This article from The Chronicle of Higher Education 
(http://chronicle.com) 

Tuesday, May 8, 2001



  Smithsonian Board Approves Plan to Kill One Science Center and
  Spare Another

  By RICHARD MONASTERSKY    
  
  At the Smithsonian Institution on Monday, it was survival of
  the most popular. The secretary of the Smithsonian, Lawrence
  Small, announced that the regents of the institution had
  approved his proposal to close a highly respected but largely
  unknown laboratory, while another center with broad public
  support would duck the budget ax, for now. 
  
  At the same time, the regents accepted his plan to overhaul
  science at the 155-year-old institution by focusing studies on
  fewer topics and centralizing the science administration -- a
  move that has attracted considerable criticism from scientists
  within the institution. 
  
  The laboratory facing extinction is the Smithsonian Center for
  Materials Research and Education, in Suitland, Md. The center
  performs research on how to best conserve museum objects, such
  as prehistoric Chinese ceramics and plants collected by Lewis
  and Clark. The one that will survive, for at least the
  present, is the National Zoo's Conservation and Research
  Center, in Front Royal, Va., which conducts research on
  endangered species, biodiversity, and protecting habitats.  
  
  Mr. Small announced last month that he intended to eliminate
  both science centers, but the news of the conservation-center
  closure sparked an outcry from both scientists and the public.
  At the opening of the regents' meeting on Sunday, Mr. Small
  withdrew the motion to close the center, saying his motives
  had been misinterpreted. "It was clear from the messages we
  received from individuals and organizations around the country
  that the proposal was interpreted by many as indicating that
  the Smithsonian was backing away from its commitment to
  science in general, and to the biological sciences in
  particular. Nothing could be further from the truth," he said
  in an announcement. 
  
  Christen M. Wemmer, associate director for conservation at the
  center, regards the decision as a stay of execution. "There's
  no indication in what the secretary said that he feels C.R.C.
  is worth redeeming," said Mr. Wemmer. In discussions last
  week, when it was becoming clear that there was strong support
  for keeping the center open, Smithsonian officials discussed
  with Mr. Wemmer plans to scale back  the operation, he said.
  "What we're still seeing is a cannibalization of projects and
  a reorganization." 
  
  Scientists from outside the Smithsonian also came to the
  defense of the materials-research center, known as S.C.M.R.E.
  Last Wednesday, the American Anthropological Association wrote
  to Mr. Small to oppose the closure. "To eliminate the
  S.C.M.R.E. will have far-reaching and adverse repercussions
  for the Smithsonian Institution, anthropologists, and the
  international research community." 
  
  However, the center attracted less attention and public
  support than the wildlife facility. "There hasn't been a media
  outcry for the materials-research group largely because they
  don't have warm, fuzzy animals that people can connect to,"
  said Brian T. Huber, chairman of the Senate of Scientists at
  the National Museum of Natural History. "Their research is
  equally important but harder to put your arms around, harder
  to describe." 
  
  The fate of the center now resides with Congress, which will
  consider the closure along with the entire Smithsonian budget.
  The institution received $455-million in federal funds in the
  2001 fiscal year, which account for 70 percent of its
  operations. 
  
  As part of the plan to reorganize science across the entire
  institution. Mr. Small will establish a commission of
  scientists from inside and outside the Smithsonian to offer
  advice. 
  
  At Monday's news conference, Mr. Small said that he would
  await the conclusions of the commission before making specific
  plans, but that the proposal approved by the regents calls for
  "enhanced focus" of research activities. At a meeting at the
  natural-history museum last month, Mr. Small said, "We can no
  longer be as diverse and as broad as we were because the
  resources just don't permit it," according to a transcript. 
  

_________________________________________________________________

Chronicle subscribers can read this article on the Web at this address:
http://chronicle.com/daily/2001/05/2001050802n.htm 

If you would like to have complete access to The Chronicle's Web
site, a special subscription offer can be found at: 

   http://chronicle.com/4free 

_________________________________________________________________

You may visit The Chronicle as follows:

   * via the World-Wide Web, at http://chronicle.com 
   * via telnet at chronicle.com

_________________________________________________________________
Copyright 2001 by The Chronicle of Higher Education


*****************************************************************************************

The following article was selected from the Internet Edition
of the Chicago Tribune. To visit the site, point your browser
to http://chicagotribune.com/. 
----------- Chicago Tribune Article Forwarding----------------


---Forwarded article----------------
New Smithsonian `focus' outlined

By Michael Kilian

  Embattled Smithsonian Institution Secretary Lawrence Small announced
a "new strategic direction for science" Monday that could lead to
future curtailment and consolidation at the world's largest museum and
research complex.

He refused to give details about what science programs might be
eliminated under this plan to "focus" the Smithsonian's scientific and
curatorial research efforts, saying that would be up to an advisory
board of science experts that soon will be appointed.

    "Scientific research has become so boundless and expensive an
undertaking that no institution, not even the greatest university, can
encompass it all," Small said during a news briefing after the
Smithsonian's Board of Regents met.

The briefing normally attracts two or three reporters but more than
two dozen attended Monday.

On Sunday, Small withdrew his controversial proposal to close the
Smithsonian's renowned 3,150-acre wildlife conservation research
center in Virginia shortly before an informal meeting of the board.
The closure plan, which faced nationwide opposition, sparked a revolt
among scientists within the 155-year-old institution and a call for
congressional hearings into Small's actions.





Trims authorized

At their formal meeting Monday, the regents accepted his decision but
authorized him to carry out other proposed cuts, including elimination
of the Smithsonian's Materials Research and Education Center, three
library branches, its media production center and its photographic and
imaging office, abolishing 180 positions.

At the same time, the regents approved a proposed increase in the
institution's federal budget from $454 million to $494 million a year.
The funding increase must be passed by Congress.

The board of regents, which is chaired by Supreme Court Chief Justice
William Rehnquist and includes Vice President Dick Cheney and former
University of Chicago President Hanna Gray, meets and votes in secret,
though most of the Smithsonian's budget is federally funded.

With 16 science, art and history museums in Washington and New York,
and nine scientific and scholarly research centers, the Smithsonian is
the largest complex of its kind in the world.

The federal government provides 70 percent of its annual budget,
nearly a half-billion dollars. The institution is visited by 34
million people each year.

Small, a former banking and mortgage executive, is the first
non-academic to head the complex. Critics have charged that Small is
attempting to curb scholarly research while transforming the
institution into a public entertainment center heavily influenced and
supported by donors.

Small has denied the charge, but his annual report this year
emphasized that attendance increased from 31 million to 34 million
last year and that private donations rose from $147 million to $206
million.

He has renamed two museums and several subsidiary facilities for
wealthy donors.

While attempting to close the wildlife research center in Virginia for
a savings of $2.8 million, Small spent more than $10 million to secure
the loan of two pandas from the Chinese government for the
Smithsonian's National Zoo.

In a statement Sunday and at the briefing Monday, Small insisted that
closing the wildlife center would have been good for the institution
and that poor communications caused the uproar over it.

"We made this decision [to drop the closure plan] because it
was clear from the messages we received from individuals and
organizations around the country that the proposal was interpreted by
many as indicating that the Smithsonian was backing away from its
commitment to science in general, and to the biological sciences in
particular," Small said.

"Nothing could be further from the truth, but clearly this action is
necessary to correct that false perception. While our intention hadbeen to save the significant cost of managing such a large physical
property and to reinvest those savings in scientific research, it is
now obvious that the message did not come through."





National protest

The directors of the Brookfield and Lincoln Park Zoos and the heads of
36 of the nation's leading zoological and wildlife conservation
organizations were among those who protested the action, as did
several influential members of Congress.

Brian Huber, chairman of the Smithsonian Museum of Natural History's
Senate of Scientists, an internal association, called Small's reversal
"a hollow victory."

"It's a smoke screen," Huber said. "The reality is that he's still
cutting positions. He will now have a $2.8 million shortfall in his
budget, and that will have to come from somewhere. And he's calling
for this science commission and a `new strategic direction' for
science. There's another shoe waiting to drop."





Back to work

Asked if he intended to hold the rebellious scientists accountable for
speaking out to Congress and the news media, as he threatened to do in
an earlier dispute involving the National Portrait Gallery, Small
said: "Absolutely not."

"I recognize that emotions ran high, but it's time now to come
together as colleagues and get back to work," he said.

Illinois Audubon Society Executive Director Marilyn Campbell, who
protested closure of the wildlife center, said she had never seen a
head of the Smithsonian act in such a manner.

"It wouldn't have happened with Dillon Ripley," she said, referring to
the late ornithologist and predecessor of Small's who expanded the
Smithsonian's facilities and programs.

Small said that, given a "vote of confidence" by the regents, he would
move immediately to appoint an advisory board of outside scientists to
review the Smithsonian's research programs. He said he could not offer
details about the board.

  

========================================================Important Subscriber Information:

The Museum-L FAQ file is located at http://www.finalchapter.com/museum-l-faq/ . You may obtain detailed information about the listserv commands by sending a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "help" (without the quotes).

If you decide to leave Museum-L, please send a one line e-mail message to [log in to unmask] . The body of the message should read "Signoff Museum-L" (without the quotes).