Wednesday, November 16, 2011

Blog Post #10


Ethical Question

Ask/address an ethical question in your field of interest. Develop/address arguments for each side of the issue, then defend your position on the issue.

Environmental consulting firm for developmental projects
-never destroy wetlands
-have to destroy for urban sprawl / expansion


The field of interest that this ethical question comes from would be wetland ecology as well as the environmental consulting firm companies. An example of a consulting firm that does this type of work is Normandeau Associates. Normandeau Associates works on environmental planning, permitting, documentation and natural resources. These firms are typically working with various agencies “to develop and operate in a manner that promotes the protection of natural resources while meeting project objectives.”1  Firms are used during major land development projects, when groups or a business or a city want to develop land to expand that area. Issues arise during site selection, when developers have a plan that possibly poses a threat to the natural areas that lay outside of the urban sprawl. This is where the environmental consulting firm is contracted to look over the plans of project, and help make ethically, and environmentally sound decisions.

There is an area that is east of a city that contains a wetland, naturally diverse ecosystem containing a large range of wildlife; from small fauna to large fauna; insects to deer. Wetlands play an important role is the surface and groundwater cycles.

The developers see this land as an opportunity to expand their township, they see it that the area would bring in more revenue for the township if it were an extension of it rather a natural area.

If I were a consultant, I would work with the developers as well as the DNR to weigh the pros and cons and the values tied to each item, to figure out what the best next step is. I would look to the other directions of town, north, south, and west, to see if there was a piece of land available for development. It could be possible that there is a less diverse area of land, especially not a wetland, which could be developed. It is just important to keep wetlands in nature, keeping our surface and ground water clean.

A compromise could occur with this: If the wetland was delineated, a protective buffer could be placed around the wetland to preserve the plants and animals as well as let the developers continue with the plan. The process that this uses is that a site visit needs to happen to insure that the area is a wetland. Based on the quality of the water, and other environmental characteristics, the wetland is rated using the Department of Ecology Rating System. 2. The boundaries would then be mapped out, and using GIS or other spatial analysis applications, a buffer around the wetland would be placed, depending on its category.

Personally, I would try to find a new location for the development, and keep the whole natural are intact, but if this was not an option, then the wetland delineation would suffice.

References

Monday, November 14, 2011

Blog Post #11


Quality Management

Water Quality Management plans are developed in the US Forest Service to preserve water quality in areas that have low quality water or low access to water. When water is in short supply, managers need to make sure that what is there is of the highest quality for both people and the fish, and animals that need it to survive. This plan is created in the National Forest of California. The State Water Resources Control Board has got to work with the USDA Forest Service and affected Regional Water Quality Control Boards to update the statewide Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP). The WQMP identifies a wide spectrum of activities that are on NFS land that cause point and non-point source pollution, especially sediment and thermal pollution, that all affect the quality of water. There is a staff level working group that works on revising the WQMP, and a policy-level group that works on the policy direction. The staff level working group seeks input from a broad range of stakeholders.

Wednesday, November 9, 2011

Blog Post # 9

Title, Issues and Action Plan

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1LX4YsdFecBCXgm5Ivi7N0UlS5IkzwsYhoEa9OKPjay0/edit?hl=en_US

Blog Post # 8


Ethical Question

Is it ethical for a physician to accept Wild tickets from a pharmaceutical rep to take her family to the game?

I think it is ethical for a physician to accept Wild tickets from the pharmaceutical rep, only if there is a clear understanding between the physician and the pharmaceutical rep that if the tickets are taken, it doesn’t necessarily mean that the physician office will go with that pharmaceutical company. The tickets would have to be received as a gift rather than a bribe with strings attached. I personally don’t know how these organizations function because I don’t plan to go into either one as a profession. I have a feeling that it is an unethical thing for the physician to accept, because it might seem unfair to other physicians at the office for only one to take their family. It could also be seen as unethical because the rep might be thinking that if they purchase tickets for the doctor, that they will for sure choose that company. 

Blog Post # 6


 Diversity

Diversity has many meanings to me. It has meaning in nature with Biodiversity; it has meaning to the human species as well.  In an ecosystem, all the animals and plants have specific roles in the chain of life. There are the small animals and plants, the ones that provide or are food for larger animals. It is important that these plants and animals remain in place to keep the balance of the ecosystem in check.
 To me, Diversity and inclusivity go hand in hand. Depending on what job or career you go into, it will most likely be a diverse environment. There will probably be people of different races, ethnicities and backgrounds. You have to be well equip with knowing how to be around people who are different than you. Here at Stout, most classes are the majority of students are white Midwest students. It is important in a setting like this to learn about diversity, and how to handle being around people that are different than you. Most places are not like Stout. That is why I feel it is very important for students to attend the different Ally Center events on diversity and race that are held though out the year. Sometimes it is easy to forget about the other people, especially when it comes to the holiday season. We always think of Christmas, but start to lose focus on the other holidays of other nationalities or religions. Just like in nature, there has to be a balance within human diversity so things don’t get thrown off.


1.      Diversity Statement: USDA Forest Service:
“Oliver Wendell Holmes once said, "I find the great thing in this world is not so much where we stand as in what direction we are moving." I believe the Forest Service is moving in the right direction and, I want to keep it going that way. I need your help. We are going to continue caring for the land and serving the people. However, as I stated in my first message to the National Leadership Team, my initial focus is going to be on people – you, the Forest Service employees.
As the fifteenth Chief of the Forest Service, I am committed to work force diversity and to ensuring the protection of civil rights, including equal employment opportunity for all employees and customers of the Forest Service programs and services. No employee or applicant will be unlawfully denied employment opportunity because of race, color, national origin, sex, age, religion, disability, political belief, sexual orientation, or marital or familial status.
I believe that diversity not only refers to ethnicity, gender, or culture, but there is also a diversity of thought. It is healthy for us to have professional differences of opinion and these should be shared, but always in a climate of openness, mutual respect and trust. As Forest Service employees, it is our responsibility to ensure that discrimination and harassment do not exist in the employment experience and the work environment. Anything less is simply unacceptable. We must treat each other and the public with respect and professionalism. This is how we want to be treated and is the foundation for good customer service.
No one in the Forest Service can be successful working alone; however, if we work together, all of us can succeed. I look forward to your cooperation in helping me carry out the Agency's responsibilities in the area of civil rights.”
2.      Diversity Statement: US Fish and Wildlife Service:
WASHINGTON— The U.S. Senate today will hold a hearing over the confirmation of Dan Ashe as new director of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. If confirmed, Ashe will face a number of significant challenges, including fixing the agency’s endangered species program that, under the Obama administration, has done little to protect rare plants and animals facing the possibility of extinction. Ashe will need to correct an agency culture that has led to dozens of Fish and Wildlife Service decisions being overturned in court for failing to follow the proper science in managing threatened and endangered species.
“We are hopeful that Dan Ashe can turn the Fish and Wildlife Service around,” said KierĂ¡n Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity. “To date, Interior Secretary Ken Salazar has done little to reform the agency’s problems managing our nation’s endangered species. Under Salazar, the agency has shown an utter lack of urgency when it comes to saving endangered species and has been more intent on delaying protections than implementing them.”
Among the worst problems in the agency is its reluctance to provide new protections to species that badly need them. So far, the Fish and Wildlife Service under President Barack Obama has protected just 54 species, most of them on a single Hawaiian island, for an average of just 27 species per year. That rate is better than under the Bush administration, when 51 species were protected for an average of fewer than seven per year, but worse than under the Clinton administration, when 498 species were protected for a yearly average of 62.  The Obama administration’s failure to protect more species has left more than 250 species to languish unprotected on a “candidate” list for federal protections, including the wolverine, Oregon spotted frog, white fringeless orchid and, in a new addition earlier this month, Pacific walrus. The agency has also continued to see decisions overturned by the courts, including most notably a decision to remove protections for the gray wolf. “The real test for Dan Ashe is whether he can get the program for protecting endangered species moving and restore the agency’s scientific credibility,” said Suckling. “There is no more important function of the Fish and Wildlife Service than the protection of endangered species, because the extinction of a species cannot be reversed.”    
In an encouraging sign, the administration’s requested budget asks for an increase in the endangered species budget, specifically for newly protecting species under the Endangered Species Act. 
If he is confirmed, other significant action will be needed from Ashe, including major steps to protect bats from white-nose syndrome (which has killed more than 1 million bats to date in the United States) and research funding for the disease; and policies that recognize and respond to the dangers of global warming for imperiled species in Alaska, the lower 48 states and Hawaii.
The Center for Biological Diversity is a national, nonprofit conservation organization with more than 320,000 members and online activists dedicated to the protection of endangered species and wild places.
3.      Diversity Statement: UW-Stout
University Housing has a long history of supporting all kinds of diversity and providing inclusive living environments where all students are welcome. We hope that your experience in the residence halls allows you to meet a lot of new people from a variety of backgrounds. We also hope that you find the residence halls to be a comfortable and accepting environment.

4.      Diversity Statement: Peace Corps
The diversity of the American people is a large part of what makes America the country it is.  Diversity of ethnic backgrounds, life experiences, and beliefs have strengthened our country in countless ways. And because the Peace Corps shares with the rest of the world our most precious resource -- our people -- it can carry out its mission only if the Volunteer corps truly represents America in all its diversity.

5.      Diversity Statement: EPA
FROM: Administrator Lisa P. Jackson
TO: All EPA Employees
I am reaffirming my commitment to the principles of equal employment opportunity and diversity in the workplace for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's employees and job applicants. The EPA must continue to attract, develop, and retain a highly skilled, diverse work force to meet the demands of our mission to protect human health and the natural environment.
The EPA must be fully committed to promoting and maintaining a workplace that ensures equality of opportunity for everyone, regardless of her or his race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, status as a parent, sexual orientation, protected genetic information, prior EEO activity and marital status.
Our managers and supervisors must lead by example to ensure the workplace is free from discrimination, hostility, intimidation, reprisal and harassment. We all have a role to play, and each of us must be committed to treating one another with dignity, respect and professionalism.
I ask you to help me create a work environment that embraces our individual differences and gives everyone full consideration for employment opportunities, including hiring, promotions and training, regardless of his or her protected status.
Our vision of One EPA can be realized only if we respect and honor the differences that every employee brings from her or his background. I am confident that, as we move forward, all of us will work toward protecting and advancing the principles of EEO.
I offer my sincerest thanks to all of you for your dedication to the EPA and for the excellent work you do every day to protect the American people and our environment. None of it would be possible without the diversity of experiences and ideas that each of you brings to our agency.

Sunday, October 23, 2011

Blog Post #7


General Ethics:

What/why ethics?
-        -   Personal and social ethics
-       -    Standards for living- assumed/in place/ made up
-       -   Minimize conflicts between connections and networks
-      -     Born as a blank slate, and can be taught good or bad

Ethics code for USA Forest Service:
Code of Scientific Ethics

This document outlines 11 codes for scientific methods and ethics that are used in the USFS. Each code has a description and examples to go with it. This document also goes though how to handle allegations of scientific misconduct.
“This code has been developed by a committee of scientists in USDA Forest Service Research & Development (FS R&D) after feedback from colleagues and extensive research on science ethics.  The code is based on the Code of Scientific Ethics of the USDA Agricultural Research Service, but has been modified for application to the FS R&D organization by a team of Forest Service employees. The Code is a tool for self-regulation.”
  1. 1.       I dedicate myself to the pursuit, promotion, and advancement of scientific knowledge.
  2. 2.       I will conduct, manage, judge, and report scientific research honestly, thoroughly, and without conflict of interest. 
  3.      ,       I will prevent abuse of all resources entrusted to me, and endeavor to treat human and animal subjects humanely, following established guidelines where they are available.
  4.             I will not willfully hinder the research of others nor engage in dishonesty, fraud, deceit, misrepresentation, or other professional misconduct.
  5.             I will welcome constructive criticism of my personal scientific research and offer the same to my colleagues in a manner that fosters mutual respect amid objective scientific debate.
  6.             I will recognize past and present contributors to my research and will neither accept nor assume unauthorized and/or unwarranted credit for another's accomplishments
  7.              I will claim authorship for a research product only if I am willing to be held responsible for both the interpretation of the data and the conclusions as presented.
  8.             I will claim authorship for a research product only if I have made a major intellectual contribution (as part of conception, design, data collection, data analysis, or interpretation) and made significant contributions to its preparation (write, review, or edit).
  9.              I will not publish or use original ideas, research data, or unpublished findings of others without written approval. 
  10. .           I will refrain from duplicative publication of the same research findings as original.
  11.       I will show appropriate diligence toward preserving and maintaining resources, such as data records, that are entrusted to me.


Ethics code for Israel:
The Israel Defense Forces are the state of Israel's military force. The IDF is subordinate to the directions of the democratic civilian authorities and the laws of the state. The goal of the IDF is to protect the existence of the State of Israel and her independence, and to thwart all enemy efforts to disrupt the normal way of life in Israel. IDF soldiers are obligated to fight, to dedicate all their strength and even sacrifice their lives in order to protect the State of Israel, her citizens and residents. IDF soldiers will operate according to the IDF values and orders, while adhering to the laws of the state and norms of human dignity, and honoring the values of the State of Israel as a Jewish and democratic state. 
http://dover.idf.il/IDF/English/about/doctrine/ethics.htm
Ethics code for China, India, Thailand, Saudi Arabia,  Israel:
Center for international Forestry Research
Board of Trustee’s Code of Conduct:
“We care about our behavior as Board members and how we get results.
We, the Board of Trustees of CIFOR apply the principles in this Code to our relationships with each other and with all those people with whom we deal in our work for CIFOR. Our Code of Conduct is a guide for us all in the way we do business as Trustees of CIFOR and members of the CGIAR system.
In our individual capacity as members of the Board of CIFOR, and in our collective capacity as the Board of CIFOR, we will abide by the following minimum standards:
1. We respect the law and act accordingly
·         Our objective is always to comply with the laws of the country in which we are operating.
·         Everyone of us will notify our Chair of any failure to comply with the law.
·         In interpreting the law, we will always endeavor to adopt a course which reinforces our reputation for integrity.
2. We conduct ourselves with integrity, are fair and honest in our dealings and treat others with dignity
·         Integrity for us means doing the right thing and behaving properly.
·         We do not use oppressive or misleading practices or falsify or wrongfully withhold information to achieve a benefit for ourselves or for CIFOR.
·         We operate in countries with many different laws, customs and business practices. We recognize these but do not compromise the principles embodied in this Code. Honesty is valued in every culture.
·         Dignity for us means that everyone is entitled to be treated with respect as a person, regardless of individual difference.
·         We aim to work as a team and to promote cohesiveness and loyalty among us.
3. We do not place ourselves in situations which result in divided loyalties
·         For us, divided loyalties arise when:
  • Our private or professional interests conflict directly or indirectly with our obligations to CIFOR and the CGIAR;
  • We receive benefits (such as gifts or entertainment) from a person doing or seeking to do business with CIFOR which could be seen as creating an obligation to someone other than CIFOR.
  • We do not act in ways which may cause others to question our loyalty to CIFOR.
4. We use CIFOR assets (including funds, equipment and information) responsibly and in the best interest of CIFOR
·         Using CIFOR's funds to provide excessive benefits (such as gifts or entertainment) for ourselves or others is unacceptable.
·         Using CIFOR's assets (such as equipment or stores) other than for CIFOR's business or interests in unacceptable.
·         We respect the nature of Board information and do not disclose confidential information relating to the Board of CIFOR without authorization by the Board Chair.
5. We are responsible for our actions and accountable to the CIFOR Board for their consequences
·         We take responsibility for:
  • being well prepared for Board meetings;
  • ensuring CIFOR's good name and its role as a CGIAR center;
  • informing the Chair and/or the Board of any possible conflicts of interest we may face;
  • being proactive in seeking to achieve the objectives assigned to us;
  • the way in which we achieve those objectives;
  • the attitude we adopt in achieving those objectives;
  • honestly and fully reporting the results of our actions.
  • For us, accountability means we take responsibility for and will be judged by the outcome of all manners over which we have control.”

Blog Post #4


Post #4:

Carbon Dioxide Paper Evaluation


1.       Post your group's presentation.


2. Reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the criteria established. Where these good criteria, or should there have been different criteria established?
·         I think that the criteria that was established was good, but the minimal. I think that more criteria should have been established. I realize that a lot of the ideas given during class fit under the two criteria so it was difficult, but I feel that it should have been more specific.

3. Reflect on the strengths and weaknesses of the presentations as a whole. Consider the "yes" and "no" groups as a whole.
·         The presentations as a whole had a lot of information. During the day of presentations that I saw, there wasn’t too much overlap. Most groups had different examples than the others. No one really used the same example from the paper, which was good because there were so many to choose from.

4. Reflect on the group management of your group. What went well, what did not?
·         Good
o    Split up tasks
o    Used Google Docs to all work collectively
·         Bad
o    No specific leader
o    Took a while to split up tasks
o    Members didn’t feel too connected to the project

5. Reflect on the personal "ethic" you felt in your group. Did you believe in your position? Where you arguing against your beliefs?
·         I believed in my position on the fact that this paper was used as a petition support against global warming. I think that global warming/climate change is happening, and so I was happy to be a “no” this is an invalid paper. I did not think that it had consistent data, and had no scientific method.
·         I personally thought that this assignment could have happened in a less time consuming process. I don’t feel that we needed to present this information.
I think it would have been more beneficial for the class to establish criteria like we did, but instead of splitting in presentation groups, but discussion groups. We could have recorded what was discussed. It would have been more informational to

6. Did the class make the correct decision when considering the broader impacts of the global warming/climate change debate? Why?
·         The class vote was “No”. Most people have learned about global warming in science courses and have seen weather patterns that support and agree with the Kyoto Protocol. This environmental treaty is between countries in the United Nations, which set international standards for energy regulations, including emissions, carbon footprints and greenhouse gases. These greenhouse gases include carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, and sulphur hexafluoride, as well as the two groups hydrofluorocarbons and perfluorocarbons. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyoto_Protocol

7. Explain the statement, "What we do in the US, soon will not matter." Provide evidence to justify this statement.
This statement "What we do in the US, soon will not matter" describes how our country is destroying itself by the overproduction of the land, from drilling and mining, to the pollution we cause to the earth. Other developing countries, such as China, Brazil and Russia are becoming more efficient and less wasteful. I don’t think that this statement is correct. I think that everything the US does matters. There are so many corporations that think only in the present, and about the benefits for themselves, and never think of finding a way for a mutual beneficial relationship between the earth and the corporation. We must thinking of seven generations away, what will the current impacts leave residual in years in the future.

8. Explain this statement, "What we do as individuals, matters." Provide evidence to justify this statement.
This statement “What we do as individuals, matters” is valid. Every individual has impacts on the environment in many different ways. People need to think about their practices and values and readjust to be a more helpful species to the environment. It is depleting all over the world, and it is being a necessity for our plant to not only survive, but also provide us with the soil to produce our food and life.