May 22nd, 2006

Panel Suggests Breaking OSU's Ties to Timber Industry

Friday, May 19, 2006

MICHAEL MILSTEIN

The Oregonian

The leadership of Oregon State University's College of Forestry needs an overhaul, and its dean, Hal Salwasser, showed poor judgment in his handling of a furor over research into the impacts of logging.

Those are the preliminary findings of 13 professors and others appointed by Salwasser to review the episode. Their report will be the focus of a collegewide discussion next week.

While the college itself is diverse, its leaders are not, the reviewing panel said in its draft report. They are primarily white middle-aged males who get advice dominated by timber industry views and took the industry's side in a recent furor over the logging of burned forests.

That should change, the panel said.

Salwasser created the group in response to turmoil surrounding research at the college that concluded logging sets back recovery of burned forests.

The research, led by Daniel Donato, a graduate student, and co-authored by his professor, was published on one page of the journal Science. It received wide attention because it undermined Bush administration arguments for salvaging burned trees by logging.

But some prominent professors at the College of Forestry who argue for logging and replanting after wildfires tried to derail publication of Donato's research. The journal printed it anyway, but their move raised alarm at OSU about erosion of academic freedom.

It also raised the issue of the college's longtime ties to the timber industry, which supplies a slice of its funding through logging taxes.

The research and the furor surrounding it have since been the subject of congressional and state hearings. Salwasser's e-mails also have emerged, showing close interaction with timber interests. In one, he refers to certain environmentalists as "goons."

Salwasser himself coached the appeal to Science and worked with the timber industry to refute Donato's work, said the report, and the narrow perspectives of college's leaders blinded them to their own missteps.

"The inability of the leadership to recognize the academic freedom issues involved in their participation in the letter to Science calling for delay of the Donato et al. paper, and their coaching of groups interested in attacking the Donato et al. paper, stand out as significant failures of leadership and narrowness of purpose," said the panel, headed by professor K. Norman Johnson.

"The quaqmire"

"If the (College of Forestry) leadership were more representative of the diverse perspectives and expertise resident in the College, we believe it would have been less likely to march into the quagmire that transpired after publication of the Donato, et al. paper."

The final version of the report will be discussed Wednesday at an all-college meeting in Corvallis. That will be followed by a vote on whether Salwasser can "lead the College through the changes needed to thrive in the future," Johnson wrote in a collegewide e-mail this week.

The report then will go to Salwasser for a response and to the university administration, said Todd Simmons, an OSU spokesman.

The findings are especially critical of Salwasser. The report says he violated OSU policies by lending college support to legislation advanced by Rep. Greg Walden, R-Ore., that would speed logging of burned forests.

The House passed that legislation Wednesday. Walden's Web site lists Salwasser as a supporter.

Policy of neutrality

But college policies caution that the university and college should not take sides in policy debates, Johnson's group says.

"The Dean's initial statements and his email correspondence reflect a high level of interaction with individuals from, and support of, the industry side of the argument," the report says. "The dean's email correspondence and memos show poor judgment in his interactions both within and outside of the College."

While the college -- as part of a land-grant college -- should work with timber interests, it also should seek advice from other perspectives such as conservation groups and research societies, the report says.

Salwasser declined to comment Thursday. He previously apologized for mishandling the episode. Earlier this month at a forum, he took responsibility for what he called "stupid and inappropriate (actions) that caused harm to the college and to some individuals."

He said he will "focus on informing rather than advocating, and I will make it clear that I represent myself and do not speak for the entire college, except when I am advocating for our budget or students.

"A better college"

"We will be a better college for having endured this and learned from our actions, a bit scarred and battered but probably looking and acting differently, but better," he said.

He said he will work with the OSU provost and president to address all the recommendations of Johnson's group.

Cristina Eisenberg, a graduate student who is a member of the group, praised Salwasser's commitment to resolve long-standing divisions at the college.

"That makes me very hopeful that good things will come out of this," she said. "It's been a very unfortunate thing for us in many ways, but it's also created a lot of positive openings."

Recommendations in the report include diversifying decision-making bodies at the college, such as an executive committee that now includes department heads. It also should include faculty and students, and should be open and accountable, the report said.

It also recommended that faculty be subject to a code of conduct that currently applies only to students. The college also should foster discussion of controversial issues, and do a better job telling alumni and Oregonians how its research investigates the issues from all sides.

Michael Milstein: 503-294-7689; [email protected]