so we are findinga growing

need for collegeeducated people to fillthe bottom

ranks of whata 100 years ago might perhapshave been

considered clericalpositions, if they existedat all. Most generally thesepositions are designated

"staff positions,"stressing the fact thatthe individual's role is notto make substantiveprogram decisions, but ratherto assist a superior,usually a technically trainedperson, in handling his assignments particularly the administrativeaspects of his assigtments.

Education for thesenew types of staff positions may represer a kind cf mid-point betweenthe classical tradition of "general education," withits strongem-

phasis upon humanistictraining, and theother extreme of specializedtechnical education. If my analysis has a degree of validity, thenwe might focus upon the kind of education, the kind ofcourses, that might be appropriate for effectively trainingthis middlegroup.

In part, theissues are not unlikethose which have plagued college curriculumcommittees for several generations -- i.e. Does the student learnmore from comprehensive survey courses than he doesfrom rigorous

detailed investigationof a narrowly definedfield. Certainly, thereis always thedanger of superficiality, masquerading under the title of breadth. Unfortunately, I do not know the answer tothis question of howstu- dents learn, and I havesuspicion that thereis no simple answer, variables includingthe student himself, his motivations at the time, andother factors which we may not have identified. I am reminded ofthe

fascinating storyof Louis Acassiz,told by one of his students, to the effect thatfor one wholesemes- ter the student lived witha single fish studying its

every aspect andconstantly being toldto go back to his specimen to observe. It is said, alongthe same lines, that inhis course inConstitutional Law, 66

Justice Felix Frankfurter,when at Harvard,would spendone semester da,a, singlecase. Most ofus who teachConstitutional Law, on theother-hand, tryto cover a subjectmore or less systematically andcom- prehensively. But, how does one learn most? Is it even possibleto develop generalists bymeans of a collegeeducation? Or, do these skills andabilities rather reflect the personality,the heredity,and the life experiences ofthe individual? Thejustification for manycollegeprograms is that thestudent should simply bebroadly educated since formany kinds of jobs inour society themere fact ofhaving completed a college educationis all that isrequired. In my own field ofpolitical science, for example, Isuspeyt thatmany of our undergraduate majors end up neitherin politicsnor in governmentemployment, and I doubtwhether theyuti- lize toany great extent the specializedknowledge they accumulatedin their major field,except perhaps as citizens. To such,I suspect, the value ofcollege educationlies in the exposure to knowledge,to other intellects,and in having providedopportunities and stimuli for intellectualgrowth. Whatever the source of generalistability, I thinkwe must recognize that wheneffectivelydeve- loped, it doesrepresent one of the highestskills, as recognizedcenturies ago by Plato inhis references 67

to philosopher kings. Plato, incidentally,stressed the importance of experiencein reaching thepoint at whichsynthesis and integration-- wise judgment-- might be made (aview supportedby some interesting research in creativity).

But to return to the problemsof employment for the undergraduate major in naturalresources -- As I have inferred, there is obviouslya NEED for generalists in resource programs, forpeople whocan relate programs, policies and problems inone field to those in another. But, I wouldsuggest thatwe examine very carefully whether theseneeds may not bemost pressing atthe middle and upper levels of thegovern- ment hierarchy, rather than atthe GS-5, 7or 9 grades at which most undergraduates beginpublic employment. The largest number of collegegraduates are recruited by the federalgovernment throughthe Federal Service Entrance Examination forwhich thereare no preparation prerequisites, theexamination beingan intelligence test type of evaluation. In the federal service, then, once a student hasqualified by passing the Federal Service EntranceExamination, he ison his own in finding employment thatappeals to him. Pre- sumablya student who has majored in naturalresources and done well, willseek employmentin resource agencies, if positionsare open. If positionsare not open, or if he has not doneparticularly wellas a 68

student, I suspect that he ismore likely to takean)7

position which isoffered him,even though it is not related to his areas of study. In eithercase, however, we must admit thathe will oftenhave only limited

opportunity touse his particuar course training.

This is just theopposite in thecases of those recruited because they are engineers,biologists, foresters, etc.

The situationat the state andlocal level is

considerably different,since most stateand local governments generally recruit for specificpositions with very detailed prerequisites. Hence, thereare very few positions in stategovernment, and fewer still in local government, forsomeone with simply a general major in naturalresources, or in any other general field. (I am, ofcourse, begging the question of courses taken andprogram content.) In other words, state and localgovernments will employ biologists, foresters,budget specialists, sanitarians,hydrologists, andso forth, but, they are less likely to employnatural resourcesmajors, unless in terms of thecourses completed, these majors can also qualifyas having one of thesemore specialized and traditionalconcentrations. Few states and cities haveanything likethe Federal Service Entrance Examination torecruit thegenerally trained student. At the stateand local levelthe 69

civil servicesystem is thus muchmore rigid, and while as a student of governmentI may insist that there is a need for generalisttype persons (at least many of us who teach political sciencefeel that this is one of the greatest deficienciesin state and local staffing patterns) nevertheless, state andlocal governments do notoften recruitgeneralists but

rather seek tofill very specificpositions, with specific technicalrequirements. At the local level

the outstandingexceptionsare those jobs leading to

city managercareers, and theseare few in number.

With respectto the promotionalprospects. of students with undergraduate degreesin naturalresources, it is my judgment that theopportunities would be considerably greaterin the federalgovernment than in state and localgovernments. This is partly because the federalgovernment hasso many

more employees, andpartly because thepersonnel

structure of thefederal governmentis more flexible. Thus the person with generalistabilities will be encouraged. But in mostsiutations promotiontends to be based on performance, andon availability of jobs.

Studies of theDepartment of Interiorseveral years ago indicated, that in some fieldsvery real blocks existedafter Grades 9or 11 because the number of higherpositionswere far fewer than the 70

number of lower positions,and the vacancy ratewas

not high enough tocreate sufficient openings for

steady promotions. This fact, together withthe

fact that our governmentalsystem at all levels places

a premium on technical training,would suggest that

promotional opportunitiesfor a person relying SOLELY.

on his undergraduate trainingin naturalresources could be quite limited. As a matter of fact, of

course, many other factors enterinto the promotion decision.

It is worth stressing,however, that we do not have anything likethe British or Indian "administra-

tive class" (and Iam not sure that I want tosee one

develop), whichprovides a separate proMotionalladder for generalists.

Returning to the basicquestion "should there be an undergraduatemajor in natural resources"my

inclination is torespond in the negative. At the

some time, I wouldurge that consideration be given, to developing strongminor or cognate concentrations

for those who haveresource careers in mind, whether

these careers wouldbe in agriculture, inengineering,

in biology, inearth science, in forestry,in economics, in publicadministration, or whatever. The emphasis of such a minorshould, in my opinion,stress policy problems and policyformation. It might, in fact, amount to almosta second major in terms of thenumber

e-,- - " of credits required. At thesame time if it is to meet the needs of the varietyof students Ihave

identified, theprogram would haveto be quite flexible permitting considerable adjustmentand choice, and being geared to the needsand interests ofpar- ticular students. Let me explorethis a bit farther. In broad outline, perhaps two generaldistinc- tions might bemade between theneeds of those students who are majoring in socialsciences and those majoring in natural sciences. For the socialscience student with an interest in naturalresources I would suggest that a substantial numberof sciencecourses be required. But many of thenormal sciencecourses may, in many cases, not provide thekind of knowledge and insight which couldbe of mostuse to the Social Science major. If thereare enough suchstudents, it would, of course, be possibleto design specialsci- ence courses. But, if the numberis few, thenperhaps we will have tosettle foran intensive "cap stone"

course, taught bya particularlycompetent natural scientist, who would seek topresent the studentwith insights into the technical parametersof natural resources problems inparticular fields.

G The problemfor the studentwith a major in one of the natural sciences wouldseem to be more readily dealt with. His naturalresources minor or cognate might wellinclude acourse in social statis- tics, stressingstatistical analysis. It should also

include acourse in resource economics,emphasizing

(among other things)both the concepts andtechniquer:

of cost-benefitanalysis. Such a minoror cognate should, finally,also includea course in resource

politics, emphasizingthe nature of thepolitical process, in order to familiarizethe student with

the extent towhich the politicalsystem provides

the means for makingchoices with respectto societal goals. In this connection,I would hope that the

student would becomeaware of our plural value struc-

ture, and theextent to whichwe are engaged in a

constant efforttowards making wiserchoices and

decisions withrespect toresources. I will return to this subjecta bit later.

Should a GraduateDegree in NaturalResources be Offered?

It is my view thatthe graduate degree innaturalresources can providenecessary and useful education beyond thebaccalaureate degree. In this connection, itmay be useful to distinguishbetween the Master's degree(probably conceivedof as a terminal degree)and the Ph.D. degree.

One conception ofa Master's degree in Natural

Resources would bethat of supplementinga variety of undergraduate technicaland specializedprograms such as engineering, biology,agriculture andso forth. 73

The objective inthis case would be toprovide the

student who has alreadypursued a specializedtech-

nical educationan opportunity to place histechnology in a broader socialcontext-- to permit him to deve-

lop a familiaritywith policyprocesses.

A related kind ofgraduateprogram would pro-

vide mid-careertraining for publicemployees, who

have been dealingwith resourceprograms and problems.

Here the objectivewould be to supplementformal

undergraduate trainingand particularlywork experience. The goal of suchmid-career training wouldbe

to prepare thosewho engaged in it forhigher level positions.

Mid-career trainingprograms are sometimes

justified in termsof preparing theparticipants for

"administrative"positions. It seems tome that this

goal is toonarrow in that almost bydefinition as one moves up the hierarchy ingovernment agenciesmore and more time must be devotedto administrative andpolicy matters. This would be trueever, with respect to many research positions,because even higher level specialists areconstantly involved inplanning, in making choices andsetting priorities. To do this intelligently requiresa knowledge of the larger context within whicheven a researchprogram must go forward. It might be noted,in passing, thattoo often technicallytrained poeple,even after they

.,..' 74

have had work experience, fail torecognize thata

basic socialproblem is that ofchoosing among alter-

natives and settingpriorities inareas where available

knowledge is lessthan complete, andwhere operative factors and forcesare usually very complex.

It seems tome that a meaningful graduateprogram either for thosewho continueon without any work

experience,or for the midcareerpublic employees should emphasizepolicyprocesses, so that the student

becomes aware ofthe political,social, and psycho-

logical context withinwhich naturalresources

programs go forward. The student shouldalso be

trained in analyticaltechniques appropriateto such

policy problems. Here an understandingof systems

analysis would beuseful, as would bean understanding of related economic cost-benefitapproaches. In respect to the latter, the emphasisshould not beon

simply how toconduct cost benefitstudies, but rather on the philosophical and conceptualframework, on

value premiseswhich underlie suchstudies, and on

their limitations. To develop hisanalytical skills

the student willof course requirea fairly wide -range of courses, includingcourses in statistical analysis.

The question ofprogram flexibilitycan only

be answered interms of the backgroundsof the students. If they allgave similar backgroundsthen a

rather rigidcourse sequence may beestablished. But, if theyhave diversebackgrounds (and I believe

that it wouldmake sense toencourage the widest

possible diversity)then much greaterflexibility

would need tobe built intothe program. One technique that appeals to me (modeled after thegraduate

program in politicalscience at NorthwesternUniver- sity) wouldbe to designan intensive graduate level

survey course, taughtby several facultymembers, perhaps from several disciplinesand offered inthree terms. Such a course might representapproximately

one-third of thegraduate student'sload.

With respectto the Master'sdegree in natural

resources, one questionthat might be examinedis

whether sucha degree should havelonger time requirements than most Master's degreestodgy. There is a

general presumptionthat a Master'sdegree can be earned in one year after thebaccalaureate degree. On the otherhand, thereare some two year Master's degrees, and itmight be arguedthat a graduate program in natural resources should involvemore than one year of study. This would clearlypose difficulties in the case of federal midcareertraining programs and probablyin othercases also. But the questions should beexamined and disposedof.

It should beclear thatmy conception ofa

Mater's degreeprogram in naturalresources is that such aprogram should seek todevelop in the 76

student those integrativeskills that will permit him

to deal more effectivelywith policy problems inthe natural resourcesfield. In addition to the general

seminar which I havesuggested, the student might

(dependingon his previous background)properly be exposed to rigorouscourses in resource economics,

since economics isconcerned with fundamentalques-

tions ofresource allocation, and tocourses dealing with the politicalprocess (by which I mean not simply

party activity, butthe whole chain ofactivities

involved in makinggovernmental naturalresources

decisions) Iam sure that in manycases students will

find difficultiesin scheduling all ofthe courses which might profitablycontribute to their particular interests.

Especially for themid-career trainingprogram, courses in personneladministration emphasizing inter- personal relations,in budgeting, and insimilar practical subjectsmight be desired. But I tend to minimize these kindsof courses, unless theyclearly rise above techniquesto consider fundamentalgovern- ment decisionprocesses.

With respect toa Ph. D. degree in naturalresources I have considerableuneasiness. Government agencies place lowvalue on doctorates thatare not in some technicalor specialized field. In my own case, for example, the fact thatI hold a Ph.D. in 77

Political Science hasnever been a major factor in

securing federalemployment or in beingpromoted.

The situation isquite different in thecase of sci-

entific degrees andresearch positions. Withrespect

to teaching, thedoctorate in naturalresources would

have very limitedutility, because mostcolleges and

universities findthemselves under greatpressure to hire people withdegrees inmore or less traditional

disciplines,even when seeking specialcompetence in a field like naturalresources. Degrees like the

doctorate in publicadministration oreven the doc-

torate in educationare regarded with some suspicion by many faculties.

With respect tothe question ofemployability of persons whohave completeda graduate program in naturalresources, it seems tome that this will depend partlyon the nature of theprogram, and partly on their interests. If they have hada strong undergraduate specialty,the addition of theMaster's degree would considerablyincrease their employability assuming thatthe Master'sprogram would emphasize the kindsof policy questionsreferred to previously. The mid-careerpersonnel would, by definition, continue intheir careers.

Are short coursesor institutes desirable?

It seems tome that short coursesor institutes could play avery important role, both forthe uni- 78

versity and forthe participants. The (Iontributior to the universityof shortcourses or institutes would be to provide opportunity for studentsand

faculty to beexposed to thepoints of view and interests of persons active in naturalresource programs. The benefits tothe participantswould

presumably be interms of broadeningtheir perspec- tives on the nature ofresource questions. The various kindsof shortcourses or institutes that might be developed are infinite, rangingfrom conference programs of very shortduration designed to appeal to citizen groups and citizen leadersor designed forparticulargroups of public employees.

A program ofseveral weeksduration for engieers working with water problems,for example, couldpro- vide opportunities for relating theengineer more effectively to the social andpolitical context within which his activities takeplace. In this connection, you may want me to enlargeupon the so-calledexecu- tive or management developmentprograms for public

employees in whichWayne StateUniversity has pioneered.

What kinds of research innaturalresources is most uzetentjj. needed?

In part, theanswer to this questionis a function of the kind ofprogram that is set-up. If the program emphasizespolicy problemsand seeks to orient 75

technically trainedpeople to the contextwithin which

resource decisionsare made, then additionalresearch in the policy area is needed, dealing withboth economic and politicalaspects ofresource policy

decisions. I would stress thatin many respects the

economic and thepolitical are complementary,re-

flecting differentkinds of valueframeworks and

different kinds ofchoices. This perhaps best

illustrated in theRFF pamphleton Water Pollution by Allen V. Kneese. The focus of economicanalysis is

efficiency,measured in non-marketsituations by cost-

benefit analysis. The politicalprocess, on the other hand, is primarily concerned with valuechoices, and

here research needsto focus onconsequences of alternate decisions, as well as on the decisionprocess and on factors influencing decisions. In effect, we are dealing with processes of change, whetherstudying natural resourceproblems in ourown country or in

foreign countries. Many of theseprocesses involve

economic dimensions,but other socialand political

factors are alsoinvolved, which haveoften been overlooked.

Where are the ga s in texts and otherstudmaterials in naturalresources?

To answer thisquestion would requirea sys- tematic survey of available materialsrelating to course goals. But, letme at least identifyone major 8o

deficiency which I find inmany of the materials re-

lating to naturalresources policy questions. This

deficiencyconcerns the extent to whichproposals and programsare presented as representing the best

and only solution toa particular problem, without

recognizing the complexvalue premises which underlie

such proposals andprograms, or assessing possible

alternatives, valueconflicts, or political feasi-

bility. Students of naturalresources must be

weaned away fromthe moralistic emphasisof the

"woodmenspare that tree" approach, toa recognition of the plural characterour values and the complexity

of the decisionproblems in our contemporarysociety

(reference mightbe made in this connectionto a

recent book by PaulDiesing entitled Reason in Society: Five Types of Decisionsand their Social Conditions.

University ofIllinois Press, 1962). An awareness of

the value premiseswhich underlieresource programs would among otherthings help in dealingrealistically with the timedimension. None of us are yet able to foresee the futurewith any degree of precision,yet most resource decisionsrest on premises with respect to the future. But we need to indicatewhat future we are talking aboutand recognize therange of possible policysolutions.

Natural Resourcesand the Political Process

The balance ofmy time I want to devote to the 81

topic which is of most interestto me-- THE POLITICS

OF NATURAL RESOURCES- - and which I believe strongly should be a vital part ofany curriculum in thena- turalresources field.

In popularparlance, politics isoften some-

thing distasteful,something to beavoided. We speak of "office politics" or "university politics"connot- ing thereby something which isnot quiteproper. If

someone whom we think isunqualified getsaparticular job, we say "Oh, he played politics". Despite the fact that Aristole stated many hundredsof yearsago that man was a political animal,we have in the

United Stateshad ambivolentfeelings with respect to politics. At the local level,particularly, there have been strong movements to getpolitics out of

government and fromthis movement havecome the non-

partisan electionsof many ofour cities. And, in one state, Minnesota, the legislatureis electedon a non-partisanballot.

In times past,many political scientistswere at the forefront of reform movementswhich emphasized

non-partisanship. But today politicalscientists have begun to reorient their thinking,recognizing the politicalprocess as a vital partof our societal

structure,necessary to the making ofchoices both as to means and as to ends. Our politicalinstitutions have developed inorder to permitor to facilitate -.1101!1.616!"1-19 -

choices. And the politicalprocess, then, is con-

cerned with makingdecisions, decisionsbacked by the authority or sanctionsof government.

Many early politicalscientists andmany citizens have misunderstood thefunction of politics

because, with Madison(particularly in theTenth

FEDERALIST Paper) andothers of the foundingfathers,

they assumed thatthe only choices whichconfronted society were choicesbetween what was correct and

what was inerror. The 18th Centuryemphasis on "right reason"very easily led to a host of miscon-

ceptions aboutpartisan activity, aboutthe nature of

the politicalstruggle, and about themotives or intelligence of one'sopponents.

Many factors havecontributed to undermining these simplistic views,so that today political

analysis begins withthe fact that society iscon-

fronted with pluralalternatives restingon plural

value premises, thevalidity of which mustoften simply be assumedor measured in operational terms.

It is in this contextthat our political- governmental

institutions are recognizedas mechanisms for choos-

ing among alternategoals and in theprocess of choice for working outcompromises and accommodations.

In the 1930's therewas in many circles a simplistic assumption thatgovernment planning would result in correct economicdecisions. This simple 82a

faith in planning as the rational solution tosocietal

problems is to becontrasted with thecomplex argu-

ments whichgo on today as to how bestto stimulate

economic growth. Most everyone wantseconomic growth. But is is throughthe politicalprocess that viable

(not necessarilycorrect) decisionsinvolving plural

values and pluralalternatives for achievingsuch values are made. As a result,our political-governmental institutions must be studied (andunderstood)

in terms of theirrole and function inthe selection

of values andof means for realizingthem.

All decisions,unfortunately, deal withthe

future, and whilewe hope to improveour techniques

for understandingcause and effect relationships,so

that the futuremay be less uncertain,we must con-

stantly remindourselves andour students that policy

decisions reston a host of assumptionswith respect to future conditions, what the PaleyCommission called "The CloudedCrystal Ball."A simple historical

illustration of thisis theconcern expressed by the

first ConservationCommission in 1908regarding an expected coal shortagein the 1930's. About a decade earlier Sir William Crookes had predictedworld famine by 1931 because of a shortage ofwheat. Given the premises on which these predictionsrested, theywere reasonable. But, ofcourse, it was the premiseswhich were in error. 83

We as intellectualsand as inheriters of de-

mocratic traditionsare dedicated to evermore

rational decisions. In this sensewe share the goals

of Jeffersonand his 18th Centurypeers. And, cer-

tainly the historyof our government'srelationships to natural resources is evidence of theconstant

struggle to increasethe rationality ofresource decisions. But formany reasons, resource policy

has not beenan example of "pure reason." It is in

this field where "porkbarrel politics" andlocal or

regional interestsoften obscure nationalinterests.

These situationswe must bring toour students.

At the same time,it seems tome, that the

dominant trendline in resource policyhas been a

continuing if notalways successfulsearch for the public interest. Perhaps herea caution is in order

so that we do notpresent our studentswith an over-

rationalized modelof reality. We must bring them to recognize theextent to whichmyths and rationali- zations of selfishand local interestshave been involved in policyformulation and inthis connection we should perhaps seekto developa healthy skepticism and an antidogmatismin their approachto policy analysis. They should learnto ask questionsand we should encourage a constant appraisal andreappraisal of consequences,analyzing results interms of their effects. 814.

In the following pages, I want to outlinesome of the elements of the politicalprocess which should form the basis of a course ofcourses designed to

orient the studentof naturalresources.

Characteristics ofthe PoliticalProcess

The end productof the politicalor govern-

mental process isdecision and action. A study of politicalor governmentalprocesses is a study of

decision-making, ofthe factors andforces which converge to result in particular policy andprogram decisions.

The governmentalprocess is purposeful. It

operates in relationto goals; itseeks to achieve objectives; it responds to thestimuli of feltor

identified needs. Whether these needsare real or assumed, accurately diagnosed or properlyprescribed for is of secondary relevanceto theireffectiveness as stimuli or catalysts. It is worthemphasizing that the goals, the objectives,the needs-- these stimuli to governmentalactivity-- are plural in character. They are in fact largelyasytnetrical andmay even be inconsistent and conflicting. They are oftencompo- sites of reason andnon-reason. They present evidence of the rational, the non-rational,and even the irrational in humanexistence. And the resultant programs ana policies bear the stigmataof their birth processes. 7.,

Although policy is oftendescribed as monoli- thic, more accurateperhaps is the recognition that

many forces and factors stimulatepolicy decision and

condition policydirection. Public policy is ingen- eral not logicallyunified nor tightly integrated.

Even withina narrow program field, piecemealdecisions and responses to particularproblems often result in

a policy structure that is farfrom neat and symmetri-

cal. The institutions ofgovernmental decision making in the U. S. do notencourage a high degree of atten-

tion to inter-relationshipsamong decisions and a careful consideration ofconsequences.

The process (or thatpart of it subject to

study at any particulartime) operates, ina context -

the environmentwithin which decisionsare made - and this context mustalso be understood and analyzed

since it affects,even limits and determines, the direc-

tion, scope andcontent of the decisionswhich result

from the operationof the politicalprocess.

Within the environmentor context are included

such factorsas: 1) The structure, machineryand in-

s titutions of government,their informal and operational

as well as their legaland formal aspects; 2)the

condition of society,its culture, itsvalues, the

economic system,etc.; 3) factors ofpolitical and social behavior suchas leadership and personality;

L) the ideas,beliefs, myths andsymbols together with 86

the knowledgeor lack thereof (ignorance)operative at

a particular time andplace and in relation toparti- cular circumstancesand situations.

Policy decisionsare not the result ofspon-

taneous generation. They are responses to feltneeds

-- attempts to deal with identifiedproblems. The

situation that givesrise to decisionmay be recogni-

zed by the publicgenerally, or itmay be intensely

felt bya very few. In the lattercase the folk-

saying that the "squeakingwheel gets the grease"

would oftenseem apt. It is not at allnecessary that

the problem becorrectly or objectivelyidentified and defined. Neither is itnecessary that the solu-

tion be appropriateto the problem. Stated goals need

not be real goals. Often it is impossiblecausally to connect ends and means,or to determine reasonsor

motives which ledto a particular policyor program.

And to separatereal motives fromrationalizations may be difficult or impossible.

Rarely is a need feltbroadly enough anda problem recognizedclearly enough to resultin spon-

taneous support fora particular programor policy. Hence, the need forleadership. Hence, the necessity for promoting bothan awareness of the problem and its importance,and the appropriatenessof particular solutions for dealingwith it. Typically thesepro- motional activitiesinvolve the building ofalliances 87

and alignments, focusedon the points at which crucial decisions are made.

In a society which placesgreat stress upon

majority rule the effort isin the direction ofcon- vincing decision makersthat if not a majority, then at least a significantsegment of the population

favors (or would favor)a particular program or policy.

Claims exceed reality bymany times, and prac-

tice obviously departsfrom theory. First, rarely

does a majority favora particular policy or decision

in the simple referendumsense. Here, the major

difficulty is that in realityonly a relatively few

have even a dim understandingof policy issues. Of

almost equal difficulty isthe determination of view points of those whomay actually understand the issues.

Institutions for thispurpose are weak or non-existent.

Voting is of little directvalue because party activity

is rarely issue-orientedand political partiesare

(in this context)patently irresponsible. The opera- tion of the federalsystem, the size of the country,

and the single-memberdistrict basis of geographic

representationencourage consideration of particu- larized local problemsoutside the context of broadly

identified national interests. Thus it is through the accumulation ofsupport at successive geographic levels that many crucialquestions are decided, rather than by the simpleprocess of majority rule.

...... ,0V 88

And the tendency toaccommodate has fullestplay,

since the doubtswhich might be identifiedby logical analysis and rationalcalculation are rarely voiced.

Constant actions andreaction amongmany forces

and factors involvedin public policydecisions is

characteristic of thegovernmentalprocess. Various

terms have beenapplied to this aspectof the process,

including "struggle,""conflict," "tension,""competi- tion," and"counter-vailance."

The stresson struggle is in fact anotherway

of saying thata study of politicalprocess must be

concerned with thedistribution and allocationof

power.and influence,with the interactionamong indi-

viduals andgroups, with the forming andreforming of alliances and alignments. Much of this issugges-

ted by the graphicdefinition of politicsby Harold Lasswell: "Politics:Who Gets What, When, How."

The concepts ofstruggle, however designated,

all imply peopleas participants, those whoare ad-

vantaged and thosewho are disadvantaged. But while ultimately the basicunit in theprocess is the

individual, it isapparent that in mostsituations individualsare organized intogroups or groupings, which are theactual participantsin the struggle. The place of the group in the process ofgovernment (which has been recognizedfrom Aristotle on)has in recent decadesbecome an importantpart of political analysis. 89

Earl Latham, elaboratingsomewhat on the

Aristotelean definitionof man as a political animal,

has stated "politicsconcerns itself with the patterns

of organization bywhich human wit andenergy are brought together ina structure of orders and func-

tions to accomplish,through this coM6ctivity, what

is beyond attainmentof any individual part of it."

do not accept the ideathat the struggle

inevitably producescountervailing forces which effectively check eachother and thus bring about

good and desirableresults, nor the view thatvalue results are indifferentand the public interest

criteria irrelevant. I would stress rather,that the political processcan and often does seek and work

toward decisionswhich are in the publicinterests, and that sucha desirable result is possible where

the institutionsinvolved in governmentaldecision-

making evidencestrong biases toward rationalityand where society includesamong its values an effort to

increase logicalcalculation and rationalcontrol in

the definition andrealization of publicpurpose.

My view assumes thatin democratic America

there is a strong andpersistent belief that facts should outweigh fancy,that reason shouldovercome ignorance and prejudice, andthat choices and decisions in the publicinterest can be made. At the same time it is recognized that thedefinition of the 90

public interestis noeasy matter. This is partly because for the foreseeable futurethat whichwe know will continue to be infinitesimalwhen compared to the unknown. Hence, thepurpose of the governmental process is the search for the publicinterest, to which search the free tradeof ideas, theconflict and struggle among groups and interests,and the constant appraisal and reappraisalof experience is essential.

It is unreasonable and unrealisticto posita policy process which producesonly correctanswers. At the same time, as knowledgeand insight,experience and technique develop thedeterminations of public interest shouldimprove. But it is especially becauseof present limitations on complete knowledge(and perhapseven though the quantity of knowledgeincreases tremen-

dously, the ratioof the unknownto the known will remain more or less constant)that the political process as it operates in the UnitedStates is in fact an effective means for making societaldecisions which combine so many facts andfactors, values and beliefs, elementsand interests. Like the market place concept of the economists,the politicalprocess as here describedprovides ameans for bringing those multiple forces, interestsand influencesinto play. The economist isconcerned with theallocation of resources; thepolitical scientist (andpolitical process) withthe allocation ofpower and the fruits of power.

The subject matterof a course in thefield of resourcepolitics would thusdeal with those

elements of thedecision makingprocess which the

economist oftendimisses with theconvenient and

necessary phrase "ceterisparibus." It is easy to

forget the extentto which efficiencymodels and

cost-benefit analysesrest upon the deliberateex-

clusion ofmany factors and valueswhich may often

be of crucialimportance to individualsand to

society. Maximization of welfareseems like such

an eminently logicalgoal, that it isvery easy to

overlook themany other values of societyand assume that economic efficiency is theonly validmeasure.

Often, largelybecause cost-benefitanalyses are carried out atlevels considerablybelow thosere- quired by the pure theoretical concepts,fundamental premises ofprogram goals (with respectto which efficiency is sought)are not analyzed. Too often, for example,alternate expenditurepatterns are not even considered. To illustrate,a unit of higher educationmay be more importantthan an additional unit of flood control. But such choicesare beyond the ken of most cost-benefit studies,although implicit 92

in theoreticalformulations.

It is this problemwith which HerbertSimon has

dealt in hissuggestion that publicdecision making as a matter of logiccannot deal with "maximization"

because the totalnumber of alternativescan never

be brought togetherfor appraisal atany one time of decision. He suggests,instead, the conceptof "satisficing"as indicating amore realistic concept of public decision making. By this term Simonmeans to emphasize the temporal andintellectual impossi-

bility of makingmaximization decisionsin the real

world of administrativeorganizations.

One recent workby economist AlanV. Kneese of Resources for theFuture to which Ihave already

referred (WaterPollution, 1962)clearly recognizes the place of political decisions, (i.e.choices) with respect to the expenditure of publicfunds. But, in my opinion, Kneesestill does notgo far enough,

partly because inour economy it has SEEMEDpossible to spend money for all the thingswe wanted to do, and few policymakers have felta real urgency for

establishing prioritiesamong; activities andbetween

sections of thecountry. I am not at allsure, however, that this euphoric situation will continueas our population approaches 300,000,000 living inthe metropolitan complexesunevenly distributedaround the country. 93

It is in thiscontext of increasingpopulation and consequentpressures on resources that Ifeel

that choice andpriority questionswill becomemore and more pressing. If this is likely,then those of

us interested in naturalresources must increaseour

awareness of the choiceproblems which societyfaces and theconsequences of followingone or another course. For thisreason, too, we should betraining our students and preparingthem for intelligent approaches to these choice problems. To me thismeans not pat solutions,but anawareness of the interplay of interests and values anda sensitivity to thecomplex factors and forces relevant topolitical-governmental decisions.

The studentinterested in naturalresources

should thereforecome to understand fundamentalcon- cepts of social andpoliticalprocesses, and to in-

terpret socialtrends and developmentsas they might relate to resource uses. Dogmatic doctrines ofso-

called "wiseresource use" must be qualifiedby an

awareness of the necessitiesfor maintaininga viable society. a The studentalso should gainsome insight into the relationshipof the Americaneconomic and political

system to the rest ofthe world. In this latterarea

lie .some reallydifficult ethicalquestions. Perhaps

we can leave the ethicalquestions of Americaliving on Park Avenue while therest of the world figuratively lives in the slumsto the churches, but atleast we should makeour students aware of the economicand po- liticalconsequences of the fantasticimbalances between the level of living of Americans and.r.../f most of the rest of theworld. 95

CONCLUDING STATEMENT

The series of seminars justconcluded has

brought together practitionersand students from

every major field witha resources interest. Seminar participants were responsibleadministrators and

educators with a tremendousrange of experience in

resource management. From such a groupone could

not expect unanimityon all issues. However, there

was a remarkable degree of generalagreement on

several major issues. These areas of generalagreement, as understoodby the writer, are summarized below.

1. An undergraduate curriculum:innatural resources is defensible andmay be desirable as a "general

education"or "liberal arts" type program.

a. Graduates of sucha program would probably

have limited vocationaland promotional

opportunities with most naturalresource organizations.

2. Participants were nearlyunanimous in contending

that most presentuniversity programsare in-

adequate in providingthe kind of training that

is desirable forresource managers.

a. Much of the criticism referredto over- specializaticn and the need for "broadened" education. 96

b. Notwithstanding the generalcriticism ex-

pressed ina. above, there were no ...

4 recommendations for "diluting"or reducing

requirements for professionalundergraduate degrees.

c. In considerationof the dilemma posed ina. and b. above,a 5 and 6 year undergraduate

program would appear to be theobvious solution. There was, however, little

enthusiasm for substantiallylengthening the undergraduateprogram.

3. The split-majorwas proposed as an answer to the

problem posed in item2. The split-major would

overcome some of the inadequaciesof most conventional training. Presumably the student

with a split-majorwould emerge froma 5 or 6

year program with twoundergraduate degreesor possibly withone graduate and one undergraduate degree.

4. With the exception ofthe liberal arts oriented

program and proposals forthe split-major, there seemed to be littleinclination to make drastic

changes in undergraduatecurricula. There was

general agreement,however, on the need for,and

the opportunitiesin, revisedprograms of gradu-

ate study. Categories of graduatestudy which

appeared to receivemost supportare summarized 7-77r777-77

below.

a. Graduate work in thestudent's area of ori-

ginal specialty mainlyto train researchs scientists.

b. "Retooling" andupdating of techniciansin

their specialization. Such training would

probably not lead toa graduate degree.

c. A "broadening"program in Natural Resources

leading to the Mastersdegree. Such a

program would be designed toexpand the

horizons and broadenthe understandings of persons trained inone of the conventional resources specialties.

d. A graduateprogram for managers and poten- tialmanagers with a concentration in

Economics, PolicyFormation and Public Administration.

5. There was generalagreement that increasedex-

changes of personnelbetween resource organizations and theuniversities would be highly

desirable. The high cost ofsuch exchanges

in terms ofre-location of familiesand loss of momentumwas recognized.

6. The need for bettercoordination of researchbe- tween the universitiesand operating agencies was emphasized. 98

7. There appeared to begeneral understanding that

the management of thenation's resources is not

the province ofany single discipline and that

policies and practicesdealing with a single

resource inevitably haveconsequences for others.

Phillip 0. Foss