Environmental studies at UC Davis should be housed under one organizational roof to create a prestigious and effective center of scholarship and teaching, many speakers at a campus town-hall meeting said Monday. The gathering was convened by the Faculty Steering Committee on the Environment to hear opinions on several organizational models. About 70 people attended, and about half of the 20 or so who spoke said they preferred an organizational structure that would be something like the Division of Biological Sciences-a freestanding division or school with a significant number of faculty and both undergraduate majors and graduate groups. "That is something I'm very interested in," said Kevin Rice, an associate professor of agronomy and range science who spoke as chair of the Graduate Group in Ecology. "The Environmental Initiative got lost in the departmental structure, and that's something I deal with everyday, in terms of everything from teaching assistantships to faculty teaching in ecology graduate courses. So my druthers is [a structure that is] as strong as possible because that's going to give me the biggest chance of support for the kind of education I do, both in terms of student support and faculty commitment to the curriculum." Creating such a program would have many benefits, those speakers said. It could: * Increase collaboration and idea-sharing by related faculty members working in physical proximity; * Spark new thinking about curriculum and research directions; * Build the foundation of faculty positions and advocacy leadership needed to support graduate groups and create a strong undergraduate curriculum. Though only one of the six proposed structures included undergraduate education, many of the speakers interested in a division or school emphasized that the undergraduate component was essential. "You're talking about support for graduate students," said Ken Verosub, professor of geology and director of the Davis Honors Challenge. "The reality is there will not be teaching assistantships for the graduate students unless the unit itself is teaching undergraduates. Second, it's important to have an undergraduate program because that will force the people associated with that program to think hard about what it means for the curriculum. It leads to a certain degree of reflection and integration, which is what we really need in the graduate level. Otherwise we'll have exactly what we have now-a lot of little pockets of people doing things-and we're not going to get the kind of broad view, the broad synthesis and interdisciplinary cooperation that we need. "Third, in terms of reputation ... being able to say we have 600 undergraduate majors in this school or division or whatever is the kind of thing that's going to give us visibility and attract the kind of graduate students that we want." Calls for quick action Some of the speakers favored less extensive organizational changes, such as strengthening the John Muir Institute for the Environment or creating an organized research unit. Paul Sabatier, professor of environmental science and policy, said that university politics would make these approaches more likely to succeed. "I'd like to solve all these problems before I retire," he said. "And anything that requires systemwide approval is not going to meet that criterion. It's going to be fought tooth and nail by Merced, by faculty at Santa Barbara, Berkeley and probably Irvine.... It's a minimum of five years away, probably 10, and really, in fact, probably zero." Verosub responded, to laughter, "It seems to me that if Berkeley, Santa Cruz, Merced, Santa Barbara and San Diego are opposed to something we want to do ... it probably means we're doing the right thing." Increasing campus cachet But Tom Cahill, professor emeritus of physics and land, air and water resources, agreed with Sabatier. "We're all very impatient to have things that can be done quickly and effectively. Locating people where they have coffee together, they work together and have space, is absolutely critical. Look at the successes of the campus, the ones that really work. Charles Goldman and Lake Tahoe, transportation, atmospheric sciences. They are people who have worked together, who have committed not just one grant but years of time and effort, to support something. I would make them stronger. What's required? Faculty positions? Organized research units? Try to picture those things where we can say, 'Davis is doing it, and Davis is the best in the world.'" Risks of dividing loyalties Several people voiced concerns about the effect on individual faculty members if a new division were created. "I see a new division ripping me asunder," said Michael Singer, professor of land, air and water resources. "I don't know whether my projects necessarily fit under agriculture or under environment." One of the committee members noted that some faculty members were worried that "if you were to take all the environment people out of their departments and put them into a division ... you would impoverish a lot of disciplines." Greg Pasternack, assistant professor of land, air and water resources, candidly aired his frustration at what he perceives as second-class status for environmental scientists in his college. "What I've seen, unfortunately, is that it is ... the 'College of Agricultural Science (Footnote Environ-ment).' A lot of faculty in our college do a lot of both; it can be done together. But what I see at the higher levels is that we in the environmental sciences are ... tolerated. So I'm very strongly for a new division where we can stand on our own, where we can have accountability among ourselves as equals, as peers." "Thanks for getting the adrenaline going," smiled committee chair Dennis Rolston, professor of land, air and water resources. Window of opportunity As the meeting ended, Wes Wallender, professor of land, air and water resources, urged the committee to act aggressively. "If we err too much on the conservative side, we won't be making the kind of statement to the administration and the public at large that we are committed to the environment area. "Resources are driven by undergraduate need," he said. With the approaching tidal wave of rising enrollments and new faculty hires, plus the demographics of many impending retirements at this campus, "now is the time. I don't think you want to wait if you want to make something happen." The committee has the attention of Provost Robert Grey and Chancellor Larry Vanderhoef, he concluded. "Bob is listening and so is Larry."