Deforestation of an urban ecosystem DRAFT RESPONSE (from President Welty)
I woke up this morning to find the following DRAFT response in my campus email inbox, and thought it worth sharing given the interest my original letter has generated. Do share your thoughts on this while I mull it over and respond.
{Update: Several faculty colleagues tell me that they too received versions of the same generic response to letters they wrote on this issue.)
{Update: Several faculty colleagues tell me that they too received versions of the same generic response to letters they wrote on this issue.)
Begin forwarded message:
From: John Welty <johnw@csufresno.edu>Subject: Deforestation of an urban ecosystem DRAFT RESPONSEDate: May 26, 2012 8:20:56 AM PDTTo: Madhusudan Katti <mkatti@csufresno.edu>Cc: John Welty <johnw@csufresno.edu>
Sent from my iPadThank you for your thoughtful and articulate letter regarding the removal of trees in preparation for a parking project. I understand your concern and I agree that there was insufficient discussion as we approached this renovation. I have sent a message to the campus community today [going out Friday] about the need to review our consultative process on major renovations. I also will consult with Academic Senate Chair Lynn Williams and the Senate Executive Committee on the shared governance process that is applicable to projects of this nature. Attached to my campus message was information about the project from Vice President Matson, which includes the re-forestation plans included in the project, which will be of interest to you.
Again, thank you for sharing your concerns. It is caring faculty such as you who are Fresno State's greatest asset.
1 comments:
Good response from the President.
This is a depressing and unacceptable development indeed. It looks like two things:
1) the poor process whereby the University plans and implements this type of activity and;
2) the backward philosophy of the landscaping and implenting "improvement" projects at the university.
For (1), if one plans to cut 160 big, mature, eye-pleasing and shading trees, plan that people are going to be upset: humans love trees. The university doesn't have the appropriate, democratic, inclusive and transparent process in place to plan and implement these projects. I suspect that leadership was aware that this activity would be a problem and the lack of a good process to vet and deal with perceptions and concerns is glaring. At a minimum, faculty, staff and STUDENTS ought to be allowed opportunities to comment and affect change in their learning environment.
For (2) the University should be a leader in sound practices which conserve and protect, not deplete and harm, natural resources. The lack of a plainly thoughtful policy regarding landscaping is shameful and should be immediately revised. While attending CSUF, I marveled at the over-watering and lack of local, native plants in the campus feel and look. The philosophy reflected in the campus greenery reflects a common attempt to portray a lush and green campus with plant species which struggle to survive in our special, arid and erratic environment.
The University should lead in planning and implementing creative and conservation-based strategies that meet the campus community needs, not a great example of poor planning and process and subsequent ridiculous and inefficient implementation practices.
Post a Comment