[ion maiden]

I found this article in today's Ames Tribune to be of interest as I continue to develop my political savvy. I also thought the reader comments were interesting. Does anyone on PI.com have any comments? I am trying to wrap my mind around this and figure out what is and is not likely to be true, and why people would not want to be truthful. Thread comments, PMs, and emails would all be appreciated. I am also going to talk to my Environmental Politics and Policy instructor about it.

I almost put this under "Off Topic," but it does affect water quality, which affects paddling.

Thanks for any insight anyone can provide. Everyone stay warm and stay safe this weekend.

http://www.amestrib.com/articles/2010/01/22/ames_tribune/news/doc4b587eda370ad806764193.txt

Some question Leopold director selection

By James Pusey
Staff Writer
Published: Thursday, January 21, 2010 10:22 AM CST

The process of selecting a new director for the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture has been a long and bumpy road, and some question whether the right candidate was chosen.

The two finalists for the job, Ricardo Salvador, a program director of the Kellogg Foundation, and Frank Louws, a professor of plant pathology at North Carolina State University, were pinpointed by the Leopold Center’s 10-member search committee after a round of interviews in September and October of 2009.

Laura Jackson, professor of biology at the University of Northern Iowa, was a member of the search committee and is on the Leopold Center advisory board. She said it was clear to her through the interview process that Salvador was more qualified for the position than Louws.

“He obviously has a more holistic perspective,” Jackson said. “You’ve got to look at the whole food system, and Salvador’s talk dealt with that big picture.”

But that may have been his downfall, Jackson said, as some external stakeholders on the advisory board commented anonymously that Salvador was more of a “social scientist” and a “hyper-advocate of local foods.”

“Based on those comments it seems like they didn’t like his attention to the bigger picture of the whole food system,” Jackson said. “They would prefer somebody who didn’t really deal with that.”

Jackson said there were no such objections brought up while the advisory board was meeting; the comments all came up after the advisory board had met and agreed on the two candidates they would present to Iowa State University President Greg Geoffroy.

Maynard Hogberg, chair of the animal science department at ISU, explained the process of selecting the new director. First, the search committee identified qualified candidates and recommended them to the Leopold Center’s 17-member advisory board. They then gave their approval on the candidates and sent those choices on to the Office of the President.

Geoffroy held the final say on the decision, Hogberg said.

“The whole search process is mandated by Iowa law,” he said. “Everything was followed according to how it was supposed to be followed.”

There are suspicions that some input from the commercial farm industry took place outside of the public process in order to influence the university administration’s decision, Jackson said.

“That’s what’s suspected, and it certainly wouldn’t be the first time that that’s been a major influence, not just at ISU but across the country,” Jackson said.

Doug Gronau works for the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation as a district director representing west-central Iowa, and wrote a letter to Geoffroy recommending he choose Louws as the Leopold Center director. He sits on the Leopold Center advisory board and said he supports Louws because of his extensive background in extension.

Though Salvador has shown opposition to some widely-accepted practices in commercial agriculture, such as factory-style hog confinements, Gronau said there was no specific reason he opposed Salvador’s hiring.

“He just didn’t have the agricultural experience that Dr. Louws did,” Gronau said.

Gronau outlined the Farm Bureau’s recommendation in a letter to Geoffroy, but emphasized that any other concerned citizen could have given Geoffroy their comments, too.

In a weekend column by the Des Moines Register’s Rekha Basu, Geoffroy reportedly said he had not received a letter from the Farm Bureau, but afterwards said he simply didn’t remember the letter.

“To be honest, I had forgotten that (Gronau) had sent me a letter until I read it in Rekha Basu’s column,” Geoffroy said. “That letter really didn’t have any influence on my decision.”

Jennifer Steffen, of the State Soil Conservation Committee, is the chair of the Leopold Center’s advisory board and said the board passed along Salvador and Louws to Geoffroy without any preference or ranking of the two candidates.

“There were a number of strengths that Salvador had that Louws didn’t have,” Steffen said. “Dr. Louws also had strengths that were sent forward to the president.”

These strengths and weaknesses were outlined in a report by the search committee comparing the two candidates, which also was sent on to Geoffroy. This document included statements that Salvador was the most well rounded candidate and that Louws’ experience was limited.

Geoffroy said the evaluations from the search committee did show a “slight” preference toward Salvador, but he said he based his decision on counsel given to him by Dean of Agriculture Wendy Wintersteen and Executive Vice President and Provost Elizabeth Hoffman.

“I was given very strong advice from both to make it Dr. Louws,” Geoffroy said. “On the basis of that, I authorized Dean Wintersteen to offer him the position.”

Geoffroy said their feeling was that Louws had a stronger scholarly record and a broader appreciation for sustainable agriculture.

Wintersteen wrote in an e-mail that Louws was endorsed because of his experience in working with farmers to address critical issues and his ability to provide superior leadership.

“In my opinion, I believe Dr. Louws to be very well-equipped to communicate, interact and value the wide diversity of agricultural producers and groups in the state, in a similar manner demonstrated by the current director, Jerry DeWitt,” Wintersteen wrote.

Wintersteen denied claims that her decision was influenced by the Farm Bureau.

So far, Louws has yet to officially accept the position, but on Dec. 2, Wintersteen sent an e-mail to Salvador, notifying him that he is no longer being considered for the position.

Jackson said she was disappointed with Salvador’s early dismissal.

“Not only did they not offer it, they kissed him goodbye,” Jackson said. “It wasn’t just that they didn’t offer it to him, it’s that they didn’t keep him in as a possibility.”

Steffen said it concerns her that the dean would eliminate one of the candidates when the job has been neither accepted nor declined by another candidate.

“Until you know that you have someone hired, you should consider both acceptable candidates,” Steffen said.

Wintersteen did not say why she took that course of action, but said she has been in regular communication with Louws, who “has requested the time to make thoughtful decision in January.”

Meanwhile, the career of current Director Jerry DeWitt has been extended until June 30 due to the lengthy hiring process. He had originally planned to step down on Jan. 30.

Jackson said despite her concerns over the hiring process she thinks it’s important Iowans remember all that the Leopold Center does for the state.

“We really just want to put this hiring process behind us,” Steffen said.

James Pusey can be reached at (515) 663-6922

or jpusey@amestrib.com.

[BrianZ]

With Salvador's hire he may "rock" the big ag canoe. Have to keep this paddle related Farm bureau and probably the big ag advisory board members didn't want that to happen so a letter was sent to influence and labels were placed on Salvador. Ultimately he was sent packing by the deans even though Louws has not accepted the position. That should tell you he is not one of them and therefore must be eliminated.

For the environment our current policies are not protecting it. It is time to vote out candidates that don't protect our environment and vote in candidates that will protect it with new policies based on sound science. Our rivers are still dirty with the current policies so what do we have to loose with a change in thinking and personel? It may just work

Brian
_________________
Jensen SCR-2
Perception Acadia Scout
OT Pack...Thanks Al
Sawyer Starlight

[ion maiden]

Thanks for the input, Brian!

From what I learned by discussing this in class just now, rocking the big ag canoe apparently means that Farm Bureau, etc., could decrease funding for the Leopold Center and/or ISU. It's like a gift of money that has big strings attached.

It seems that this is a steadily recurring theme: People who are trying to do the environmental protection tasks they are supposedly hired (or under consideration for hiring) to do end up getting punished for it. It is a very confusing contradiction. Much of politics in general seems to be made up of confusing contradictions, in fact. It's like someone getting hired to make widgets, and then getting written up or fired because he or she is...*gasp*...making widgets.

I am beginning to understand the way this works, but I don't understand why people do what they do in the first place.