PROCEEDINGS - American Society of Animal Science

incoming students have hands-on experience with food
animals.
New Issues. All eras of food animal production have
dealt with issues. However, following the green
revolution (when concern for the capacity to produce
food diminished) many highly funded activist groups
now target the food animal industry. Many academic
units have developed programs that focus on food safety,
animal care and environment.
Politics. The political scene has had an increasingly
greater impact on animal agriculture during the past 30
years. Professional societies, clientele groups and
universities now have PACs and/or lobbyists to liaison
with state and federal government.
Because of these issues, administrators have
responded with a variety of decisions. The challenge
should be to deal with difficult issues without losing site
of the goal: namely, to maintain balanced programs and
serve stakeholders.
Maintaining Balance When Shift Happens
Land Grant institutions should be dynamic but the
principle of balanced teaching, research, and extension
programs to serve stakeholders must be maintained.
Strategic planning and change has been a popular theme
during the past three decades. We have witnessed
“change merchants” in university administration that
jump on any bandwagon labeled as change. Change
almost became a competition among some
administrators. In some cases, it appeared that there was
little concern for impact of decisions on maintaining
balanced programs and serving the best interests of
stakeholders. Dealing with the issues listed earlier
requires leadership with vision and understanding. It
requires leadership that considers input from students,
faculty, staff and most of all from stakeholders.
Administrative responses to shifts are described below.
Adopting electronic technology. Moving rapidly to
electronic communications in all phases of university
programs was not a choice; it was a mandate by society!
It happened quickly. The first year email addresses were
published in the Colorado State University (CSU)
Directory was 1992-93! Moreover, in a relatively short
time faculty, students, administrators, staff and
stakeholders now use electronic communications for a
multitude of purposes. We submit research reports,
search for research articles, enroll students, use Web CT
and deliver information to clientele on a regular basis
using electronic media. Classrooms are equipped with
computer terminals where instructors use PowerPoin t,
video and web generated teaching aids. Email is the
standard for letters and legal correspondence to students.
Electronic technologies appear to have improved
program balance and successfully served stakeholders.
Dealing with Reduced Funding. Funding reduction
is perhaps the most difficult issue faced by higher
administration. The general approach has been to
increase revenues by increasing research grants, tuition
and fund raising and to reduce costs wherever possible.
These approaches for solving fiscal problems all have the
potential to create imbalances in programs and
reductions in service to stakeholders.
With the recession of 1982, budget issues at CSU
were evident. In 1981 the Dean first imitated a switch
from 12 to 9-month appointments as a tool to buffer
budget cuts. Of course, administrators remained 12-
month employees! For Animal Science departments the
9-month appointment was first adopted at the University
of Illinois and true to form, many Deans jumped on
board. The original selling points were (1) less
opposition from academic departments across campus,
(2) that agriculture faculty would receive a 9-month
salary equal to their 12-month salary and (3) more grant
dollars would result because faculty could increase
annual income with two additional month’s salary from
external funds! However, many universities did not
convert from 12 to 9 with the same salary and extension
faculty were also an issue. In 1990, CSU held an Ag
Department Head’s retreat to discuss a survey from 19
Land Grant universities relative to converting from 12 to
9-month appointments. Most of the 19 surveyed
universities’ representatives did not support conversion.
Extension faculty and limits on the federal retirement
system, ability to serve stakeholders and finding summer
funding were the most common concerns listed.
However, by the mid 90s many new appointments at
CSU were 9-month. Currently CSU mandates 9-month
appointments for all new faculty in agriculture including
extension. Concerns with summer funding (after 2 years
of full funding) takes precedent over serving
stakeholders. This is understandable as they have
families to support. Anticipated increase in grant dollars
(and indirect cost recoveries) is the major factor now
driving the 9-month system. In a telephone survey of 10
WSASAS Animal Science Departments, only CSU
currently mandates 9-month appointments for all new
faculty although several reported a variety of
appointment types depending on source of funds.
Many of the changes that have occurred in the past
3 decades are based on increasing external grants and the
assumption that this will result in increased indirect cost
recovery. University administration view indirect costs
(often-termed overhead or facility and administration