Minutes of the ESA Governing Board

6–7 August 2005

Montreal, Canada

Members present:

Jerry Melillo (President), Nancy Grimm (President-Elect), Alan Covich (incoming President-Elect), Gus Shaver (Vice President for Science), Norm Christensen (Vice President for Finance), Carol Brewer (Vice President for Education and Human Resources), David Inouye (Secretary), Shahid Naeem, Margaret Palmer, and Dee Boersma (Members-at-Large), Richard Pouyat (incoming VP for Public Affairs), Bill Parton (incoming VP for Finance), Dennis Ojima (incoming Member-at-Large)

Staff present:

Katherine McCarter (Executive Director), Cliff Duke (Director of Science), Elizabeth Biggs (Director of Finance), Sue Silver (Editor), Jason Taylor (Director of Education), Nadine Lymn (Director of Public Affairs), David Baldwin (Managing Editor), David Gooding (Associate Managing Editor)

Guests:

Steve Chaplin, Bill Michener, Kiyoko Miyanishi, Paul Ringold

I. ROLL CALL (8:59 am)

A) The GB unanimously adopted the proposed agenda.

B) Minutes from the May 2005 Governing Board meeting were adopted with one editorial correction.

• REPORTS

A) Report of the President (Melillo)

• Plans for the Mexico meeting are falling into place, including major funding from the Ford Foundation.

• Jerry has made initial contact with a regional foundation about the idea of a regional focus for the education campaign.

B) Report of the Executive Director (McCarter) and staff

Lots of good news.

• We have just enrolled our 9000th member, in our 90th year.
• Frontiers fund-raising has been proceeding well.
• Mexico meeting plans are going well, including the financing.
• Journals are doing well.
• Registration numbers for this meeting will set a new record.
• Success in all these areas is due to the staff’s outstanding efforts.

For more information, see the extensive Annual Reports in your folders for this meeting.

1) Report on publications (Baldwin)

Submissions to Ecological Applications have gone up significantly (about 10% in the past year); the number of pages is going to increase immediately, and the number of issues will increase from 6 to 8, possibly in 2007. The office is now caught up after the recent server crash.

2) Frontiers (Silver)

Frontiers was ranked by ISI for the first time: number 5 out of 134 in the Environmental Science category, and number 12out of 107 in the Ecology category. Eight papers have now arrived for next year’s special issue focusing on China. A special issue focusing on Mexico is in the works, and NSF has provided funding to underwrite it.

3) Public Affairs (Lymn)

About 10 out-of-town media people are here in Montreal for the meeting (including Science and Nature), as well as freelancers. A local publication has just put out an eight-page spread about the meeting.

4) Education (Taylor)

TIEE’s fourth volume was recently published, and a CD is for sale at this meeting. A fifth volume is in preparation. There are 35 SEEDS participants at this meeting (a record number). The Bioscience Education Network will likely receive NSF funding soon; ESA is providing the ecological component for the Science Digital Library that this program will support.

5) Administration (Biggs)

We’ll probably end with about 9200 members this year (8600 last year), and have jumped about 500/year for the past few years). The online database is working smoothly, both for membership and registration for this meeting.

There was some discussion about how to attract additional membership/funding from the nonacademic sector, particularly the corporate world. Hiring of a fundraiser might catalyze this.

6) SBI/Science (Duke)

There is a new program assistant, Devon Rothschild. Dr. Elizabeth (Bette) Stallman will be replacing Rhonda Kranz, who is leaving ESA to pursue new opportunities. Plans are proceeding for the National Agricultural Air Quality workshop in June 2006.

There may be a new Microbial Ecology Section applying for establishment soon.

C) ESA/BES Ecological Society presidents meeting (Melillo)

BES has significant funding they wish to use to help establish ecological societies in developing countries, particularly former Commonwealth countries. There will be representatives here from ecological societies from nine different countries.

D) Report of the Vice President for Finance (Christensen)

McCarter presented the fourth-quarter financial report; the financial picture is quite good (in striking contrast to several years ago), and hasn’t changed much since the May meeting. Fiscal soundness is key to our ability to raise additional funding, and the current reserve is being used to help generate income. We have in hand about half of the $2 million goal for a fiscal reserve to allow us to meet future challenges.

As of 2005 all unrestricted funds and about $500,000 of restricted funds (total about $1.4 million) have been moved to management by Townley Capital Management.

III. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS

A) Fiscal Year 2005–2006 budget (McCarter)

The change in subscription prices is the biggest budget change. A Development/Fundraising staff position is included for the first time. Devon Rothschild will be a full-time employee in the Science office, and will take on some responsibilities that were previously contracted out.

Carol Brewer asks about the Millennium Fund. Some of it is going to the Development position, $30,000 to Board strategic initiatives. Total is about $86,000 now. There appears to be some confusion among Board members and the membership about the different endowments. A suggestion is made that the funds be pooled, perhaps with a renaming of funds. Norm will bring a proposal to the Board.

Carol asks the Board to consider some allocations from the Board strategic initiatives fund: Printing and distribution of the WAMIE II report ($2000–3000); analysis and report of the undergraduate education survey ($3000); translation of some of the Issues in Ecology into Spanish in time for the 2006 Mexico meeting (about $1000 each; total perhaps $3000).

1) Approval of the proposed budget. A motion is moved, seconded, and approved: The Board approves the proposed budget of $5,893,028.

2) Committee funds will be available for four meetings of seven people each receiving travel funds. Three standing committees (Science, Education and Human Resources, and Public Affairs) typically receive funding, with $5600 reserved for an additional meeting (possibly related to the Development position). All three VPs would like to reserve funding to have the option to meet during the coming year.

3) Long-Range Planning Grants: A subset of the Board (the three Members-at-Large) is appointed to review and approve proposals from the sections, chapters, and standing committees.

4) Discussion of the presentation of the budget to the Council

A motion is moved, seconded, and approved: The Board approves use of most of the uncommitted Millennium Fund funding ($5000) to print the WAMIE II report, and for analysis and publication of the undergraduate education survey. The Board also approves the process of having Board members make proposals at the May meeting for use of strategic initiative funding.

B) Biodiversity statement (Powers/Lymn)

This position statement is currently under review by the Public Affairs Committee. David Hooper will send it to Board members soon for approval.

Top of next column

C) Nuclear energy statement (Melillo)

The Council of Scientific Society Presidents inquired of its member societies if they had a position on nuclear energy. There is consensus that this is an important and timely issue. Rich Pouyat will chair a longer-term effort to develop an ESA position statement about nuclear energy, and perhaps energy issues in general. Norm Christensen will help, and Rich is given suggestions of several people or groups who might be appropriate to help with this effort.

D) Regional Initiative concept (Melillo, Lymn, Taylor)

Nadine Lymn summarizes the concept paper for an ESA initiative to inform environmental decision-making at a regional level. We might want to have some ESA staff in place in any region where such an effort is going on. We want to be honest brokers of environmental concerns. Could we regionalize the rapid response teams? Can we use chapters for regional leadership, or the NEON groups? We may need to be careful about whom we partner with; e.g., many foundations may already have adopted advocacy positions. This effort may help to organize and energize the ESA.

E) Public Policy Priorities for the year (Lymn)

Priorities are not drastically different from the previous year; trying to predict what will be the important issues before policy makers this year. Invasive species, endangered species, forest management, marine issues, climate change, ecosystem services. Not meant to be an exhaustive list, as other hot topics may arise. Some discussion of the intelligent design/evolution controversy, and how ESA might be appropriately involved.

F) NEON update (Brewer, Palmer, Michener)

Michener presentation: They are halfway though the 20-month design process, and have held three meetings so far. Traceability matrices are shown for demonstrating linear connections between science and other areas. There will be both science and education missions. Twenty different climate regions have been identified. In most, an urban-to-wildlands gradient will be studied, with managed ecosystems in between, and new kinds of sensors and sensor arrays to be deployed among them. This will provide insights into coupling of human and natural systems. Terrabytes of data will be generated by these sensors, ranging from terrestrial to aquatic systems. One array will be present in each of the 20 climate regions, and another set will be mobile to take advantage of transient events. NEON Inc. will be incorporated as of January, high-level funding request will go to NSF in November, requests for prospectuses will come out next, with a panel to review them. Cyber infrastructure will be built first, with all nodes; then build-out will occur one at a time as sensor arrays become available. Node site selection will probably occur through NSF.

G) National Data Center (Grimm)

Could this piggyback on NEON? Will resources devoted to this then be lost from what was available for field work? Will research itself be discouraged by a requirement for data registry and archiving? Should we talk to NSF about funding a Center? The Board will vote on Friday on the Vision statement.

H) Mexico meeting update (Duke)

We’re within a few thousand dollars of the target goal for general meeting support. Ford Foundation has provided $100,000 for travel awards for students from Latin America. There will also be scholarship funds for U.S. students. Planning is proceeding well. Board members are encouraged to help recruit students, both national and international, to attend the meeting, and to attend themselves.

I) Annual meeting schedule (McCarter)

A quick review of meetings that Board members should attend this week.

Executive session followed, and ended about 6 pm.

Continuation of Board meeting on 7 August, 8:30 am. Paul Ringold and Kiyoko Miyanishi (current and next year’s Program Chairs) joined the meeting, as did Steve Chaplin.

J) Montreal meeting (Ringold)

There were 25% more abstract submissions this year than last year, which was itself a record. A significant change is the number of organized oral sessions. One of the most difficult organizational tasks was putting 1200 abstracts into 200 sessions.

K) Memphis meeting (Miyanishi)

Lord Robert May is suggested as a keynote speaker. The Board suggested some other possible speakers.

L) Future meetings (Chaplin)

Meetings in 2009 and 2010: the committee likes to work about 5 years ahead, as most other large societies also do, and this gives us the best chance at good rates and preferred dates. The size of the meeting is becoming a significant factor in restricting the number of possible cities. Pittsburgh and Albuquerque (site of 1997 meeting) are suggested.

A motion is moved, seconded, and approved: The Board approves the selection of Albuquerque for the 2009 meeting.A motion is moved, seconded and approved: The Board approves the selection of Pittsburgh for the 2010 meeting.

M) Motion to amend the By-laws (Christensen)

Norm suggested that we replace the Finance and Investments Committee with an Audit Committee (in part to satisfy the Sarbanes-Oxley requirements), and add a Development Committee. This proposal must go to the Council, which will have 2 months to consider it, and vote.

N) Talking points about the importance of having and growing operating reserves (Christensen)

Norm described some of the reasons why it is important for ESA to continue to develop its operating reserves. (Our current goal is $2 million.)

O) Publication program review (Baldwin)

David presented a brief history of ESA journals (e.g., Ecology began as a continuation of the Brooklyn Botanical Garden’s journal Plant World), and the revised mission statements for the publications in general and for each journal individually. ESA has been an early adopter of electronic publishing and access (e.g., online journals, participation in JSTOR, online submission/review, production innovations, PDF proofs and reprints). Issues for the near future include: pricing of library and individual subscriptions (print vs. online); pay per view or mini subscriptions; data registries and archives. Issues on the horizon: open access, the future of print, publication of volumes and issues (vs. individual papers), archiving (an ESA responsibility, or a library issue?). The “Brown Committee” report brought up some issues that could be reconsidered in the future, such as a preprint server, and making reviews and commentary publicly available. The future role of journals in the overall financial picture of the ESA needs to be monitored, including issues such as open access, the trend for declining subscriptions, and covering the costs of innovations such as Ecological Archives and the proposed Data Registry/Archive. Some of these topics will have to be considered in detail at future meetings.

Some data trends: submissions are up (300% since the mid-1980s); acceptances are down (acceptance levels 22–25%); paper lengths are down (the Don Strong effect); pages published are going up; 41% of manuscripts are rejected without review; mean time to first decision is under 2 months. Some papers are being published within 6 months of submission, and most reports are being published in less than a year.

A question for the Board that would help to provide guidance to editors and the Publications Office: In the face of increasing submissions, do we want to continue to become more selective, or publish more papers?

P) New business

Brewer – do we want to pursue translation of some Issues in Ecology to Spanish before the Mexico meeting? Board members are asked to bring suggestions for particular issues to the meeting on Friday. Nancy Grimm reminds Board members about the November meeting in China that at least three Board members will attend. An issue from yesterday’s Executive Session: redesign of the ESA web page should be a priority for the coming year.

Q) Thanks to departing Board members Norm Christensen, Margaret Palmer, Sunny Power, and Bill Schlesinger.

Meeting was adjourned at 12:30 pm.

Minutes of the ESA Governing Board

12 August 2005

Montreal, Canada

Members present:

Nancy Grimm (President), Jerry Melillo (Past-President), Alan Covich (President-Elect), Gus Shaver (Vice President for Science), Bill Parton (Vice President for Finance), David Inouye (Secretary), Shahid Naeem, Dee Boersma, and Dennis Ojima (Members-at-Large), Richard Pouyat (Vice President for Public Affairs)

Staff present:

Katherine McCarter (Executive Director), Cliff Duke (Director of Science), Elizabeth Biggs (Director of Finance), Sue Silver (Editor), Jason Taylor (Director of Education), Nadine Lymn (Director of Public Affairs), David Baldwin (Managing Editor)

Guests: Matt Jones and Jim Reichman

• INFORMATION

A) Welcome by President Nancy Grimm

Thanks to the staff (especially Ellen) for the successful meeting.

B) Organizing for the year

What’s going well that we want to keep pursuing? The field of ecology is entering an era characterized by larger, more collaborative and interdisciplinary research with outreach efforts. So what should ESA’s role be in this context? We can provide support for such research with the Annual Meeting and other efforts to foster communication. Another role is to play a big part in helping to build and represent the community of ecologists. Nancy would like to see progress this year on:

1) The regional communication initiative: identify a pilot region and establish a structure for it.

2) International outreach: e.g., hosting people at the Annual Meeting, and meetings in other countries.

3) Hiring a development officer.

In addition, several new or recently initiated projects should receive attention:

1) Continue development of plans for a national data archive (beyond registry).

2) Find ways to support existing community development efforts, e.g., NEON.

3) Revitalize the sustainability science issue; devote some time at the October Governing Board meeting to revisiting the priorities identified from comparison of the Visions report with other long-range ideas previous Boards have had. Explore possibilities for outreach to other disciplines.

4) Charge the Professional Ethics and Appeals Committee with re-examining the code of ethics. Maybe have a session at the next Annual Meeting on ethics in ecology.

Top of next column

5) Revamp the ESA web site. The Publications Committee will be asked to help with this task.

Jerry Melillo suggested that the Federation of the Americas initiative will need continued attention. The Merida meeting will help in this regard, but we should continue to nurture this effort.

A couple of Board members have heard feedback at this meeting that some ESA members are concerned about the potential for NEON to draw funding away from smaller-scale research. What will be transformational about NEON? The network structure? Development and deployment of new kinds of sensors and instruments? How can we help educate the membership about the potential benefits to ecological science of NEON? How can we contribute to ensuring that NEON does not result in a reduction of resources for basic ecological science?

C) 2005–2006 meeting dates

A date of 20–21 October 2005 in Washington, D.C., was chosen; new Board members will have an orientation beginning at noon on the 19th. Board members will be polled about dates for the May 2006 meeting.

• DISCUSSION ITEMS

A) Data registry. Presentation by Jim Reichman of results of discussion of the Publications Committee, with a presentation by Matt Jones.

This is a project of the Knowledge Network for Biocomplexity (KNB; ‹http://knb.ecoinformatics.org›, a national network intended to facilitate ecological and environmental research on biocomplexity. Data will be archived in two places. Reviewing entries for acceptability will probably require about 1 person-month/year.

A motion tabled from the May 2005 meeting is revived. The ESA has approved the data registry at NCEAS and strongly encourages all authors of papers accepted in ESA journals to use this or another ESA-approved registry for data in their papers. Data registration will become a requirement for papers submitted for ESA journals beginning in 2006. The motion is amended: The Governing Board has approved an ESA data registry and strongly encourages all authors of papers accepted in ESA journals to use this registry for data in their papers. Data registration is encouraged on a voluntary basis as of January 2006, and will become mandatory in the future. Seconded, and approved unanimously.

B) Translations of Issues in Ecology

Water in a Changing World, Biodiversity and Ecosystem Function, and Human Alteration of the Global Nitrogen Cycle are suggested as the top three priorities for translation into Spanish. We will look for volunteers, but may have to pay something.

C) Feedback

The number of people registered for the meeting was 4493 (based on present data). There were many student activities this year. The only negative comment received concerned scheduling the Opening/Awards Ceremony opposite regular sessions. This should be avoided in future.

The meeting was adjourned at 10:48 am.

Minutes of the ESA Governing Board

20–21 October 2005

Washington, D.C.

Members present: Nancy Grimm (President), Jerry Melillo (Past-President), Alan Covich (President-Elect), Gus Shaver (Vice President for Science), Bill Parton (Vice President for Finance), David Inouye (Secretary), Richard Pouyat (Vice President for Public Affairs), Dee Boersma, Dennis Ojima (Members-at-Large). Carol Brewer, (Vice President for Education and Human Resources) joins the meeting in the afternoon.

Staff present:

Katherine McCarter (Executive Director), Cliff Duke (Director of Science), Elizabeth Biggs (Director of Finance), Sue Silver (Editor), Nadine Lymn (Director of Public Affairs), Jason Taylor (Director of Education)

I. ROLL CALL AND AGENDA (9:01 am)

A) Adopt Agenda—adopted unanimously.

B) Minutes from the August Governing Board Meeting—approved unanimously.

II. REPORTS

A) Report of the President (Grimm)

President Grimm and staff drafted a letter for release after the Pennsylvania court decision about evolution and intelligent design, and to be used as appropriate in other situations.

The Keystone Center (Colorado) has been charged by several Senators to help move the Endangered Species Act revision process forward; Barry Noon is one of the 25 facilitators (and is the only ecologist from a nonacademic setting). A letter was sent encouraging the addition of one or two independent ecologists to the panel.

Board members were encouraged to send letters about the January meeting in Merida on to colleagues in Latin America who might be interested; registration is now open. Grimm is also developing a workshop for the Mexico meeting.

The Code of Ethics for the ESA is mostly directed at publication and certification, and there are probably other areas that need to be considered; a group of members has been asked to work on this.

ESA established a web site to help with ecologists who were victims of hurricane Katrina, and a rapid response team was set up to respond to press and policy maker inquiries. There will be a briefing for congressional staff, and Robert Twilley (LSU) will represent ESA to highlight ecological issues related to reconstruction (e.g., of wetlands).

President Grimm and others spent two hours with the new Head of Biological Sciences (Jim Collins) at NSF prior to the Board meeting to make a start at developing a close working relationship.

Grimm has also worked on the upcoming China meeting (1–4 November); there is a lot of interest and activity there now in the area of sustainability and a circular economy.

B) Report of the Executive Director (McCarter)

McCarter noted that written staff reports were provided. David Baldwin had to miss this meeting (the first in many years) and sends his regrets. Jason Taylor is going to the LTER planning meeting tomorrow to work on collaboration between SEEDS and LTER. Carol Brewer may be able to join the meeting tomorrow, and Shahid Naeem is unable to come.

The first advertisement for the new development officer did not draw a lot of applications, but the second advertisement brought in more. Five candidates will be interviewed next month. Alan Covich, Dee Boersma, and Bill Parton have volunteered to help with phone interviews of promising candidates. SEEDS, the regional initiative, and the Frontiers business plan will be focal projects for the new staff member.

Electronic voting for ESA offices opened last week; this is the first electronic vote we have done.

The Federation of the Americas will have a business meeting during the Merida meeting.

C) Education (Taylor)

There is an upcoming field trip next month for 25 students and 4 faculty members to the Sevilleta LTER site. There will also be students going to the Mexico meeting (15 of 35 applicants were selected). A professional development meeting will take place in March. A grant proposal to CCLI (NSF) related to TIEE is being prepared for January, in partnership with Hampshire College. ESA is also collaborating on the digital library project. Jason and Nadine have been working on the regional initiative. A program assessment for SEEDS will begin in a few weeks, with particular attention to tracking previous participants.

D) Administration (Biggs)

Fiscal year 2005 closed with 9265 members. In 2006 all subscribing institutions will be getting print + online access to ESA journals (no more print-only option); reception from librarians has been wonderful. In China 900 institutions will be given electronic access to all our journals, as of 17 October. Environment Canada is requesting access for all 17 of their libraries, and other similar kinds of multisite requests are coming in. The Board is enthusiastic about the idea of pursuing electronic access for ecologists from developing countries.

Michele Horton has been hired as ESA's new Meeting Manager. She has spent the past 20 years working for nonprofits in the meetings field. Final figures are not in yet for the Montreal meeting, but we will certainly meet revenue targets. It is likely that next year’s meeting will be much smaller; the number of symposium proposals was about half that for Montreal. It is suggested that we look into pushing back the deadline for symposium proposals (early September is difficult).

The annual audit will occur early in November.

E) Frontiers (Silver)

Three special issues are coming along: China, paleoecology, and Mexico. Charlesworth is developing a web site to advertise individual subscriptions for ESA journals in China. In August Frontiers made a change to 100% recycled paper.

It was suggested that a hurricane-related special issue might be of interest. Apparently Ecological Applications is going to do something like this. Editor-in-Chief Silver will investigate.

F) Public Affairs (Lymn)

A hurricane briefing will occur next week on Capitol Hill, along with the official announcement of the Rapid Response Teams (mugs will be given out with the contact information). Annie Drinkard is working on the Annual Report highlighting 90 years of ESA. The endangered species RRT (Stan Temple, Barry Noon, Virginia Dale) met with Senator Chaffee’s office for two hours last week. Laura Lipps plans a quarterly newsletter about RRT activities.

G) Science (Duke)

Dr. Elizabeth (Bette) Stallman has joined the Science Office as a Program Manager for science (replacing Rhonda Kranz), overseeing the National Park Fellowship program, and air quality workshop. Update on Mexico: received 370 abstracts and will accommodate most of them. Of 180 applications for the Ford Foundation travel grants, about two-thirds will be funded (120; $500 for Mexican students, $1000 for others). Out of 36 applicants for the NSF travel funds, about 30 will be funded. There will be 20 workshops. Support for the meeting has come in from a large variety of sponsors. Bruce Babbitt will open the plenary session.

H) Report of the Vice President for Finance

1) First quarter financials (McCarter)

We appear to be on track with the planned budget. Estimate for income from the Montreal meeting is $160,000 ($140,000 was budgeted). After the audit is completed we may move additional surplus operating funds to the Townley account.

Board Initiative Funds.—The Board has $30,000 for “Board Initiatives” in the current budget. A proposal was made to utilize these funds for the regional initiative, the Federation of the America’s society presidents to attend the Mexico meeting , and web site redesign. In August the Board authorized $5000 of Millennium Funds for printing the WAMIE report ($2000) and analyzing the survey of undergraduate education ($3000). After discussion it was decided to allocate $19,000 for the regional initiative, $1000 for a dinner for the Federation during the Mexico Meeting, and $10,000 for the web site redesign effort. In addition the Board allocated the remaining $5600 in committee funds for the web site redesign committee. Other funds raised for the Mexico meeting will be used to support the travel of Federation of Americas presidents to Merida.

2) Investment update (Parton)

In the last three months we gained about $30,000 from the Townley account ($947,000); these are award funds, life memberships, and Board-designated funds ($300,000). The additional reserve funds will go here soon ($300,000 now at Merrill Lynch). We budget $50,000/yr for the reserve.

III. DISCUSSION/ACTION ITEMS

A) Audit Committee

A motion is moved, seconded, and approved: If the Audit Committee is approved by the ESA Council, the three-person committee will be composed of Vice Presidents and Members-at-Large (at least one of each). Gus Shaver, Rich Pouyat, and Dee Boersma (a one-year term) will constitute the Committee this year.

B) Report on yesterday’s meeting with NSF

James Collins, Michael Willig, and Joann Roskoski from NSF; Grimm, Covich, Melillo, and Shaver from the Board; and Duke, Taylor, McCarter, and Lymn from the staff, attended the 2-hour meeting. ESA would like to be a conduit to the ecological community, and provide advice as requested. We will produce a prospectus outlining ways in which we think we can assist NSF.

C) Regional initiative

The Gulf Coast will be the first region, because of interest in recent ecological damage from hurricanes. A tentative committee and meeting date have been set (Baton Rouge in December). There was discussion of whether this is the right region to start with, how many regions there should be in all, and how many we can work on simultaneously. By May, we want to have a timeline and list of ideas. ESA should solicit Chapters to help with this effort. A motion is moved, seconded, and approved: ESA will continue with the process as started, focusing on the Gulf Coast. ESA will also appoint an ad-hoc committee to develop a focused national perspective. Melillo agrees to chair the Board committee. President Grimm will appoint the other members.

D) Public Affairs Program Review (Lymn, Pouyat)

Vice President for Public Affairs Pouyat and Director of Public Affairs Lymn reviewed the history of the ESA’s Public Affairs Committee. Established in 1954, it was the Society’s first foray into the policy arena. By the 1960s this activity was recognized as valuable, as was the need to call on the membership for expertise. In the 1970s the PAC pushed for a national policy on population, formation of a Council of Ecological Advisors in the Executive Office, and recommended that the ESA produce position papers. 1980s: PAC recommended establishment of a corporate award, the Society hired its first staff person (half-time, Public Affairs Director), and the Society worked closely with advocacy groups (e.g., Sierra Club, NRDC, WWF). 1990s: PAC recommended establishment of a public plenary at Annual Meetings, members began to participate in Hill visits to advocate for science funding.

1) Staff history

1983 Elliott Norse begins half-time position, established an Ecological Information Network, wrote an ESA Bulletin column (“From the Washington Office”), and advocates positions on behalf of the Society until 1987.

1987–1993, Marge Holland was full-time Public Affairs Director, and the Society moved from an advocacy role to a facilitator role.

1995–present: Nadine has been PAO Director.

2) Milestones and expansion

1980s: Ecological Information Network, ESA Newsletter, Biotech Hill briefing.

1990s: Press operations commence, ESA testimony on wetlands; Madison meeting in 1993 attracts local TV station (downside—ESA members flee when approached by PAO staff to be interviewed). Multiple, in-depth news releases (Good Morning America calls). PAO position commences; Science and Environmental Policy updates, media training and policy sessions during Snowbird meeting, commence annual analysis of President’s budget proposal for AAAS biological sciences chapter. Half-time education position is created. First ESA Congressional Fellow (Pouyat) serves Patrick Moynihan. ESA starts participating in Congressional Visits Day. First series of congressional meetings with ESA Board members. Press releases on ESA journals commence. ESA starts sponsoring science booth at Hill exhibition. Media contacts reach 500. Community outreach event during the Annual Meeting. Public Plenary added to the Annual Meeting. Office begins averaging three Hill briefings/year.

2000s: Education position becomes full time. ESA cosponsors two town hall meetings (science and technology) for the first time. Twenty Hill and Executive Branch meetings/year. Biological/Ecological Sciences Coalition established. Separate Education Office is created. Boost in international media coverage. ESA creates policy analyst position. Hill staffer is hosted at the Annual Meeting. Second ESA Congressional Fellow serves Senator Harkin (2003–2004). Office begins averaging 10 ESA statements/letters per year. Spearheaded peer review statement endorsed by 14 other societies. Launched Rapid Response Teams. Media hits are 1344 in one month for April Ecology press release.

3) Trends in ESA Public Affairs

Early 1980s focused on environmental policy together with advocacy groups.

Late 1980s shifted toward facilitator role and began also to address science funding; served as Society’s presence in D.C.

Creation of ESA Headquarters in 1990s freed PAO up to focus more on policy/media per se.

Evolving PAC–PAO relationships.

More education component in the late 1990s.

Top of next column

Teaming up with other science organizations with lots of attention to science funding.

More joint efforts with Science Office.

Hill activities standard part of operation.

4) Current portfolio

Mission: to work with media to convey ecological knowledge, inform national environmental policy, foster federal support for ecology research and education.

Media outreach (Annie Drinkard): press releases, media inquiries, services to ESA members, such as communications training.

Federal support of ecology, including research and education.

Budget analysis.

Congressional visits (spring and fall).

Participate in coalitions (USGS, NSF, Biological Ecological Sciences).

Environmental and science policy (Laura Lipps).

Policy news, Action Alerts, position statements, Hill briefings, RRTs.

5) Public Affairs Committee

Review abstracts for media outreach.

Public plenary at the Annual Meeting.

Review ESA statements and papers.

Participate in Hill visits for science funding.

6) Proposed new PAC initiatives

Gulf Coast Regional Initiative.

International (maybe something for the International Section to do).

PAC “slots”: student, industry, Mexican, Canadian.

Congressional Fellow (2-year intervals).

Community outreach at the Annual Meeting.

EHRC/PAC event?

Prominent ESA member speaks at a public forum.

Rethink the public plenary.

Public policy awards.

Member, policy maker, media.

ESA Handbook.

Joint efforts with other committees?

Encyclopedia of analogies and metaphors (begin with an evening session).

After the presentation, the Board discussed some ideas for future directions. The idea of a summer camp for Congressional staff members was brought up; Melillo was involved in such a program, and OTS had one for tropical ecology. The Board also discussed the AAAS Congressional Fellow program (how often, how to fund). Another suggestion was the idea of an award for a governmental entity or member who has been supportive of responsible use of science in decision making.

The PAC will present some ideas about how to streamline the process of creating position papers.

The International Relations Committee should be reconstituted and reactivated.

E) Biodiversity position statement

Both position statements (which can be initiated by staff members) and position papers (written by ESA members) must be approved by the Board. Position papers are also reviewed by the PAC. The Board asked David Hooper to develop a response to the long article in Issues in Ecology (No. 4, 1999) that caused some controversy (e.g., letters in the ESA Bulletin), on Biodiversity and ecosystem functioning. This position statement is unusual because it was the author who proposed it. It’s been reviewed and seems to present a consensus view on the topic. A motion is moved, seconded, and approved: The Board approves the position statement on “Effects of biodiversity on ecosystem processes: Implications for ecosystem management,” (Hooper et al.) as recommended by the Public Affairs Committee.

F) Invasive species position paper

A motion is moved, seconded, and then tabled: The Board approves the position paper on “Biological invasions: recommendations for U.S. policy and management” (Lodge et al.), as recommended by the Public Affairs Committee. Pouyat is asked to convey a variety of comments from the Board back to the authors. Revisions will be distributed by e-mail, and the Board will then vote.

G) Update on pending new position statements (Lymn)

Nothing new on these yet, but work will begin again soon.

H) Carbon-free meetings

The Meetings Committee asked the Board to endorse an optional carbon offset activity. Annual Meeting registrants would be invited to calculate the carbon emissions produced when they flew or drove to the Annual Meeting and the equivalent dollar cost to offset these emissions. They would be asked to make a voluntary donation to offset the emissions to organizations verified as “credible and secure.” The Meetings Committee is asked to do some research into organizations that ESA would be willing to list on its web site as appropriate places to make donations to offset carbon dioxide generation associated with travel to the Annual Meeting and to report back to the Governing Board by March 2006.

IV. EXECUTIVE SESSION

III . DISCUSSION /ACTION ITEMS continued

I) Visions recommendations review

1) The broad goal of communicating the importance of ecological science has focused on the regional outreach efforts.

2) The development of international outreach and communication is connected with electronic publication of ESA journals, Frontiers and the ESA Bulletin.

3) Enhancement of the web site with more updated information will also help achieve both goals. Web site collaboratories discussed at NSF would also benefit these priorities.

4) Data-sharing goals are very broadly distributed and ESA needs to coordinate activities with NEON, NCEAS. We can continue to develop strong links with NEON planning.

5) Consider how to develop panel discussions at upcoming Annual Meetings to continue to highlight the Visions report recommendations.

6) Communicating with staffers via “summer camp” (5.3) and associated internships, IGERT Fellow from UC Davis, contact recipients of agency fellowships (e.g., NOAA). Develop a list of internships available to students. ESA did have a 1-day excursion.

7) These internships could complement the planning of AAAS Congressional Fellows.

8) In consideration of 1.5: Translate ESA Issues, (three done, three more this year), etc. into other languages and support students to participate in international events such as the Merida meeting, encourage the ILTER activities for students to participate in international activities.

9) British Ecological Society has a long-term interest in African activities that might be related to ESA participants. Some international exchange? Contact John Lawton to see if BES is interested. Carol Brewer is invited into a BES meeting to discuss international education.

10) We have a full list of goals and priorities; a periodic fall review of the list is needed to keep on track and to integrate milestones to measure progress on achieving results. What progress have we made? What new ideas for changing the list? Changing the priorities? Develop the SUMMARY for publication in Frontiers.

11) ESA was on a 3-year Strategic Plan that incorporates ALL components of the membership. We need to develop mechanisms for reaching out to a more diverse array of sources. Visions List is not the same as a Strategic Plan but a request to the Board. Perhaps every 5 years there needs to be a new Visions Committee.

12) Some of the aspects covered in Visions List are outside the ESA’s direct control.

We need to focus on the three major priorities that are within ESA’s direct control.

13) The Board agreed that a 5-year time frame seems appropriate for review, progress assessment, etc.

J) Web site plan (Biggs)

ESA Director of Finance Biggs described the plan for the web site review:

1) Form a representative committee. Goal is to have ESA members work with staff to review redesign by May 2006.

2) What “functions” are needed? Streamline functions such as Board calendar and coordination. Shahid Naeem is interested in helping with outlining the overall design and other members were suggested for inclusion on the committee.

3) Highlighting the RRT and the letters to congressional contacts would be helpful (in responding and coordinating responses (e.g., to Endangered Species Act).

4) Some currently available staff from outside ESA might be brought into the committee) to consider how information should be organized. Define what needs to be included.

5) Has AIBS developed a working group to develop web sites that is effective? See if AIBS staff might be interested.

6) It would be useful to consult with some NCEAS contacts. Jim Reichman might be willing to help or to provide someone from his staff.

We want a highly effect web site and realize that the “design” will be personal. It needs to be used as a modern web site. The design needs to be widely understood by members and thus the committee needs to have wide representation.

K) Microbial Ecology Petition

The Board reviewed a petition to establish a Microbial Ecology Section. The Board is requested to approve the proposal and then have the proposal discussed and approved by the Council by e-mail so that the new section could participate in the Memphis meeting.

The section appears to have a strong program and will likely grow rapidly. The sections and chapters are self-funded. They provide some guidance to the Program Committee by endorsing proposals for symposia.

The motion was made and unanimously adopted to recommend establishment of the Microbial Ecology Section to the ESA Council.

The Board noted in additional discussion that the ESA By-laws provide a mechanism to create or to disband sections and chapters. The regionalization plans will likely stimulate interest in regional activities.

L) Publications issues

1) Pay -per -view/“mini” subscriptions

ESA presented a proposal to establish a “pay-per-view” system for ESA journals, and “mini” subscriptions (access to a number of ESA articles per year.) The costs need to reflect a strategic view of overall subscription rates and recruit new members from developing countries.

The Board moved to go forward to establish a fee structure for a pay-per-view and mini-subscription. Approval was unanimous.

The Board asked the VP for Science Gus Shaver to contact the Publications Committee and to propose a plan for a forward-looking review regarding how our journals will evolve in the future.

Issues include ongoing discussions of open access, complete costs of publication, and tracking what other societies are doing. The issues associated with professional societies’ publications and open access cut across a large number of groups. In the near term we should evaluate what various groups (e.g., ASLO’s options for authors to pay for open access) are currently doing. The last major review of publications was in 2000. Jim Reichman will be contacted to prepare a proposal for planning a long-term program review and to outline the major issues.

The Board briefly discussed the “open access publishing” debate. Sue Silver has a report that covers the costs and benefits (e.g., PLOS). There is not currently a general model that works and is sustainable. Small steps are being taken by various groups and need to be examined and tracked. The costs for these open access journals is a very wide discussion. Currently NSF has no policy on open access publishing. We are in a waiting period during which more data on costs and sources of funding will be developed by NSF and many other groups. It is important to keep up and avoid any “surprises” with decisions as they are made.

2) Help for non-English speaking authors.

David Baldwin had suggested that previously authors submitting to ESA journals have sought help from English-speaking colleagues. A Call for Volunteers in the ESA Bulletin was also mentioned as one way to compile a list of helpers as well as a list of other means to advise authors. A broader connection by e-mail, on ECOLOG, and the web site could be explored.

M) New business

The Board discussed a rumored policy at NSF regarding grant awards. ESA will investigate and take appropriate action.

Meeting adjourned.