SIMON

FRASER

UNIVERSITY ?

MEMORANDUM

S. 7c45,

To....... .

Senate

Sublect .... M...R.M....-

.Mast.'..5...rogram

Natural Resource Management

From.

Senate Committee on

Academic Planning

Date ?

1978-04-20

Action taken by the Senate Committee on Academic

Planning at its meeting of

1978-04-19

gives rise to the

following motion:

MOTION

That the proposed Master's Program in Natural

Resources Management leading to the Master

of Resource Management Degree, as set forth

in S. 78-45, be approved and recommended to

the Board for approval.

NOTE -

?

Representatives of the Program Committee and of the

Office of the Dean of Graduate Studies satisfied

the Senate Committee on Academic Planning that the

program proposal was well conceived, that the

program had been thoroughly examined and that con-

cerns raised by internal and external reviewers

had been adequately addressed by the initiators of

the program and the Graduate Program Assessment

Committee prior to approval by the Senate Graduate

Studies Committee on April

10, 1978.

It has therefore

been included as a new program in our budget sub-

mission to Council., Nevertheless, if approved by

Senate and the Board, the M.R.M. program together

with other recently approved programs will be returned

to SCAP for advice to the

p

resident regarding relative

priorities.

I*

---

SiMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

MEMORANDUM

0

To. Members, Senate Connnittee on Academic

Planning

SubIect...

?

o f ?

Resource

anagent

Mem ?

Program

From ?

Marlan McGinn

Assistant Registrar-

Graduate Studies

Date ...... ...... ?

.....

.1978

Enclosed is the program for a Master of Resource Management

degree. This program was approved by the Senate Graduate

Studies Committee on April 10, 1978, and is now being for-

warded to the Senate Committee on Acadmeic Planning for

approval.

S

---

SiMON FRASER

UNIVERSITY

MEMORANDUM

To.. ?

... Hrr

.

y

.

?

vans..........................................

...... .............

.From ..... ......Larry... Thoma.s .................................. ..................

........

Registrar

Collections Librarian

Subject ?

MASTER OF

RES.

URCE MANAGEMENT

?

Date ................ ...... ....

.Apr .

..978

The Assessment Committee has requested that

the apparent differences between the Library and

the proposers of the new program,in regards to the

library budget, be resolved.

I can report that this matter has been dis-

cussed by representatives of the Library and the

Geography Department, and we aro now agreed that the

budget proposed

In G.S. 78.5,

which specifies

$5,000 for the first year and $2,000 for the second

year, is necessary to provide adequate library collec-

tions.

zar^r

x/^

-

LET: dcr

c: Mary Barker

Geography Department

I

a

---

I

FEB17 1978

L;.OFGRADUAT

STUDIES OFFICE

SIMON

FRAU-Ji IJN!VFIISITY, BURNAL3Y, C., CANAP\ V1;A iSti

)I;'FHMFN1 OF GE)CHAPi Iv' ?)I.3321

February 16, 1978

Dr. Jon Wheatley

Dean

Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, B.C.

V5A 1S6

Dear Dean Wheatley:

Here encibsed is a copy of the revised proposal for the

program in Natural Resources Management. The suggestions

of your Assessment Committee have been considered and changes

have been made as follows:

(a)

An additional social science course has been

included (MRN 6145);

(b)

The chairmen of all departments with faculty

involved in the program have been contacted;

(c)

The budget has been put into a first and second

year format as well as having certain line items

changed.

Please feel free to contact any or all members of the

Steering Committee if you need additional input.

Sincerely,

Michael C. Roberts

Chairman

Steering Committee

MRM Program

M CR / mgb

0

?

End.

.

I'I1

---

Ls

SIMON FRASER I INIVFRSITY KI)RNARY,

?

CANADA V5A Si

DEPAHII\t

i.NT 01 GEOGRAPHY; 291-332

March 1, 1973

Dr. B.P. Clayman

Associate Dean

Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, B.C.

V5A 1S6

Dear Dr. Clayman:

MAR - 2 197P

DEAN OF GRADUATE?

STUDIES OFFICE

The Steering Committee of the MRM program contacted

every chairman whose department is in some way involved

with the program:

Dr.

M.

Mackauer

BioScience

Dr.

B.

Schoner

Dept. of Econ.

?

C Comm.

Prof.

K. Dixon

Sociology C Anth.

Dr.

F.

Quo

Political Science

Dr.

N.

Reilly

Math.

Dr.

M.C.

Roberts

Geography

All of these chairmen were supportive of the MRM pro-

gram though they all expressed the point that it would

have some impact on their departments. It was crucial,

therefore, that the budget incorporated .compersation to

provide for replacements of their colleagues involved in

the program. The proposed budget was mentioned to them

to show that 1/4 or 1/2 time replacements were envisioned

and explicitly accounted for.

Let me add a further comment on a somewhat different

topic - student interest in the program, because members

of the steering committee have been approached by potential

students on and off campus enquiring about the status of

the MRM. Just by word of mouth information there is an

awareness of this program and a considerable desire to see

it operational.

is

Sincerely,

uala^ 66&Lol^

Michael C. Roberts

Chairman

MCR/mgb

?

Steering Committee, MRM

S

---

PROPOSAL FOR A MASTER'S PROGRAM

IN NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT

FEBRUARY 1978

M. L. Barker & N. C. Roberts

Department of Geography

J. L. Knetsch

Department of Economics & Commerce

A. L. Turnbull

Department of Biological Sciences

.

.

no

-I

.

---

PROPOSAL FOR A MASTER'S DEGREE PROGRAM

IN THE MANAGEMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

This material has been prepared in accordance with requirements as

outlined in the document "The establishment of new graduate programs" approved

by Senate July 10, 1972.

a. JUSTIFICATION FOR THE PROGRAM

A two year Masters level program in Natural Resources Management is being

proposed at S.F.U. This would be a professional program designed for individuals

with experience in private organizations or public agencies dealing with

resources, and for recent graduates in various disciplines related to natural

resources management.

The intent is to offer individuals with primary backgrounds in separate

disciplines such as geography, biology, forestry, engineering, planning or

economics, an opportunity to take greater advantage of complementary subject

matter and to develop increased familiarity and competence in the strategies,

approaches and techniques of natural resources management.

(i)

The role of natural resources in the B.C. and Canadian context:

The impetus for this proposal came primarily from the growing

recognition of the importance of natural resources to British

Columbia and Canada, and the changing nature of policy and

management issues. Increasingly, competitive and changing

demands now characterize many natural resource problems.

Public participation in allocation decisions, the role and

fate of natural resource-based communities, conflicts over use

of free-flowing streams, claims on resources by Native people

and other groups, fair taxation, the use of natural resources

as a tool for regional economic development, environmental quality,

irreversibilities in resource commitments, and efficient util-

ization of resources over the long-term are among the types of

issues now at the forefront of natural resources management.

Expertise in more traditional resource disciplines Is and will

continue to be needed. But increasingly it is being recognized

that such experts might be more effective and productive if

their experience and background could be supplemented by further

participation in an academic program. designed to allow a

wider appreciation of problems and means to deal with them.

This recognition of need is widely shared among natural resource

organizations and professionals in the field.

(ii)

Interest in the private and public sectors: In the summer of 1976

an outline of the proposed program was discussed with represen-

tatives from the provincial and federal resource agencies,

environmental consultants and resource industries in B.C., and

universities across Canada.

S

- ?

2

---

-2-

• ?

The results of this survey were: 1) encouragement to

proceed and a strong indication that there is both a

supply of participants and a demand for graduates;

2)

agreement with the nature of the program; and

3)

useful suggestions for modifications (which have

since been incorporated). It was also clear that while

the initial participation, in some instances in the

form of agency sponsorship of students at full salary,

might be a reasonable expectation, longer term par-

ticipation will be dependent on the quality and useful-

ness of the program.

Representatives from the following organizations were

consulted:

Environment Canada - Fisheries and Marine Service (Vancouver)

- Lands Directorate (Ottawa)

- Recreational Fisheries Branch (Ottawa)

Canada, Department of Regional Economic Expansion (Ottawa)

Canadian Office of Tourism

B.C. Pollution Control Branch

B.C. Department of the Environment - Land Management Branch

- Water Resources Service

- Environment and Land

Use Secretariat

B.C. Forest Service

. ?

B.C. Department of Recreation and Tourism

- Deputy Minister and

Assistant Deputy Minister

- Parks Branch

- Fish and Wildlife Branch

B.C. Institute for Economic Policy Analysis

MacMillan Bloedel (Vancouver)

Several Environmental Consultants in Vancouver

Faculty of Environmental Studies, University of Waterloo

Institute for Environmental Studies, University of Toronto

Westwater Research Centre, University of British Columbia

In particular, strong support was indicated by the B. C. Fish and Wildlife Branch

and the federal Fisheries and Marine Service.

(iii) Employment opportunities: One indication of the potential

success of this program is the demonstrated demand for graduates

from the only existing MRM program in Canada, at the University of

Manitoba. In British Columbia there is clear interest in hiring

graduates from the proposed program as well as in strengthening

the qualifications of existing personnel.

(iv) Faculty interest: The need for further academic opportunities

in the natural resources has been recognized by several

departments at S.F.U., most notably by Biological Sciences,

•

?

Economics and Commerce,and Geography. Inter-departmental meet-

ings on the advisability of an SFU initiative have taken place

- ?

3

---

-3-

over a period of some two years. Interest within the

university community has subsequently broadened and

includes the support of faculty in the Departments of

Political Science, Sociology and Mathematics.

b. NEW POSITIONS NEEDED

This program has been designed to utilize, as far as possible, the avail-

able strengths of the faculty already at S.F.U. So although the number of new

positions requested totals 3-3/4 only 1-1/2 positions will be new tenure tract

faculty to be recruited from off campus.

(i)

Director: This person would be able to teach at least one of

the formal courses as well as partaking in the seminars; the

position would be 1/2 time administration. This will be a

critical appointment because the director will be responsible

for: a) getting the program off to a solid start; b) establish-

ing contact with provincial and private agencies; and c) main-

taining the desired course sequence within the total offerings

of S.F.U. programs. This will be a position needing a search

of the same calibre as that used by the University for selecting

a chairman.

(ii)

A shared appointment between this program and Biological Sciences:

The

in resource

person selected

biology and

would

would

have

be

a

responsible

research and

for

teaching

MRM 611

proficiencyand

MEN

?

is

612. Since the program requires two new courses in the area of

biology it would be impossible to staff this from present Biological

Science personnel. The person selected must have a clear under-

standing of the biosphere not only from the viewpoint of biologist

but also from that of a resource manager.

(iii)

A sessional lecturer or visiting assistant/associate professor

in natural resources law: It is hoped that we will be able to

Identify someone from the Vancouver legal community to teach

the Law and Resources (MRM 641) course. This will be a quarter

time position.

(iv)

The other 1-1/2 faculty positions are all replacements for faculty

from Geography, Economics and Commerce, Political Science, Mathe-

matics and Sociology/Anthropology who will be seconded to the

program for certain courses (or will have joint appointments).

(v) Secretary.

(vi)

Technician: As the program grows and the various environmental

courses (MEN 611, 612, 631, 632) and field trips are mounted

there will be a need for a support staff person. This position

will supervise the equipment; maintain the laboratories; assist

in mounting and running the field program.

I

- ?

4

---

.

-4-

This submission is based on a full-time appointment of a Director; a half-

time appointment with Bio Sciences (50% BioSc., and 50% Natural Resources

Management); replacement positions for part-time use of faculty in Economics

and Commerce, Geography, Mathematics, Political Science and Sociology; and

a quarter-time position for a resources. lawyer.

Budget

Faculty ?

First Year

?

Second Year

Director ?

$

40,000. ?

$ 40,000.

BioSc. 50% time/MRM 50% ?

25,000. ?

25,000.

Faculty Replacement ?

25,000. ?

37,500.

Positions (1-1/2 positions)

Lawyer

(1/4

time)

?

8,000. ?

8,000. -

?

$ 98,000.

?

$110,500.

Support Staff

Secretary ?

$ 12,000.

?

$ 12,000.

Technician ?

13,000.

?

13,000.

?

25,000.

?

25,000.

Total Faculty & Staff Salaries

?

$123,000.

?

$135,500.

Other Costs

Visiting Lecturers

?

1,500. ?

3,000.

Field Trips ?

2,000. ?

4,000.

Materials & Supplies

?

5,000. ?

5,000.

Miscellaneous Equipment

?

10,000. ?

5,000.

Library ?

5,000.

?

2,000.

Total. - Other Costs

?

$ 23,500.

?

$ 19,000.

TOTAL COSTS FOR THE PROGRAM

Revenues (from fees)

12-15 First year enrollment $7,200. - $9,000.

24-30 Second "

?

H ?

$7,000. - 19,500

Student contributions to field trips

?

?

Grants for research - overhead

?

?

Contacts have been made with the Canada Council and NRC concerning the possibility

of seed funding.

V

.5

---

-5-

d. THE FIELD OF STUDY D..-ITStRE AREAS TO BE COVERED BY THE PROPOSED. PROGRAM.

?

Is

The field of study is the management of natural resources to maximize their

benefits to society while minimizing harmful effects of their exploitation.

Some concerns are: quantification of resource supplies and needs; estimates of

productivity and sustainable yields of renewable resources; the nature of

decision making; predictions of the impact of resource developments on the

economic and social structure, the physical and mental health of people, and

the recreational and aesthetic values of communities; estimates of possible

damage to valued plants and animals; and evaluations of possibilities of

repairing sites damaged by resource extractions.

The principal disciplines contributing to these areas include Economics,

Biological Sciences, Geography, Political Science, Sociology and Mathematics.

The academic merit of each of these disciplines is recognized by Simon Fraser

University and each constitutes a discipline in which Simon Fraser excels.

Separation of these disciplines into administrative and functional units

arbitrarily separates sources of information that together are essential for

rational resource use decisions.

This program is designed to transcend traditional discipline boundaries

by two devices: (1) by creating a forum in which a variety of discipline

trained individuals can meet, communicate, and learn to integrate disciplinary

perspectives; (2) to provide formal training to students in disciplines other

than those of their primary training.

In the resources field, in particular, it is important that an academic

program stress problem-solving and critical thinking rather than focus

primarily on subject matter (e.g. fisheries economics, fisheries biology).

To this end, the program will stress modes of integrating and synthesising

• ?

specialist approaches. It does not seek to make complete economists of social

scientists, or complete biologists of engineers. But it intends to make

economists, for instance, aware of the fact that there are legitimate

biological constraints to ideal economic solutions, (and vice versa), and

to permit economists and biologists to converse together, and with represen-

• ?

tatives of other disciplines, so that optimal solutions can be reached.

The program is aimed at students who already have a sound disciplinary

training and are either presently working in some aspect of resource develop-

ment, or are planning to do so.

There are other programs that endeavour to teach full courses of under-

graduate studies leading to a first degree in resource management. These

programs, we feel, contain the inherent danger of producing graduates with

a mix of elements of many disciplines, but with little real expertise in

any discipline. We feel strongly that interdisciplinary training depends

first on achievement of at least one strong disciplinary background. Each

member of a resource management team should be able to contribute a thorough

knowledge of a relevant discipline, so that the contributions of that dis-

cipline are fully available to the team. Thus we have aimed this program at

products of strong disciplinary training.

- ?

6

---

-6-

e. NAMES OF PERSONS TO BE INVOLVED IN THE PROGRAM

Faculty with ongoing involvement in the Core Program

B.

R.

Aispach

Mathematics

N.

L.

Barker

Geography

C.

B.

Crampton

Geography

A.

Doerr

Political Science

N.

Dyck

Sociology/Anthropology

J.

L.

Knetsch

Economics & Commerce

M.

C.

Roberts

Geography

A.

L.

Turnbull

Biological Sciences

Acilunct Facult

R. C.

Brooke ?

Biological Sciences

P. Copes

?

Economics and Commerce

E. J. Hickin

?

Geography

R. B. Horsfall ?

Geography

R. W. Mathewes ?

Biological Sciences

R. N. S.Sadleir

,

?

Biological Sciences

f. NAMES AND QUALIFICATIONS OF FACULTY PARTICIPATIN

G

IN THE PROGRAM

S ?

Brian R. Aispach

B.A. (Wash.), N.A., Ph.D. (Calif.)

Associate Professor

Research Interests: Combinatorics; graph theory; discrete optimization

Program Involvement MRM

643

Mathematical Models in Resource Planning

Mary L. Barker

B.Sc. (London), M.A.

Assistant Professor

Research Interests

Program Involvement:

Ph.D. (Tor.)

Resource Policy, Water resource management, Environ-

mental psychology.

MRM

601

Natural Resources Management Seminar I;

NRM

646

Impact Assessment.

Cohn B. Cxampt

B.Sc., Ph.D. (Bristol)

Professor

Research Interests Biophysical land evaluation; soil micromorphology

Program Involvement: MRM

632

Terrain Evaluation

Audrey Doerr

B.A. (Sask.), M.A. (Carleton), Ph.D. (Carleton)

Associate Professor

Research Interests: Public policy processes

Program Involvement: MRN

644

Public Policy Analysis

Arctic land-use.

7

---

-7-

f. Noel Dyck

B.A., M.A. (Sask.), Ph.D. (Manchester)

Assistant Professor

Research Interests: Social Organization, Contemporary Canadian Indians

Program Involvement MRN 645 Resource Development and Communities

Jack L. Knetsch

B.S., M.S. (Mich. State), M.P.A., Ph.D. (Harvard)

Professor

Research Interests Economics of natural resources, Resources Policy

Program Involvement: MRM 601 Natural Resources Management

Seminar I; MPH 621 Economics of Natural Resources

Michael C. Roberts

B.Sc. (London), M.A. (Tor.), Ph.D. (Iowa)

Associate Professor

Research Interests Hydrology of drainage basins, Fluvial geomorphology.

Program Involvement: MPH 631 Hydrology & Geomorphology of Drainage Basins.

Albert L. Turnbull

B.S.F., M.F. (U.B.C.), D. Phil (Oxon)

Professor

Research Interests: Population & community ecology; predation

Program Involvement:

MRH

611 Resource Biology I

MPH 612 Resource Biology II

R.C. Brooke

B.S.F. (U.B.C.) M.F. (Yale), Ph.D. (U.B.C.)

Associate Professor

Research interests: plant ecology: vegetation-environment relationships,

succession in forest, subalpine and alpine areas of

B.C., forest and non-forest tundra regions.

Program involvement: adjunct faculty (MPH 611, MEM 612)

P. Copes

B.A., M.A. (U.B.C.), Ph.D. (London)

Professor

Research interests:

Program involvement:

fisheries economics

adjunct faculty

.

E. J. Hickin

B.A., Ph.D. (Sydney)

Associate Professor

Research interests:

Program involvement:

R.B. Horsfall

fluvial geomorphology; application of the principles of

fluvial dynamics, sedimentology and hydrology to

geomorphic problems.

adjunct faculty (MPH 631)

B.A.(Reed), M.A., Ph.D. (Johns Hopkins)

Aac,4tif

Professor

Research interests: environmental perception. Mental health in isolated

communities. Advocate and co-operative planning.

Program involvement: adjunct faculty (MPH 646)

.

---

-8-

S

f. R. W. Mathewes

B.Sc. (SFU), Ph.D. (TJBC)

Assistant Professor

Research interests: paleoecology, biogeography, plant systematics.

Program involvement: adjunct faculty (MRM 611, MRM 612)

R.M.S. Saleir

B.Sc., Ph.D. (Western Australia)

Professor

Research interests: environmental assessments, wildlife resource studies,

mammalian reproduction

Program involvement: adjunct faculty (MRN 611, MEN 612)

g.

THE DEGREE RELEVANT TO THE PROGRAM

This will be a new professional degree:

Master

of

Natural Resource

Management (MRM).

The program will be located in the Faculty of

Interdisciplinary Studies.

h.

THE DEGREE REQUIREMENTS

The basic program consists of 41 credit hours of which 4 hours are for

workshop/seminar credit; 33 hours are for course credit and 4 hours are for

research projects/practicum credit.

A sample program is included to indicate the course structure for one

student. This sequence of courses will vary somewhat depending upon the

student's background.

Sample Program

It should be possible for students with varied backgrounds and preparation

in individual disciplines to satisfy the core requirements in each field and

to fulfill the other degree requirements in the scheduled four semesters of

full-time effort. An indication of how this might be accomplished by different

individuals, and of the proposed sequencing of courses can be obtained by

examination of sample programs.

Sample Program - no background in Biology, Economics or Geography.

An individual with no particular course or other preparation in any of the

core areas will need to pursue the most structured program in order to meet

the degree requirements. For some students it might be necessary for them to

take Econ. 200 and Geog. 111 in the semester preceding enrolling in the MRI4.

While this will leave little flexibility, all of the areas can be covered within

the prescribed time period.

.

I

9

---

-9-

?

FTRST YEAR

Fall

Spring

MRM 601-2

(Seminar I)

MEN 612-3

(Resources Biology II)

MRN 611-3

(Resources Biology I)

MRM 632-3

(Terrain Evaluation)

MEN 621-3

(Economics of Natural

MRi1 641-3

(Law and Resources)

Resources)

MRM 643-3

(Mathematical Models

MRM 631-3

(Hydrology & Geomorphology

in Resource Planning)

of Drainage Basins)

SECOND YEAR

MRN 642-3 (Regional Resource Planning)

?

MEN 602-3 (Seminar II)

}IRN 644-3 (Public Policy Analysis)

?

MRN 699-4 (Research Project)

MRM 645-3 (Resource Development and Communities)

MRM 646-3 (Impact Assessment)

Sample Program - Economics, Biology or Geography Background

Individuals with backgrounds and/or previous course preparation in one

of the core areas will be able to choose optional courses in the first two

semesters. For example, in the case of economists, Econ. 200 and possibly

MRM 621 (Economics of Natural Resources) would not be required and other

courses in economics - e.g. fisheries economics, regional economics - might

be substituted or alternatively courses from other fields could be included.

Students with previous experience in the other core disciplines would.

make analogous substitutions. The MEN courses would, however, be required

of all participants in the program.

1. PROPOSED COURSES REQUIRED BY THE PROGRAM.

New courses

MEN 601 Natural Resources Management Seminar I

HEN 602

?

it

?

II

MEN 611 Resources Biology I

MRM612

?

It

MEN 641 Law and Resources

MEN 642 Regional Resource Planning

MEN 643 Mathematical Models and Resource Planning

MEN 645 Resource Development and Communities

MEN 646 Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

MEN 699 Research Project

10

---

-10-

Courses built upon existing offerings

MEN 621 ?

Economics of Natural Resources

uRN 631 ?

Hydrology and Geomorphology of Drainage Basins

MRM 632 ?

Terrain Evaluation

MEN 644 ?

Public Policy Analysis

Course outlines attached (see Appendix A).

J. LABORATORY AND RESEARCH EQUIPMENT NEEDS

A combined seminar-open laboratory space is required. Research and teaching

equipment needs are modest and have been costed in the budget(c).

Space requirements for the program are listed in item n.

k. SOURCES OF POTENTIAL SUPPORT FOR GRADUATE STUDENTS.

1. Sponsoring agencies. The survey carried out by Professors Barker and

Knetsch in the Summer of 1976 indicated that a number of students

(approximately 6-8 per year) would be supported by their employers,

including both private firms and government agencies.

• ?

ii. Some of the students will be taking courses in the MRM program on a

part-time basis and will not need support. It will be possible for

some students to take one course per semester by taking time off

from their regular employment.

iii.

Fellowships. Once the program is underway approaches should be made

to the major resource companies (MacMillan-Bloedel, Kaiser, Weidwood,

etc.) for sponsored fellowships. The Federal Fisheries and Marine

Service has raised the issue of offering a limited number of intern-

ships to students enrolled in the program.

iv.

Personal Support. Some students will enter the program with their own

sources of support.

v.

It is quite likely that some of the students in this program could

hold teaching assistantships In associated departments. This would

be an ad hoc arrangement but could, conceivably, support two people

per year.

vi.

Canada Council and the N.R.C. will be approached for student support.

If this is forthcoming it will probably be for a limited period.

I.

.

.

11

---

-11-

1. A

RESOURCES

STATEMENT

AND

SIGNED

FUTURE

BY

NEEDS

THE UNIVERSITY

IF THE PROGRAM

LIBRARIAN

IS IMPLEMENTED.

SHOWING PRESENT LIBRARY

?

S

Included here:

1. Memo from L. Thomas, Library; and

ii. Copy of the letter to Dean Wheatley from M.C. Roberts (May 6, 1977)

?

giving the Committee's response to his memo. (See Appendix B)

m. AN ESTIMATE OF ENROLLMENT

a)

12 - 15 in the first year.

b)

24 - 30 in the second year.

A large number of inquiries about the program have been received and this

Is a clear Indication of considerable demand for the program. For the program

to be successful only well qualified applicants will be accepted; as reflected

in the enrollment estimates above.

n. SPACE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROGRAM

The ideal combination of space requirements is:

Director's Office

?

40 ?

in2

Secretary ?

25

Seminar/teaching laboratory

?

120

Research laboratory

?

80

Graduate student office space

?

100

Faculty offices (2)

?

?

50 ?

Total space required 415

a. NAMES OF EXTERNAL ASSESSORS OF THE PROGRAM.

1.

Dr. K. H. Hare

Director

Institute for Environmental Studies

University of Toronto

2.

Dr. W.R.D. Sewell

Department of Geography

University

of Victoria

12

---

-12-

• ?

o. 3. Dr. P.E. Nickel, Director

Natural Resource Institute

University of Manitoba

4. Dr. D.A. Jameson, Assoc. Dean

College of Forestry and Natural Resources

Colorado State

University

p.

DURATION OF THE PROGRAM

The program should be reviewed after

six

years which will allow five

cycles of students to have entered and graduated from the program.

q.

CALENDAR

DESCRIPTION

j MASTER OF NATURAL RESOURCE MANAGEMENT

PROGRAM

This isa professionally oriented, two year-(four semesters) degree

program designed for individuals with experience in public agencies or private

organizations dealing with resources, and for recent graduates in various

disciplines related to natural resources management.

The intent is to offer individuals with primary backgrounds in separate

disciplines such as geography, biology, economics, engineering, forestry or

planning, an opportunity to take an integrated sequence of courses from

comp]mentary subject matter fields so as to develop an increased familiarity

and competence-in the strategies, approaches and techniques of natural resource

management.

The successful completion of the program will lead to the degree of

Master of Natural Resource Management (M.R.M.).

ADMISSION

For admission requirements, refer to General Regulations section.

Individual students will vary

involved in the degree program and,

be conditional on the completion of

in their preparation for the various fields

therefore, admission to the program might

certain underg:aduate courses.

DEGREE REQUIREMENTS

The basic program consists of 41 credit hours of which 6 hours can be

transfer credit. A further

six

hours of core courses can be replaced by

other courses if the student has had the core courses elsewhere. That is,

a student can transfer 12 hours of which

six

can reduce his total credit

load to 35.

The required courses are as follows:

13

---

I

-13-

MRM

601-2

Natural Resources Management Seminar I

MRM

602-2

Natural Resources Management Seminar II

MRM 611-3

Resources Biology I

MRM

612-3

Resources Biology II

MRM

621-3

Economics of Natural Resources

MRM

631-3

Hydrology & Geomorphology of Drainage Basins

MRM

632-3

Terrain Evaluation

MRM

641-3

Law and Resources

MRH

642-3

Regional Resource Planning

MBM 643-3

Mathematical Models In Resource Planning

MRM

644-3

Public Policy Analysis

MBN

645-3

Resource Development and Communities

MRM

646-3

Environmental and Social Impact Assessment

MRN

699-4

Research Project

?

L

S

- ?

14

---

Appendix A

New Course Proposals

is

.

15

---

SIN MASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course ProDosal Penn

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

Departnent:

Interdiscip1i n arr Studies ?

course Number: ?

MRM 601

Title: ?

Natural Resources .Managnnt Seminar I

Description:

Thestudyofdisciplinary_andinerdisciplinryapproachesto

natural resources planning, with an ehas is upon critically.

evaluating nde1s and criteria of assessment

Codit Hours

:

2

?

_vector:

0-2-0

Prerequisite(s) if ?

None

quxrr

AM S$G

?

.

.•

Estimated Enrolinent: ?

12-30

?

When will the couree first

be

offered: ?

783

Nov oftenwill the course be offered: ?

Once a year

• ?

"S.

JUSTIFICATION:

During the first semester, individual students will be taking

courses in a variety of catplementary subjects This seminar will bring

all students together with a focus on integrating approaches to natural

?

?

Prp

-

mpnt - '. •.

?

.-

?

•

ISE

lihich Vacuity 's.*ár will normally ?

Directors 6 other faculty in

?

*.t are '

the-'badgetary taplicationa of mounting the course:________________________________

I

.

Are there sufficient Library resources (oupend details)*

?

Yes

Appended: . a)

Otline of

the

Course ?

.

b)

An,

indication of the competence

of

the Faculty member to give the course.

c)

Library resource

Approved: Departaintal Graduate Studies Committee:_ ?

_Date:_____________

Pseulty 'Gradusta Studies.-Committee:. .

?

Date:_____________

Vacuity: ? .

?

Date:___________

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:_____________

Senate:

?

Date:_____________

---

COURSE OUTLINE

MRM 601

?

Natural Resources Management Seminar I

This seminar will be the first of two required of all participants in the

Natural Resources Management program, and will be taken in the first semester of

enrollment. The emphasis will be on the understanding and appreciation of the

contributions and limitations of various disciplinary approaches to natural

resources management and policy choices. Different goals and objectives of

resources management will be examined as they are viewed by different interests

and clientele groups. Attention will be directed towards study of the planning

process and case studies will be examined with attention paid to integrating

disciplinary and professional perspectives.

A series of resource management problems in particular instances will be

used to examine the main issues. Among these will be a proposal to increase

employment and economic development by altering valued coastal resources; a

development of engineering works that will degrade environmental resources;

and alternative timber policies. Emphasis will be on the identification of

• ?

values and Interests, and on what analyses and information can usefully be

applied in. the resolution of conflicts, and in choice of policies and plans.

A wide view of social, legal and economic consequences of alternatives will

be encouraged.

0 ?

1

?

17

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

?

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

CALENDAR INFO*NIO

Interdisciplinary Studies

.

?

Course Wer:

MRM

602

ntis:

Natural Resources Management Seminar II

O"criptIon:

Advanced discussion of research and planning methodoloie,

with review and ealuatiorj of student research in progress.

14it Rours:

2

. ?

.

?

Vector:

0-2-0

?

Prerequisite(s) if ww:

all

othe.course requirements completed.

LUT AND SCULE ? .

ktlaats4 ?

12-30 ?

will the course first be offered:

80-i

lou often will the course be offered:

.1V$TIflCATI

This is the second of two required seminars for participants in..

.íñ the MRM programme. The seminar will be used primarily for advanced

discussion of

------------------

methodologies, and for the presentation and critique

.

• ?

Iicb Faculty member will normally teach the course:.

Director & other faculty in

.•

?

. ?

.

?

S

pro

11:011

Are the1,4stary Implications of mounting the course:________________________________

Are there sufficient Library resource. (append

details)

: Yes

Appead.ds a) O$iine of the Course

? .

?

.

b)

c)

Library

An

indication

resources''

of the coetance of the Faculty member to

give

the course.

Approvsd: Dspirtaental Graduate Studies Coenitte.:_.

?

Date:

Faculty Graduate Studies Coittee:

?

Date:_____________

Vacuity: ?

Data:_____________

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

.

Date:____________

Senate:

?

Date:_____________

---

0 ?

COURSE OUTLINE

MRM 602 Natural Resources Management Seminar II

This seminar will focus upon the assessment of research and planning

methodologies, with the reporting and critique of student research projects

forming an important component. A student research project (MRM 699) is a

requirement for the MRM degree.

An emphasis of the seminar will be on the improved information for

resources management and the extent to which different types of study and

analysis can provide useful data. The timeliness, cost-effectiveness and

nature of reporting the results of such efforts will also be examined.

.

---

SIMON FRASER

UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Pronosal Form

CALENDAR

INFORMATION:

Department:

INTER-DISCIPLINARY STUDIES

?

Course Number:

MEN 611

Title: ?

RESOURCES BIOLOGY I

-

Description:

A review of population, community and ecosystem ecology.

Plannin

g

. conIuc.tin, and re

porting

of ecological surveys.

CreditHours:

3

?

.

?

Vector:

3-1-0

?

Prerequisite(s) if any:

0

?

LUWNT AND SEDVIG;

?

.

Estimated Enro11Isnt

1230

?

When will the course first be offered:

?

78-3

Now often will the course be offered:

?

Once per year

JUSTIFIGAXXONI

This course is primarily for students with little or no experience inbio-

logicai eco].9gy

or studeUts who have neglected this subject for some years,.

.It introduces them

tb

modern ecological: concepts and methods, and dis-

• cusses objectives, and methods of surveying, biological aspects of

envirOnrnenç. ?

-. ., ?

•.

?

S

Which Faculty member will normally teach the course:

_

New faculty appointment

What

a

re

thsbdatary i1ications of nountlax the course:________________________________

One T.A. Mimeographic and A.V. services

Are there .uiftdan Library resources '(a

p

pend dCtaila):____________________________

Append.d: .

*)

Otitline of the Course

?

.

b) An indication of

the

competence of the Faculty nether to give the course.

•

C)

Library resources

Approved: Dspaxtntal Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:______________

Faculty. Graduate Studiss' .Coenittee:

?

, -. ? Date:

Faculty: ?

,

?

Date:_____________

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

•. ? Date:

Sqnat.:. ?

,

?

Date:____________

.

.

20

---

a

a

MRM 611-3. RESOURCE BIOLOGY I

SECTION I - Biological Ecology - 12 hours

An intensive review of general ecological concepts with emphasis on

populations, communities, and ecosystems.

A.

Historical review: - ecology's beginnings,

development, and present state; evolution

of aims and scope of ecology

B.

Autecology and Synecology: - individual and group

relationships

to environment

C. Populations: - population definition; Mendelian

and population genetics; selection and adaptation;

variation within and between populations

D.

Population structure: - age distributions; age

specific birth and death rates; life-tables;

stable age distribution and growth rates

E.

Population growth and regulation: - finite and innate

rates of increase; population fluctuations; carrying capacity

F.

Communities: - community structures; regulation; food,

predation, competition, social interactions; density

dependency

C. Ecosystems: - physical and biotic interactions; resource

cycles; soil, water, nutrients, climate; trophic levels

energy fixation; energy flows; succession, maturity,

biomass relationships, productivity, standing crop.

H.

Exploitation of ecosystems: - diversity and stability

concepts; impoverishment.

I.

Evolutionary considerations: - population and community

evolution, heterogeneitY and selection, niche; niche

overlaps, niche breadth, survival strategies, r and t

strategies, time minimizers and

energy maximizers,

optimization, some reservations

SECTION II - Ecological Surveys - 24 hours

A. Objectives and terms of reference: - scope and constraints

of survey, optimal use, conservation, specific resource (game,

fish, timber, restoration of degraded environments, water,

recreation, minerals, etc., alternate uses, perturbations -

natural or man made, predictions

óT

?

121

---

MRM 611-3. RESOURCE BIOLOGY I (continued)

?

10

SECTION II -

B.

Pilot Survey (quick and dirty)

what is there now

prior information: maps, photos, local experience,

literature, previous surveys (timber cruises, mineral

prospecting, game records)

observation ?

transects, quadrates, visual observation,

counts, indirect evidence (feces, tracks, burrows, signs

of feeding, bird calls, etc.)

?

ii ?

what is known about what is there now

literature, local experience, etc.

assessment of pilot

rank inputs (or components)

identification of key systems, species or species associations

C.

Main detailed survey

?

I ?

establish priorities relative to time and budget

?

ii ?

establish sampling systems

estimate variance

set precision and accuracy

design sampling method

administration of procedures

personnel, time, training

data recording systems

?

iv ?

analysis and interpretation of data

?

V ?

assessments, predictions, conclusions, recommendations

D.

Survey report: - organization, brevity, coherence, simplicity,

state conclusions clearly and emphatically.

P^

22

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proiosal Form

LbAR INOBJIATION:

• ?

Department:

INTERDISCIPLINAR STUDIES

?

Course Nb.r:MRN

612

Title:

•

Resource Biology. .11

Description:

Concepts of biological resources and resource management models. ?

Examines some of the "classic" cases of mismanagement

sours 3

?

Vector:

3-1-0 ?

Prerequisite(s) if any:MRM

611

or euivale

q

?

nt

. ?

NT AND SGs .

?

. .

st1asted Enrollmentt.

•. 1230

?

When will the course first be offered: ?

79-1

Rmvoftsn viii the course be offered:

?

_Once per year

• ?

..

?

scs' ?

. ? . ?

.

?

.'

Mañy'modls

.

for the management of fish, game, forest, and recreational site..

ThaveDeen deli-eioped. anci are used.

course

This presents the principles that

have' been. developed for successful models, .and discusses the failings of un

successful models.

I.

Which Pamelty

member

will normally teach the course:. ?

New faculty appointment

Vb4t an r.).udetary. tpIications of mounting. the course:

?

_

.

One T.A. Mimeographc and A.V. services. Funds for travel for 2 - 3 class

field trips. Stipends for

3 -

A guest lecturers.

Are there sufficient Library resources (anp.nd details):

?

Yes

Appended: a)

outline

of the urse

a) . M indication of the competence of the Faculty member to give the course.

c) Library resources

Approved: Departmental Graduate Studies Committee:

?

_Date:_____________

Vacuity Graduate Studies

.

Coitte.: ?

. ?

Data:______________

Facultyt

• ?

Date:____________

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:______________

Senate: ?

• ?

Date:______________

-

?

41,

---

MRN 612-3. RESOURCE BIOLOGY II

SECTION I - Present resource management models and assessments of their biological

success.

A.

General coicepts

renewable resources

standing crop

productivity

biomass energy relationships

yields - underutilization

overutilization

optimal yield

B.

Some resource management models

e.g.

fisheries, game, forestry, recreation

short and long term evaluations

conflicts

C.

Alternative management strategies and predictions of

biological significance

D.

"Catastrophic" alteration of environment, e.g.

flooding, strip-mining, "dust-howl", fire (use and

misuse), introductions of exotic species

E.

Technologies of "repair" of degraded environments

F.

Evaluations of short-vs. long-term pressures of biological

resources

C. Case studies - a critique of resource judgements and management,

e.g. Peace-Athabascas.

Lake Erie

Nile River Basin

Tennessee coal

Ground-nut scheme

Ord River irrigation scheme

Whaling and sealing

East coast salmon

etc.

.

24

---

Faculty:

______

_______________Date:__

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:

46'^'

25

6

;.1bN

tduate Cnirsv

tOII..L ?

rm

CAI.INI)AR

INF4)hIIAT!4:

I4RN Programme

Interdisciplinary Studi

e

s

Economics of Natural Resources

, 1 1.

11

Application of economic theory to natural resources management problems,

with a view to assessing existing and alternative policies. Topics include benefit-

cost an4lvsis, economics of preservatiop., pricing of

?

rvices,

alternative pollution control strategies . and fishriesna.gement.

3-0-0............

I 'rFlut

i

ter ?

E.c.QD ?

200

previous.

bacicgtound.in

. Z.conQmics.

NRoLLhEN1

AIU

S:;HELWJ.. r NC

•

.tt(c:

?

•: ?

12-30

?

offeted:

?

78-3

}kew jre: wi L th. ,'.r'.r .

?

. '

i°

.

. r.'.t: ?

Once a year

30511

171CATTflN:

This course satisfies the

minimum

economics content for this core area of the MRM

of 0

-

9

-

Y

ãiTlWEóüfie

...

wiliEcthp.isé the

..

pr

e

s

e

nt l3' ffrêd" ECON.

3&4e,ith added

requirnents on teru-paper, carrying graduate credit.

RESOURCES:

Which

Facftltv member will norma)i,' teact, the

cure: ?

J.L. Knetach

Whnt

nrc the

tudgetdrv implications

(IV

ThO(,fltiIlC the OUtqP

None, unless enrollment requires an additional section

Ate ther sufficient Library resources (sonend

Ai,pended: a) Outline of the.

Course

b)

An indication of

the

comoetence

of

the Pacultv member to give

the

course.

c)

Library

resources

Approved: Departmental Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:______________

Faculty Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Dat.:______________

o

Senate:

?

Date:

---

Course Outline

fflM 621 - Economics of Natural Resources

The course is primarily one of applied economics dealing with topics of

natural resources and environmental quality. This involves the application

of economic theory to natural resource management problems with a view of

assessing existing and alternative resource management policies.

Cásè examples will be used extensively to illustrate problems, methods

of analyses, and planning and policy implications.

Topics include the following:

I.

Introduction and Historical

II.

WelfareEconomics

Competitive market allocations

Market failures and public interventions

?

.

III.

Benefit-Cost Analysis

Welfare Measures

Benefit-Cost Criteria

Benefit Estimation

Multiple Objectives and Regional Development

Pecuniary and Technological Externalities

Discounting

IV.

Demand Projections

V.

Resource Rents

Accrual

Measurement

Policy Implications

-.

?

VI. Resource Preservation

26

VII. Environmental Impact Assessment

---

-2-

VIII. Pollution Control

Causes

Alternative Control Strategies

IX. Property Rights

Pollution Control Measures and Cost Responsibility

Expropriation

Compensation and Taking Issues

X.

Pricing of Natural Resources Services

XI. Taxation

XII. Common Property

Fisher es

Other

XIII. Resources, Environment and Growth

Text and Readings:

J.V. Krutilla and A.C. Fisher, Economics of Natural Environments.

R. Dorfman and N.S. Dorfman, Economics of the Environment.

E.J. Mishan, Cost-Benefit Analysis, 1975 edition (Recommended).

In addition there will be a fairly extensive set of readings.

Exams, Essays, Exercises:

There will be a final exam and a midterm. A term essay will be required

dealing with the application of economics. In addition there will be a series

of exercises or problems.

27

---

?

r ?

.4

I

'AI.FNI'A iN

?

MB.}I PROGRAMME

rrvnt:

Interdisciplinary Studies -

?

- -.

?

r:M63l

;

:

i

(.

:

The Hydrology and Geomorphology of Drainage Basins

The morphology and evolution of drainage basins; analysis of surface and

subsurface flow in the drainage basin; stream-hlllslope_

erosion and sedimentation.

c

d it im r -.

3

?

-

-

i ?

2-0-2 ?

equ iif anv:

ENRtiLiJFNj ANL) Sii1)i'1. N":

Es

t.ifl:* L&'d ?

n y

cii mont:

12-30

?

i,oi, w I 11 t.':-:I

?

. ?

,

f

fpred ?

78-3

How oft

-

en wiL;

t;i-

c.ikirse

111S I") PICA't ION

To provide practical and theoretical kqowj.e4gçp

4 ?

bIn&

which are

.aidaeutal_dlvjsjcin&

of. .the.. ?

margement

p1nn{ng...

?

....

RE

4i'I ?

Fnrulr' meniher w(i I i

y u' : i l lv t

* q

cl th.r-'ur-':

M.C. Roberts or E.J. Hickin

?

1'aiir"

.

i

?

ud trv imp I i ra

y I'; w :uti r y e t

?

course: ?

Kitime T A.

Are tl to

'*t'i

f1c:1nt Librry roa(,urcos (:iun.nd deral is

Ape:ided: a) outline of

the ('.our-

­

b)

An Indication of the cnflrnntflce of

the

'arulv

Member to elve the course.

c ' )

Librar y

resources

Approved: Denartn*ntal Graduate Srudiev (crsnirt:__ ?

_Date: ?

-

Facult y

Graduate

Studies Comtttee:

?

_____-

?

Date:____________

Facult y :

?

Date:

Senate (.'rduatu.r Studies Cor

y rntttee ?

Date:

- ?

28

?

Senate:

?

---------------

? Date:

---

Natural Resource Management

?

MRM 631

Course Outline

71

4

THE HYDROLOGY AND GEOMORPHOLOGY OF DRAINAGE BASINS

This course is designed to provide empirical and conceptual

knowledge of one of the most important elements of the physical

landscape - the drainage basin. The lectures will be complemented

by field trips, laboratory work and independent work on two instru-

mental drainage basins in Surrey.

Weekly Lecture Themes

?

Laboratory Sessions

1. ?

Review of the Hydrological

?

The definition of drainage

Cycle and Classical Fluvial basins on topographic maps and

Geomorphology.

?

drainage nets.

2:.

?

Continuation of the above.

?

Identification of floodplains

and floodplain features.

3. ?

Measurement and Analysis of Calculation of discharge using

Surface Water Flow in a

?

a current meter.

Drainage Basin.

Continuation of the above

with emphasis on Flood Flows

Subsurface Flow.

The Morphometric Analysis

of Drainage Basins.

Hydraulics of Streams.

Deposition and Sedimenta-

tion in a River Basin.

Erosional Processes -

Stream channel.

.

Erosional Processes -

?

Surrey Project.

Drainage basin slopes.

Drainage Basin Chronology.

?

Surrey Project.

Land Use and Drainage

?

Field trip.

Basins.

Grading

This will be based on the following schedule:

Laboratory work S field reports

?

15%

Mid-term Examination

?

30%

Final Examination

Short term paper

?

15%

Textbooks

The required text

is:

K.J. Gregory S D.E. Walling, Drainage Basin, Form and

Process, J. Wiley S Sons (Halsted Press), 1973.

4.

5.

6.

7.

9.

10.

1].

12.

Analysis of Flood Flows.

Field trip.

Morphometric Analysis of

Selected Drainage Basins.

Flume.

Air photo interpretation of

floodplains and associated

deposits.

Surrey Projects.

29

---

READING LIST

Classical Fluvial Geornorphoio

1.

W.D. Thornbury, 1.95, Principles of Geomorphology,

Wiley: Chapters 5, 6, 7 and 8.

2.

G.H. Dury (ed.), 1970, Rivers and River Terraces,

MacMillan: Chapters 1 and 2.

3.

L.B. Leopold, 1962, Rivers: Amer. Scientist, Vol. 50,

No. 4, pp. 511-537.

4.

W.M. Davis, 1954, Geographical Essays, Dover: Chapter 8.

5.

L.B. Leopold, G.B. Wolman & J.P. Miller, 1964, Fluvial

Processes in Geomorphology, Freeman: Chapter 11.

Hydrological Cycle -_General Concepts

1.

R.C. Ward, 1967, Principles of Hydrology, McGraw-Hill:

Chapter 1.

2.

M.E. Morisawa, 1968, Streams: their dynamics and

morphology, McGraw-Hill: Chapters 1 and 2.

3.

D.M. Gray (ed.), 1970, Handbook on the Principles of

Hydrology, Nat. Res. Coun. (Canada), Section 1.

Subsurface Flow

1.

?

J.D. Hewlett

?

A.R. Hib1rt, 1963, Moisture and energy

conditions withing a sloping soil mass during

drainage, J. Geophys. Res., Vol. 68, No. 4, pp.

1081-1087.

.

2.

R. Z. Whipkey,

slopes,

pp. 7148

3.

N.J. Kirkby S

flow and

Vol. 12,

1965, Subsurface stormf low from forested

3u11. mt. Assoc. Sci. Hydra., Vol. 10,

S.

R.J. Chorley, 1967, Throughf low, overland

erosion, Bull. mt. Assoc. Sci. Hydro.,

pp.

5-21.

4.

J.D. Hewlett S A.R. Hibbert, 1967, Factors affecting the

response of small watersheds to precipitation in

humid areas. In Sapper, W.E. and H.W. Lull (eds.),

International Symposium on Forest Hydrology:

Pergamon Press.

5.

M.A. Carson a E.A. Sutton, 1971, The hydrologic response

of the Eaton River Basin, Quebec, Can. J. Earth Sci.,

Vol. 8, pp. 102-115.

30

.

---

2.

6.

T. Dunne E R.D. Black, 1970, An experimental investiga-

tion of runoff production in permeable soils, Water

Resources Res., Vol. 6, pp. 478-490.

7.

T. Dunne C R.D. Black, 1970, Partial urea contributions

to storm runoff in a small New England watershed,

Water Resources Res., Vol. 6,

pp.

1296-1311.

8.

D.R. Weyman, 1970, Throughf low on slopes and its

relation to the stream hydrograph, Bull. mt. Assoc.

Sci. Hydro., Vol. 15,

pp.

25-33.

Morphometric Analysis of Drainage Basins

1.

A.N. Strahier, 1975, Quantitative analysis of watershed

geomorphology, Trans. Am. Geophys. Union, Vol. 38,

pp.

913-920.

?

S

2. R.E. Horton, 1945, Erosional development of streams and

their drainage basins: hydrophysical approach to

quantitative morphology, Bull. Geol. Soc. Amer.,

Vol. 56,

pp.

275-370.

3.

S.A. Schumm, 1956, Evolution of drainage systems and

slopes in badlands at Perth Amboy, N.J., Bull. Geol.

Soc. Amer., Vol. 67,

pp.

597-646.

4. M.E. Movisawa, 1962, Quantitative

geomorphology of some

watersheds in the Appalachian Plateau, Bull. Geol.

Soc. Amer., Vol. 73,

pp.

1025-1046.

5.

A.N. Strahier, 1964, Quantitative geomorphology of

drainage basins and channel, networks. In V.T. Chow

(ed.), Handbook of Applied Hydrology, Section 4,

pp.

39-76.

Land Use and Drainage Basins

1. ?

H.C. Pereira, 1973, Land Use and Water Resources in

Temperate and Tro

,

p1ca1 Climates: Cambridge Univ. Press.

2. A.R. Hibbert, 1969, Water

a forested catchment

Vol. 5,

pp.

634-640.

yield changes after converting

to grass, Water Resources Res.,

3. W.E. Sopper C H.W. Lull (eds.), 1967, International

Symposium on Forest Hydrology, Pergamon Press.

(pp. 527-543.)

?

14. ?

W.J. Schneider C G.R. Ayer, 1961, Effect of reforestation

on streamfiow in Central New York, U.S.G.S., Water-

.Supply Paper 1602.

"5-

---

3.

5.

A.R. ?

Flibhcrt, ?

1971, ?

Tncreaes

?

in streamilow after con-

verting Chaparral to grass, Water Resources Res.

%ilw

Vol. ?

7,

?

No. ?

1, ?

pp. ?

71-80.

6.

K.J.

?

Gregory,

?

1974, Streamfiow and building activity.

?

ifl

K.J. ?

Gregory and D.E. Walling, Fluvial Processes in

Instrumented Watersheds, Special Pub., No.

?

6, Inst.

Brit.

?

Geog.

7.

M.C. Roberts, 1972, Watersheds in the rural-urban fringe,

Nat.

?

Symosium on Watersheds in Transition, A.W.R.A.,

Ft.

?

Collins, Cob.

Drainage Basin Chronology

1.

W.M.

Davis, 1954, Geographical Essays, Dover:

?

Chapter

8.

2.

R.V. Ruhe 6 J.G. Cady, 1967, Landscape evolution and soil

formation in southwestern Iowa, Tech.

?

Bull. 13149,

U.S.D.A., Soil Conservation Service.

3.

R.B. Daniels 6 R.M. Jordan, 1966, Physiographic history

and the soils, entrenched stream systems, and

gullies, Harrison County,

?

Iowa, Tec.

?

Bull. ?

13148,

U.S.D.A., ?

Soil Conservation Service.

14.

J.T. Hack, 1960, Interpretation of erosional topography

•

in humid temperate regions, Amer. J.

?

Sc., Vol.

?

258A,

pp. ?

80-97.

S.

J.T. Hack C J.C. Goodlett, 1960, Geomorphology and forest

ecology of a mountain region in the Central

Appalachians '

, U.S.G.S., ?

Prof. ?

Paper 3147.

6.

M.E. Morisawa, 19614, Development of drainage systems on

an upraised lake floor, Amer.

?

J. ?

Sci., Vol.

?

262,

pp. ?

3140-3514.

7.

S.A. Schunun, 1965, Quaternary Paleohydrology.

?

In

H.E. Wright S D.G.

?

Frey (e'ds.), The Quaternary of

the United States,

Princeton

Univ. Press.

Erosional and Depositional Processes - Stream Channels

1.

A. Sundborg, 1956, The river Klavälven, a study of

fluvial processes, Geog.

Annaler,

Vol. ?

38,

pp. ?

127-316.

2.

L.B. ?

Leopold a T. Maddock, 1953, The hydraulic geometry

of stream channels and some physiographic implica-

tions,

?

U.S.G.S;, Prof.

?

Paper 252.

32

.

S.

S

---

3. L. B. Leopold ?

J. P. Miller, 1Y56, Ephemeral streams -

. ?

hydraulic factors and their relation to the drain-

age net, U.S.G.S., Prof. Paper 282A.

4.

L.B. Leopold C M.G. Wolman, 1.957, River channel patterns -

braided, meandering, and straight, U.S.G.S., Prof.

Paper 282B.

5.

J.R.L. Allen, 1970, Physical Processes of Sedimentation,

Amer. Elsevier.

6.

J.R.L. Allen, 1965, A review of the origin and character-

istics of recent alluvial sediments, Sedimentology,

Vol. 5, No. 2,

pp.

89-191.

Erosional and Depositional Processes - Drainage Basin Slopes

1.

M.A. Carson C M.J. Kirkby, 1972, Hilislope, Form and

Process, Cambridge Univ. Press: Chapter 16.

2.

R.F. Hadley & G.C. Lusby, 1967, Runoff and hilislope

erosion resulting from a high-intensity thunder-

storm near Mack, western Colorado, Water Resources

Res., Vol. 3, pp. 139-146.

. ?

3. ?

L.B. Leopold, W.W. Emmett C R.W. Myrick, 1966, Channel

and hilislope processes in a semi-arid area, New

Mexico, U.S.G.S. , Prof. Paper

352G.

Surface Flow - Measurement and Analysis

1.

M.C. Roberts C P.C. Klingeman, 1970, The influence of

landform and precipitation parameters on flood

hydrographs, J. Hydrol., Vol. 11,

pp.

393-411.

2.

M. Church C R. Kellerhals, 1970, Stream gauging techni-

ques for remote areas using portable equipment,

Tech. Bull. 25, Inland Waters Branch, Dept. of

Energy, Mines and Resources.

3.

S.T. Wong, 1963, A multivariate statistical model for

predicting mean annual flood in New England, Annals

Assoc. Amer.

Geqg.,

Vol. 53,

pp.

298-311.

4.

U.S. Depart. of Interior, 1967, Water Measurement Manual,

Bureau of Reclamation, U.S.D.I.

5.

Techniques of Water-Resources Investigations of the United

States Geological Survey. Various dates.

011

33

---

5.

Resercb Watnr;hud;

1.

R.C. Ward, 1071, Small watershed experiments: an

appraisal of concepts and research developments,

Univ. of Hull, Occasional Papers in Geography 18.

2.

U.S. Dept. of Agriculture, 196

1

4,

Stream-gauging stations

for research on small watersheds, U.S.D.A., Forest

Service, Agricultural Handbook 268.

3.

W.C. Ackermann, 1966, Guidelines for Research on

Hydrology of Small Watersheds, U.S.D.I., Office of

Water Resources Res.

4.

Can. National Comm. for mt. Hydrol. Decade, 1966, Guide-

lines for Research Basin Studies, Nat. Workshop

Seminar Proceedings.

5.

Colorado State University, 1967, Research Data Assembly

for Small Watershed Floods Part II, General Series

856, C.S.U.., Expt. Station.

r

L

S

34

---

El

Fe A'•' ?

I

?

N.

'

?

iai'jat& (nairso

?

rono'oI I 'rni

.M,UAR JNF.IIAUN

?

MRM Programme

-

Interdisciplinary Studies ?

. ?

. '.'r:l :_63_....

Terrain Evaluation

The extensive classification of a landscape basedon geology,

geomopoiogy,

soils,

vegetation, historic

and curr.

?

assessment

of qualitative values as an aid to multiple land-use management.

red it Moors:

?

3

?

.

?

2-0-2 -------------

pr-'ilti1'tTt5) t( ui...

FIiRULLMENF

AND CIiFP1'L1 (;

Fr

'

rimatsd

rJriI,tnLtnt L- .].2.-30

?

Joo1I

t l.

?

'flhliki ?

It

f

1• 'ffred: ?

-. ?

._

H-f ten vill the

.tr;o h

?

o!

JINTjF CATION :

This course pulls together such themes as soils, geomorphology, climate, etc.

in an integrated framework for evaluation of the landscape.

RESOURCES:

Which

Facult

y

member

vii I normall y

t, p ac l i

the

?

C. B. Crampton, N. C

•

Roberts ?

What

are

the

iudefaIv

Implications

of

minting Hie

cour:$

2

0

O.O0

for field

trips.

Are thet sufficient Library resources (an

p

end details): ?

Yes

Appended: a) Outline of

the Course

b)

An

indication

of

the

cotsoetence of the Facult

y

member to give ths course.

c)

Library resources

^'- -71

Approved: Departmental Graduate Studies Cominittee:

?

_Date:

-

Facult y

Graduate Studies Committee:

.-

____________________________Date:

Faculty:

?

--

?

____________________flate:_

Senate Graduate Studies

Committee:_

?

pete:

?

.- ?

35

Senate:

?

Pate:

---

.

Mitchell, 1973.

CSIRO Land Research Series

reports. Crampton, 1973.

Hills, 1961.

Terrain evaluation technique:

Examples of terrain evaluation

Natural Resource Management

?

MRM -

632

TERRAIN EVALUATION

Description

Extensive land classification and evaluation requires the deve1opmen

of the ability to understand the landscape from many specialist viewpoints;

geology, glaciology, soils, vegetation, past and present land-use. The aim

is to develop, as far as it is possible, a "genetic" classification combining

in the most

useful

way aspects of all of these special approaches, and then

to interpret this classification in

terms of a selected objective, such as

recreation, conservation (of any of a number of factors), or optimum land-use.

The U.B.C. Forest Research Area

will be used as the study-area for field work,

and for comparison, examples of terrain evaluation in Australia, Canada and

Europe will be examined.

Terrain evaluation is the first step towards resource

management in an area.

TEXT. Mitchell,

C.W. 1973. Terrain Evaluation. Longman, London (U.K.).

OUTLINE

(To run concurrently)

Assessment of values relating to the landscape: Krutilla, 1972.

Coomber & Biswas, 1973.

Stewart, 1968.

Terrain evaluation of U.B.C. Forest Research Area:

GRADING - End of semester report - 100. However, the fieldwork, its

interpretation

and the "writing-up" will proceed throughout the

course.

A complete air-photo

coverage of the U.B.C. Forest Research Area is available for

Interpretation.

In addition, surveys of the geology, soils, vegetation and

microclimate of Burnaby Mountain and Belcarra Park

are available as a local

example.

36

?

.

---

MRM-632

Material on Reserve

C.S.I.R.O., 1963. General Report on the Lands of the Hunter Valley. Land

Research Series No. 8. And all other Land Research Series

Reports. Melbourne, Australia.

Crampton, C.B. 1973. Landscape survey in the Upper and Central Mackenzie Valley.

Environmental-Social Committee, Northern Pipelines, Task Force

on Northern Oil Development, Report No. 73-8. (I have additional

copies).

Coomber, N.H. and Biswas, A.K. 1973. Evaluation of Environmental Intagibles.

General Press, New York.

Hills, G.A. 1961. The ecological basis for land use planning.

Res.

Rep. No. 46,

Ontario Dept. Lands and Forests, Research Branch.

Krutilla, J.V. ed. 1972. Natural Environments. John Hopkins University Press,

Baltimore and London.

Mitchell, C. 1973. Terrain Evaluation. Longman, London.

Stewart, G.A. ed. 1968. Land Evaluation. Macmillan of Australia.

..37

---

SIMON FRASF.R LJNIVERSIT

New

Graduate Course Pronosal rorm

CALENDAR INFORMATION:

MRM Programme

Department:

Interdisciplinary Studies

?

Course Number:

MRN-641

Title: ?

Law and Resources

Description:

Advanced study of legal interventions related to resource planning and

environmental control. Topics considered, include plannIng law, aduthtlstrative

law, law of pollution

_control, legal aspects of land management, property rights,

problems of managing common pool resources, anc resource taxation.

Credit Hours:

?

3 ?

Vector: ?

Prerequisite(s) if any:

*OUIUNTAND_$t4EDtJLtNG:

Estiaat.d EnrolIasnt:

12-(_ When

will the course first he offered

?

79-1

How

often will the course be offered:

?

Once _a_year

JUSTIFICATION

Students

in

the MRM

p

rg

g

ramme must be ex p

osed to existin g

and alternative

legal frameworks relevant to natural resources management.

_ ?

WORM

I

.

ich

Faculty nssr will

normally teach the course:

_

New faculty sessional lecturer requirement

are t1in4setsry implications of mounting the course:________________________________

Are there sufficient Library resources (app

end details):___________________________________

Appended: a) Oetl1na of the Course

b)

M indication of the com p etence of

the Faculty

member to

give

the course.

c)

Library resources

Approved: Dspartmsnt*l Graduate Studies Committee: ?

Date:______________

Faculty Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:

_____________

Faculty: ?

Dat.:____________

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:______________

Senate: ?

Date:_____________

,JJ

---

'39'

S

?

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Prçmosal Fore

'

S

?

?

S

?

LDAR INPONIUiTION

• ?

D.partiientl ?

TER-L' .

STUDIES

_Course Nunb.r:_MRM

642

Regional ResQurçes Planning

Description:

Theo ry

and their application -to

?

resource sectors.

*ser.z

3

?

3-0-0

Prer.qui.it.(s)

if envs_______

ENUJ! P S

i

'S

?

'.*ot1t.& *i.msntt

___ 12-30

When will the course first be offered:

?

79-3

•

Hr àftá

'

will the coursebe offered:__________________________________________________

This _

.

cóursewillexaminethe.imlicationsofthespatially _fixednature of

mostrsource _management

__allocation problems, and means tor

_dealing with them

Are thor. sufficient Libras7 resources (apsnd details)

Appsndsdz

a)

060- 4 e of tha 0surse

b)

An iudic*icn of tha conpetlnc. of the Pculty umber to Rive the course

c)

Library

resources

Approvedz

•pirtentà1

Graduate Studies Committees _

bats:_____________

Pfwlty Graduate Bdies'Cotte.

?

_--

Date:

Isculty: _

_

Date

-'emate, Oradusts Studies Cott•e

?

Detsi_____________

Snatsz

_

DatS:______________

---

COURSE OUTLINE

MRM 642 REGIONAL RESOURCES PLANNING

Theory and techniques of regional analysis and planning models,

and their application in the fields of land use, water allocation,

mineral and forestry development, and environmental protection. A

major emphasis is placed upon the examination of the economic structure

of regions, location and spatial links, and the interrelationships between

economic

sectors within regions.

Attention will be paid

to

anticipated

changes in response to changes in

the use or development

of

natural

resources.

Problems and issues to be examined include:

(1)

problems of resource towns;

(2)

environmental conflict;

(3)

taxation and constraints on resource use;

(4)

relationship of regional development to transportation links;.

(5)

incidence of gains and losses associated with resource development

proposals.

.

.

- ?

40

---

4V

SIMON

FRASER UNIVERSITY

Now Graduate Course Propoe4 Form

C ALT) AR

j vRMATON S

SINTER—DISCIPLINARY STUDIES

Cout.e.Nunl,er: MRM

.643

flti.

?

Mathematical Models in Resource Planning

The application of inathemati.cal models to natural resource

allocation and manageneiat

with

eiipttasis upon linear programing networks

.

.

,

and

graphs and statistical applications

*ourgs ?

3 ?

Veto ?

3-0-0 ?

_

Prerequisite(s) i

?

Math 101

•.

1

?

!.

D

Sns

• 1 ?

E.tfasts4 roU.untzL•

?

_

When will the course first be offered:

?

79-1-

ov of will the course be

offareds

?

Once per year

7uaTIP'cI

•

?

_ mnaemetaf tenrequirestheabilitytocarryoutanalysis

?

of.complexresoiirce.ejivironments for which mathematical solutions play an

• V ?

'fmpnrt-ant rale. •.

?

•

?

Which Pacuity a.0 will normally teach the course:

_

B.Alspach

• ?

What are the

?

tary, Ip1icatjons of uomting the courss:_______________________________

• .

?

sufficient Library resources (append details):

?

Yes -

?

V

?

• ?

VAppended*. a) OótlLns of the Course

?

V

S ?

•b) M indication of the copetsnce of the Faculty member to give the course.

• ?

.

?

c)

Library

resources .

• ?

. Approved:- Departmental Graduate Studies Coiiittee:

?

Date:

_____________

• . V ?

Faculty Graduate Studies .Coittee:

?

_Dat.:____________

Faculty: ?

__

_

Dat.:_____________

• ?

.

?

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Date:_____________

•

?

0

?

Senate:

Date:______________

•

?

..•

41

---

Natural Resource Management

?

MRM

643-3

Mathematical Models in Resource Planning

?

S

I. Linear programming

1.

Review on solving simultaneous linear equations

2.

Graphing inequalities

3.

The simplex algorithm

4.

Examples of linear programming in the forest industry

5.

Examples of linear programming in resource allocation

II. Networks and graphs

1.

Graphs, directed graphs, and networks

2. Food webs

3.

Pulse processes and ecological systems

4.

Examples of maximal flows in networks

III. Statistics

is

There will be no prescribed text for the course. Section

I.

will be pri-

marily handled through notes. The reference for linear programming will

be the book by Simmons. The reference for section II will be "Discrete

Mathematical Models with Applications to Social, Biological, and Environ-

mental Problems" by Fred Roberts (1976). The details of section III will

be worked out in the near future.

0

---

:.

:4.

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Pro

posal

Form

CALIDAR INFORMATION:

Department: ?

•Tr1rf1(nary

Studies ?

Course Wunber:

NRI4 644,

Title: ?

Piihlir

PoIfey Analysis

?

-

•

.DsScripticnz

A

theoretical analysis of alternative policy approaches to major

issues facing society. 4.practical analysis of the structures

and

processes

9irIIrti

' iri s

majqv f .

nmpevnry

pflhfey isua

and

an

?

of the natute

a1jce of those policy•

?

Particular-emphasis

yilh

be placon resource

•

?

—2-1 0 --

management issues.

E.tla.te4 $uroilaenti

1230

?

wts.n will the course first be of fared s

793

How often

Will

the couren hI offered:

0

n

ce

a year

JUsTIFIcATUs ?

••

•MRM students will be eosed

to the

political and administrative environment-

"---'6h

'ihich public policy is formulated at the federal, provInci.aL, and local

I.v1s of oyernment in Canada The exisfttg course Pol. 451 deals with the theory and

the pro.esses and subatanee-of policy making in these respects. 1.fRM students

w 1ll

h rgwIrid tn

mpPt grauaçe le

y,

nrotects and pprticipate in special

......uaPe ueal e-ö

?

'estiQs'

dew

?

t

P1

451 requirements

• ?

Which

Faculty

as.r will nosaaiiy tenth the course:

________

A. D. Doerr, other members, Department of

Political

Science

What are th.s*uet.ry Iaplicatioe. of iouutin* th.

course:_______________________________

Are

ther.

sufficient Libriry resources (aupsad details):

• ?

. ?

Appended:

•).

Outline of the Course

?

.. .

a)

An

indication'

of

the

competence of the Faculty

member to 'ive the course.

•. ?

. ?

' .

?

c) Library resources ?

.

Approved Departnaatal Graduate Studies Committee:

?

Dat.:_____________

Faculty

.

Graduate Studies Coittes

?

Dates_____________

Faculty ?

Dates_____________

• - ?

•

?

' ?

' ?

S.nate

Graduate Studies Committees

tee: ?

.

,.

?

Dati:

Senate: __••'

.

_Date:

---

SAMPLE ONLY

MEN 644 - COURSE OUTLINE

Course description

The purpose of this course is to provide students with an

understanding of the theoretical basis of public policy making and

a practical appreciation of the structures and

.

-processes by which

policy issues are defined and public policy is made. Substantive

policy issues will be explored with a view to understanding how the

system really works and the results that can be obtained from it.

Particular emphasis will be placed on resource management issues.

Required Reading

G.B. Doern and Peter Aucoin (eds.) The Structures of Policy-Making

in Canada (Toronto: Macmillan, 1971).

G.B. Doern and V.S. Wilson (eds.) Issues in Canadian Public Policy

(Toronto: Macmillan, 1974).

Requirements

Students should have prior knowledge of or experience with Canadian

political institutions and federal-provincial relations. Readings and

class participation will be strongly emphasized. Students will be

required to complete class assignments, prepare and present a graduate

level project in the area of resource management policy issues, and

participate in special graduate tutorials.

a

0

.

44

---

I

SIW)N

PRASER

UNIVERSITY

&

New Graduate Course

Proposal Form

CALENDAR INPOWVTIO:

Department:

?

INTER—DISCIPLINARY

STUDIES ?

CouTsa.Number:

MBM 645

Titles

?

Resource deve1oment

and communities

Description:

Exarninatiàn

_of_theimpactof resource developments oncommunities.

4i

Canada - The____courae___

prevenfi

_an___overview_of __the_social organisation of

:1.

iéóurces-basedco_

int1esnd

ananaly

sis

_of the participatory process in

•

isionmaking in .rëiirce management.

dit Vouri ?

_

Veèor:

_3-0-0

-

Pr.rsquisit.(.) if anvi

None

• ?

.

? . ?

..-

-*OUT D SQI$C: .•

• :

Rstiated :ro1lnt:

?

1215 ?

When

will

the course first be offSedz

?

791.

U often i*1 the course be offereds

?

Once per year

This course is primarily for students with little or no formal experience in

_community'_orga_

satLthi_

anc_community_ impacts

_or _resource

• development.

•_

• ?

eicb V*ii1ty' amber will

normally

teach ths course: N..

Dyck, R.B.Horsfall

What ...t

stary iUc;tioua of tuating the courses_______________________________

Are there g offietsut Library

resources

(aupend datailu):_

Yes

Appended:

-a)

OS$

141I

of the Course

b)

An indication of the coupatsace of the Paculty amber to give the course.

c)

Library resources

Approved: Departoentol Graduate Studies Committees

?

_bate:______________

Faculty Graduate

8tudi4e .Cttes:

?

.

?

DateS_____________

Faculty: ?

Date:____________

Sonata

Graduate Studies Committees

?

Date:

_____________

Senatel ?

Datsi.____________

---

I ?

I

?

MRM ?

645-3 ?

Natural Resource Management

RESOURCE DEVELOPMENT AND COMMUNITIES

Course Outline

Objectives

To examine the impact of resource developments on communities

in Canada. The course will present an overview of the social organisa-

tion of resource-based communities and an analysis of the participatory

process in decision-making in resource management.

Structure of the Course

1.

The Social Organization of Resource-based Communities.

2.

The Relationships between resource-based communities and the larger

social, political and economic systems.

3.

The impact of resource development on community organisation.

4.

Models of the participatory process.

5.

Nature of "public"; problems of representativeness.

6.

Credibility of participatory efforts.

7.

Case studies: to illustrate a variety of problems and methodologies.

46

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Prot,osal Worm

a ?

.

CALDAB IRPOSMATION s

D.p.rtIISOt:

?

Interdisciplinary Studje

q

?

Course Number:

?

__1RN 646

Titist

Environmental_ and _

Soc14

_Imact_As&essnient

•

?

iipUcui;

Evaluation and_appiication.of current methodologies for social,

economic and environmental Impact assessment

Credit Hourst _

___Vectors

_2-0-2

Prerequisite(s) if any:________

m&OLUT W SEwL1INC:

Eatitsd !aroUasnts

__

1230

When will the oose first be

offered:

793

.

comes be of farads

Once a yr.

JUSTIFICATION;

This course is designed to provide training in a key area of resources

management Approaches covered in the course are applicable to the evaluation of

...reuèDoi ects ?

.

•.•'

?

.°: ?

..

?

.

?

. ?

a.,

!.eniti 'assr Will norially teach the courss:___________________________________

?

a• What are th.udg.t.ry .

feltcationa of sourktinx the coürs.:____________________________

?

Are there 'suffici t Library resources '(append details):_________________________________

Append.dt a) Outline of

the

ouris ?

.

?

. .

?

.

?

.

b)

M thdicatioaof the cosetsnce of the Faculty anar to give the course.

c)

Library resource.' ?

.

Approved: DePartiental Graduate Studies Committee: ?

_Data:______________

Faculty Graduate Studies Losnittas

?

?

Date:_____________

Date:_____________

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

.

?

Date:

Senate: _• ?

a

?

Date:______________

---

COURSE OUTLINE

?

.

MRM

646 ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

The course focuses upon the evaluation and application of current method-

ologies for social, economic and environmental impact assessment. The nature

of impacts considered include:

(1)

biophysical (disturbance of physical and biological systems)

(2)

economic (regional economic impact, distribution of benefits and

costs)

(3)

social (population displacements and relocations, demographic impacts

provision of community services, and impacts upon community

cohesion and life styles)

(4)

cultural (impacts upon historic and archaeological heritage)

The course will address the following:

(1)

an evaluation of current methodologies with an emphasis upon developing

criteria and techniques of assessment;

(2)

a critical examination of current methods and approaches used in

preparing impact statements and the use that is made of them for

planning purposes.

(3)

the development of techniques for monitoring biophysical, economic

and social change;

(4)

a review of the legal framework for impact assessment, and the place

of impact studies in the planning process;

(5)

the application of specific methodologies and techniques to specific

resource development problems in southwestern British Columbia.

0

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

New Graduate Course Proposal Form

.

Department: ?

Interdisciplinary' Studies

?

Course Ngber:

MRM

699

• ?

Title: ?

Pijt

Description:

Aresearchprojectdealingwithaspecific problem in

•

resource administration or allocation, resulting in the preparation

• ?

a rormal paper.:.

redjt Bourst

?

•.

_V.etort _

Prerequisite(s) if any:

al 1

formal course requirements completed

•_________

Estimated Enrollment:_'2

30

?

When will the course first be offered:

80-i

Elm often will the course be offered:

?

Once _a_year

JUSTIFIcION:

The research project i intended to develo

p the student's

abilityto conduct applied interdisciplinary research ona

• ?

speci.fic problem of resources management orallocation.

Each project to be approved by the

Which Faculty manb.r will normally escb

•

the

?

____________

selected.

What are thaiudetary i*plications of mounting thO course:________________________________

Are there áufficiant Library resources (a*pend details):

?

Yes

Appended:. a) Outline of the Course

?

.

W Aim jndication of the com

p

etence of the Faculty member to give the course.

• ?

c) Library resources

Approved: Departmental Graduate Studies Committee:

?

. ? Date:______________

Faculty aduate Studies Coittee:-..

-

Dets;

Faculty: ?

Date:______________

Senate Graduate Studies Committee:

?

.

?

.Date:______________

Senate: ?

Date:

•:

?

S

?

•,

?

. S.

?

'5,

?

49

---

SIMOIN FHAt

It

LJrIvrA

-

t.L ii

. ?

'

?

MEMORANDUM

M. Roberts-. ?

from.. ?

Larr

y

, Thomas

?

,

Head , Geography

,

Department

?

':

?

Collections Librarian

Subject

LIBRARY ABILITY TO SUPPORT THE ?

Pate ?

19th AprM 1977

RESQRCEANAGMENT PROGRMME.''- ?

,.

: ?

:. ?

1,

?

.•

?

....

"As t is

p

rojati' is !nterdi

.

sci

pl

lnary

.

" çnvolv1V

?

epnomic,

geography'bio1O9y, and mathem a

tics - It has been passed

to

the

librarians responslb;le for

t

h

k

è development'of these collectiQns

to determine If current hldings-are sufficient.to proylde the ..

mater.als

,

which would b

.

e required in the rew programme.

?

• ?

•

?

•

?

..

?

• ?

.

?

• ••

' They

,

have reported uflanimous agreement on our ability to support.

those courses whicI are smHar tp courses currentlybeing offered,

i.e. the

'pip19

,g.y,

?

coporn

.

ics, andgeogr-aphy,coureS. ($pec.ifically:

611, 6)2, 621, 631, and

. ?

'

?

'.'' ?

•

?

. ?

.•

A1so, ?

he na -th,cou r

se.

(61+3), though new, Would seem to presnt

no-difflcult'ieS for the Ltbrary,

?

•.;

The

rna

.

1nin

g

courses in the prqgramme do give.ris

?

o certain ?

concerns wPIch 1. would like to detail' br

ief

ly.

•....

?

.' ?

'. ?

.''

?

•• ?

:

•

?

?

1). p642, Regional

.

•ReSOurCe

Planning,

may 'require government

document5

,

WhiCh we dpotave.

2)

Te literature on public admlr)IstratiOn (644) Is large,

thoughwe have some materials th

e r e

ha s

been no'

.

c p

ncefltrat

e

d collec'

tion building 'in this area, to date

3)

61+5, Public Partcipatlon,

?

hogh drawing upon Irvited

Yj

speakers, clearly toUches

upon

the soclo.polltical aspects

of-x

?

•, .,

plojtl '

ng nat.ural'resqurce

.

S, and

?

hs

t'bo-.is

a

sizebl'

?

literature.

1+)

?

61+1, Law

' and

Res u rces

?

in ddItIon

?

regring,potenta!ly

a large body of mat'erials',lQ

?

rin99

us into an a-re where unit

j

cQSt

?

areh1Ig.her'th'afl forany other fels

?

Publlhør'sWeekly

2

1,

(Feb ?

11e

?

1977)

reported that U S. prices were $19 19per

volume for

1976, sone $3 above the average f°r all dispiplines

?

It is our

impression that

?

Cnadian

a

?

law materials h

ave

yet a higher average''

cost, and the. UBC I.aw Library informs-us that $5

q

for.a pew Journal

subscr,iptibn is comrnQp.. This too--is a'nw coq'ectirg fiel

d

for the

• ?

" SFU ?

L

l bary. ?

,.

?

.

?

••

?

.'•

?

''•

It seemed to us

that thequestion of

possib

ly

relying on UP,

especially in the case

ofla

w

materials,

jid

to be

looK

e d

at some-

what carefully

?

AdJ

scuss1o

n

w

j

'th oe

of

.

-*

he

UBC law librarians

proyided çhe fo1long

poinçs of infomatton

n

regards to resoqrces

and envi ronr!1

e

n

a

1 layf ?

I

4

•

?

1)

?

The literature Is very large.

?

-

?

. 2 ?

51

'4 ?

. ?

I

?

• ?

•:

---

•,

S ?

,'..

? -

.

M. ?

Roberts ?

. .

Head, ?

Geography ?

Department ?

19th ?

April ?

1977

?

H

.

2) ?

As ?

the ?

Journal ?

subscriptions

?

are

?

expensive ?

it ?

would

probably ?

be

?

necessary ?

to ?

rely

?

on

.

?

photocopied

?

articles

?

a ?

an

alternative

?

to

?

SF11 ?

building

?

Its ?

on

?

col!ectiop

3)

?

U B C"Is

?

revjewing ?

Its

?

services

?

to

?

peQpe ?

ow tside ?

their

university ?

community

?

and ?

may ?

be ?

inroducing

?

sigifictly

?

higher

fees ?

for ?

photocopyin9, ?

borrowers ?

cards, ?

and ?

other

?

services

4) ?

$5,000, ?

a ?

figure we

?

suggested, ?

would ?

be ?

adequate

?

in

their ?

opinion ?

to ?

buy ?

a

?

basic ?

monograph ?

collection ?

and ?

s q me ?

photo-

copying ?

of ?

articles.

5) ?

As ?

SF11 ?

students

?

in ?

criminologyand

?

economics ?

are ?

already

making ?

substaqtial

?

use ?

of ?

their

?

Law ?

Libr

a r y

, ?

;hey ?

are

?

inclined

?

to

discourage ?

the

?

presence of more

?

SFU

?

q tuderits ?

In ?

their ?

stacks ?

should

the ?

number ?

in ?

fact

?

be

?

about

?

15 ?

t p ?

20

The ?

above ?

observations

?

are ?

qffered ?

in

?

support

?

of our

?

opinion

that

?

ap p rov1

,

,of

?

this 'new

?

programme ?

sh9ul

?

entail ?

a ?

speial

?

grant

for ?

additiopal ?

library

?

resqrces, ?

apd ?

that

?

the

?

date ?

4implementir,g

the ?

courses ?

should

?

be ?

5et ?

to ?

allow ?

su ffi

c

i e

n

t ?

time ?

for ?

the ?

acquisi-

tion ?

At

and

?

?

thistge

processing

?

?

andof

?

?

until

these

?

?

materials,

the ?

prQ p osal

?

?

itself ?

has ?

ieen

-

?

given

more ?

definition

?

J

.

t

?

is ?

difficult

?

to- q ?

"I f y ?

cPsts,

?

TIe

?

oiservation

that ?

$5,000wouI'd ?

be ?

barely

?

ade9uatafor

?

the ?

course on ?

Law and

Resources ?

suggeststhat ?

thIs ?

figure ?

would

t 'be ?

less

?

than ?

an ?

absolute

minimum ?

as ?

maeriaJs ?

would

?

be ?

needed

­f

:

r

, '

soie

?

of ?

the'other ?

courses

too

?

I,

S

,.' ?

.

?

.5 ?

5S5•

?

S.

-

? -

H

......................

..•

.

?

••.•

r ?

. ?

,.,- ?

S

?

..,

-

?

•.; ?

•;, ?

S ?

,•

C.C.:,

LET

?

: ?

dcr

?

?

D.

?

A,

H

?

Baird.

S

?

''H..

-I

1, ?

C

?

Dobb

1

?

5'

•1'

52

'

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY, BURNABY, BC., CANADA

?

V5A 1S

DEPARTMENT OF GEOGRAPHY; 291-3111

May 6, 1977

ii.

Dr. J. Wheatley

Dean of Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, B1C.

V5A lS6

Dear Jon:

I am enclosing a copy of the proposal for a Master's

degree programme in the Management of Natural Resources.

You mentioned

in

your letter to me, after reading an

early draft of tMs proposal, that there was no specific

course on research methods. That is so. However, research

methods will enter the programme in several courses (MRN

621, MRM 631, MRM 632

2 MRN 642

9 MRN 643 and MRM 645) as well

as being explicitly dealt with in the third workshop

(MM 603).

Larry Thomas gave a detailed response (see Section 1)

to the question concerning availability of library resources

for the programme. The figure quoted of $5,000 is regarded

as a reasonable figure for the library purchases during the

first two years of the programme. However, after checking

with Drs. Barker and Knetsch the Committee believes that

several of the issues raised by Mr. Thomas are not as serious

as implied by his memo:

MRN 642 - Dr. Barker maintains that the library holdings

?

of government documents. is adequate.

MRN 644 - The library holdings. must be reasonably

adequate as public administration is handled

by two departments (Commerce; Political Science)

already.

MRM 645 - This literature is adequately enough covered by

the journals and books acquired for the sociolo-

gy and psychology departments.

cont'd. .2

..

?

IL )

(. 1

---

Dr. J. Wheatley

?

-2-

?

May 6, 1977

?

.

MRM 641 - The basic source for law literature is to be

found in the Natural Resources Journal published

by the University of New Mexico School of Law;

S.F.U. takes this journal. Further, the library

has both the U.S. and

Canadian

Statutes dealing

with environmental law. This course will

address federal and provincial statutes on

resources and the constitutional restraints that

apply and, in this context, the library holdings

are fair. Both Drs. Barker and Knetsch point out

that specific issues of the Canadian law journals

will have to be purchased but subscribing to such

journals will be unnecessary.

In short, the holdings in our library are much better than

the picture painted by Larry Thomas though some upgrading will

be necessary.

If I may add a personal note I think this programme is a

most worthwhile one for the University to be involved in

since it will be one that reflects the very powerful role

played by the resource industries in British Columbia. The

University will be providing a professional degree in an area

that is not covered adequately by the universities of British

Columbia.

The following would be people to contact if you need

direct input during your evaluations:

Dr. M.L. Barker

?

- Geography

Dr. J.L. Knetsch

?

- Economics

Dr. A.L. Turnbull - BioSciences

Dr. M.C. Roberts

?

- Geography

Sincerely,

Michael C. Roberts

Chairman

MCR/mgb

End.

S

0

54

---

I ?

-

UM

THE UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA

?

NATURAL RESOURCE INSTITUTE

?

WINNIPEG, MANITOBA R3T 2N2

December 2, 1977

Dr. Bruce Clayman

Associate Dean

Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby, British Columbia

V5A 1S6

Dear Dr. Clayman:

I have enclosed a report on the proposed master's program

in natural resource management at Simon Fraser University.

I hope you will find the report useful. If any questions

are raised please feel free to call me.

Yours trul

Paul E. Nickel

Director and Professor

Natural Resource Institute

PEN/Ink

55

---

I am pleased to submit the following report on the

proposal by Simon Fraser University for a master's program

in Natural ResourceMaflageTht.

?

The material describing the

program has been reviewed by myself, Professor Thomas Henley

and Mr. Ian Gillies of the Natural Resource Institute.

?

Our

observations on the proposal are based upon the experience

of the past four years with an interdisciplinary program in

natural resource management here at the University of Manitoba.

The justification for a two year master's program in

natural resource management

is

clearly stated and it has been

our experience that graduates from such a program fill an

extremely important need within the present Canadian context.

Graduates with recognized expertise in one particular discipline

and with an additional interdisciplinary perspective on

resource management problems are well equipped to take up

jobs in both the public and the private sectors. Most of our

graduates are employed by the public sector, mainly by the

government of Manitoba.

?

(See appendix A on graduate employ-

ment) ?

The major private sector opportunities lie with

consulting firms.

?

In past years graduates have experienced

little difficulty in finding education related employment

although, of course, the job situation is presently a bit

discouraging for all university graduates.

If it is assumed that job opportunities will arise more

or less as they have in the past there should be little

trouble experienced in placing the projected number of

graduates from the Simon Fraser program.

r

---

-2-

There are several areas where we feel the proposed

program could be improved. These areas are:

(1) Academic Program

In the resource field in particular it is important

that an academic program stress the general themes of problem

solving and critical thinking rather than focus primarily

on subject matter related to resources. The importance of

problem solving skills in resource management was noted at

a recent meeting of the Natural Resource Institute's

graduate association. Problems in resource management

are continually changing and effective resource managers must

be equipped with the skills to identify and offer innovative

solutions to emerging problems.

.0

The team approach to problem solving has proven to be

an appropriate vehicle for developing communication skills

and skills in small group dynamics. Both of these skills are

virtual necessities for contemporary resource managers and

should be stressed in evaluation of course work and by

building in special seminars and workshops in communica-

tions and organizations. The team approach better prepares

the student for job situations where work is generally done

as a member of a group. On this point, it would be ideal

if the physical environment existeda

•

t Simon Fraser to facili-

tate the process of group interaction among students, the

director, support staff, and associated instructors.

Additional benefits in terms of group bonding, increased

mutual assistance between students, and friendships built

57

---

-3-

between students which persist after graduation from the

program also arise

?

from establishing the program in a

supporting physical environment.

The research project (MRM 699-4) needs to be carefully

structured to define a clear process through searching for

a problem, writing a research proposal and, finally, completing

the research report.

?

In our experience this process is an

essential core of the program that serves several purposes.

(a)

?

The process synthesizes the student's

course work and tests the tools and techniques

learned through application to an actual resource

problem.

(b) ?

The research process produces a report.

that is useful to a client group with a

problem in resource

?

management.

(c) ?

The research process provides an outreach

from the university to the larger society and

also contributes to inter-disciplinary exchanges

within the university.

?

At the Natural Resource

Institute each student's research is assisted by

an advisory committee which draws on experts from

the university and from government and private

industry. ?

inôluding individuals from resource

agencies and various public groups has been

a very useful method for facilitating the

flow of information between university depart-

the

ments and between the university and

larger community.

58

---

S

is

.

-4-

In addition, the goodwill established through

the research process can be considerable and

may assist in attracting future research pro-

jects and funds.

A description of the Natural Resource Institute's

practicuin process is enclosed as appendix B.

A final remark on the course MRN 643-3. In our experience

mathematical modelling has proven to be far less useful than

a solid grounding in statistics and applied mathematics for

business decisions. There seems to be a considerable gap

between the mathematical models developed in academia and

those analytical techniques used in business and government.

If the thrust of the proposed program is to provide training

useful to resource managers in the field, the orientation of

the course on mathematical modelling might be reviewed.

(ii) Admissions

'Criteria for admissions are an important aspect of the

program since it is to be expected that applications will,

exceed available positions. We concur wholeheartedly with your

view that candidates should have a strong background in one

discipline. However, we also feel that some diversification

within the first degree program is important and in our program

we insist on some background in economics, statistics, politi-

cal studies or history, geology and biology.. Usually it is

possible to obtain these pre-requisites as options in the

first degree program. Other admission criteria used by the

Institute include related work experience and an acceptable

?

rr

grade point average.

---

- ?

-

The criterion of work experience is especially important.

To a large degree, the quality of the proposed program will

depend on the students enrolled. Students with considerable

work experience in the field tend to make a more sophisticated

contribution in seminars and course work. They tend to be

more self-directed than students who apply directly from under-

graduate work. Thus, program administration is made easier

and it is likely that the example set by students with work

experience will improve the overall quality of the program.

In addition, the network of contacts built up by students with

work experience is invaluable in building strong links to

prospective employers and sources of expertise that can be

tapped for research and instructional purposes. We would

suggest that every effort be made to attract applications,

from persons with some working experience in the resource

field and even that some goal for the proportion of students

with previous work experience be set.

(iii) Staffing and Administration

The quality of the teaching staff in the proposed program

appears to be excellent. However, we feel that there could be

more emphasis upon economics, public policy and administration

in government and business. In this regard, we would suggest

that people with skills in economics, administration and public

policy should be better represented in the ranks of the program's

associated instructors.

The administrative structure proposed appears adequate

to support the program at the stated. enrollment level.

- ?

60

---

-6-

In conclusion, we would make the following recommenda-

tions:

1.

The academic expertise should be broadened

to place more emphasis on public policy, economics

and adminstrative techniques.

2.

The research project should be developed as

a core exercise within the program and a more-or-

less' formal structure for the research process

should be specified.

3.

Effort should be directed at establishing

links to the larger community in order to promote

goodwill, open access to information and financial

support and to facilitate the placement of

•

?

' '

?

graduates.

4.

The physical environment for the program

is important and should provide for frequent

interaction among staff and students.

I hope these brief remarks have been of some use to you.

4

.

?

'

---

APPENDIX A

NATURAL RESOURCE INSTITUTE GRADUATES *

A reliable indicator of the M.N.R.M. program's effectiveness

is the employment of Natural Resource Institute graduates in

the past. The diversity of employment opportunities is clearly

reflected in a survey of occupations of past graduates. The

Institute has produced 62 graduates since the first graduating

class in 1971; at present 34 graduates are employed in Manitoba,

13 are employed in other provinces in Canada, a number have

returned to their native countries, and a number are continuing

their education in universities in Canada and the U.S. It is

apparent that Institute graduates are fulfilling needs in the

field of natural resource management.

1971

Bernard Bitner

?

Resource Planner, Yellowknife, Northwest

Territories

John Burch

?

Extension Forester, Manitoba Department

of Renewable Resources and Transportation

Services, Winnipeg

Ron Kabaluk

Senior Coordinator of North-East Manitoba

Development Initiative.

?

Special ARDA

Program. ?

Manitoba Department of Northern

Affairs, Winnipeg

Dave ToinasSon

Assistant Manager, Special Programs Co-

ordination and Administration, Department

of Northern Affairs

Andy

Miles

Coordinator Special ARDA Program. Manitoba

Department of Northern Affairs, Winnipeg

*This list

includes all graduates up to 1977.

In addition,

a number of former students who

have not

yet submitted their practica are

employed

in resource related jobs.

r

.

62

---

: Doug Luckhurst

?

Medical. Student. University of Manitoba,

Winnipeg

Romeo Princic

?

Resource Economist, Environment Canada,

Vancouver

1972

James Barlishen ?

Environmental Consultant Environment

Canada, Environmental Protection Service.

Edmonton.

Donna Keates

Occupation Unknown

Don Kowal

Supervisor of Commercial Fisheries Manitoba.

Department of Renewable Resources and Trans-

portation Services

Nanchoi Kwan

Returned to Hong Kong

IrajSharis

Returned to Iran

Dan TopoliflSki

Resource Economist, Environment Canada,

Fisheries and Marine Services, Freshwater

Institute, Winnipeg Institute, Winnipeg

Kelvin Whalen

Biologist.

?

Environment Canad. Environmen-

tal Protection Service. St.John's,Newfoufld

land.

1973

Alan J. Hunt

?

Executive Secretary, Public Utilities

Board, North West Territories

Steph. Stephansson Biologist. Environment Canada. Fisheries

and Marine Services, Yellowknife

Erkki Vuori

?

Impact Biologist, Schultz International

?

Limited. Vancouver

1974

Solomon Aremu

?

Returned to Nigeria

Ronald Bailey

?

Director, Department of Indian and Northern

Affairs, Water Management Division, Ottawa

• ?

Bill Barto

?

Comprehensive Land Use Planner,

Planning

Division. Manitoba Department of Renewable

Resources and Transportation Services,

Winnipeg

63

---

I ?

I

Lorne ColpittS

?

Wildlife Habitat Specialist. Wildlife

programs. Manitoba Department of Renewable

Resources and Transportation Services,

Winnipeg

Bruce Friesen

?

Environmental Impact Assessment, Alcoa

Industries. Australia

Thomas Henley

?

Assistant Director, Natural Resource

Institute, University of Manitoba,

Winnipeg

Don Kotak ?

General Manager. Krazy Kar Krushers.

Saskatoon

Carl Wall

?

Comprehensive Land Use

Planner, Planning

Division, Manitoba

Indian

Brotherhood,

Winnipeg

1975

Mike Bridges ?

Library Management, University of Alberta..

Barbara Burton

?

Occupation

Unknown

Doug Boyd

?

Resource Policy Evaluation Specialist.

Interdisciplinary Systems Limited, Winnipeg

Douglas Chekay

?

Resource Management Specialist, Parks Branch,

Manitoba Department of Tourism, Recreation

and Cultural Affairs

Ian Gillies ?

Research Associate, Natural Resource

Institute, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg

Alison Hine

Ph.D. student, School of Natural Resources

University of Michigan

Norman Howe

Ph.D. student, Agricultural Economics,

University of Manitoba, Winnipeg

Betty Leitch

Executive Secretary, Manitoba Water

Commission, Winnipeg

Donald Leitch

Special Assistant to the Premier, Province

of Manitoba, Winnipeg

Lorna McKerness

Planning Officer,

Environment

Canada,

Fisheries and Marine Services, Regina

Bruce Ramsay

Resource Economist, B.C. Research Inst.itut4

Vancouver ?

.

64

---

.

ALl

Les Sherwood

?

Technical Representative, Aichem Ltd.

Neville Ward

?

Regional Fisheries Biologist, Ontario

Ministry of Natural Resources

Brian Wilkie

?

Park Planner, Parks Canada, Winnipeg

• ?

1976

Ian Anderson

Economic Research Analyst, Prov. Consumer

Affairs

Glenn BamptOn

Sales Representative, Xerox Canada Ltd.,

•

Winnipeg

Douglas Cable

?

•

Project Officer, Canadian Employment and

Immigration Commission

•

?

Kenneth Davidson

Resource Economist, Manitoba Department of

and Transportation

Renewable Resources

Services, Winnipeg

Philip Eyler

Land Use planner, Manitoba Indian Brotherhood

Winnipeg

Harburn

Chief Naturalist, Parks and Recreation Branch

Norman

City of Winnipeg

Cohn Hoibrow

Special Projects Team, Ducks Unlimited

(Canada)

Dale Johnston

Feasibility planner, Engineering Services

Division, Manitoba

and Construction

Department of Renewable Resources and

Transportation Services, Winnipeg

Louis Legal

Student, Faculty of Education, university

of Manitoba

James MacPherson

?

Resource Consultant, James F. MacLaren Ltd.,

Winnipeg

Gladys Pirt

?

•

?

Contract Researcher, Manitoba Department of

Renewable Resources and Transportation

Services, Winnipeg

Lorimer Thompson

?

Resource Extension Officer, Manitoba Depart

inént of Renewable Resources and Transporta-

tion Services, Winnipeg

•

65

---

I ?

I

1977

Richard K. Baydack

?

Temporary Resource Planner

Interdisciplinary Systems, Winnipeg

Gordon L. Brown

?

Resource Consultant, Western Research

and Development Co. Ltd., Calgary,Alberta

Sam S. Chow

?

Manpower and Economic Analyst, Policy

and Planning Branch, Manitoba Department

of Northern Affairs, (The Pas)

William P. Elliott Executive Director, North American

Wildlife Foundation,Delta Research

Centre, Manitoba

Gregory M. Goodwin

?

Resource Consultant, Norenco Ltd.

Winnipeg

Graham P. Latonas

?

Parks Planner

Manitoba Department of Tourism and

Cultural Affairs

John D. Neilson

?

Fisheries Specialist , McLean Consulting

Robert D. Ross

?

Naturalist, City of Winnipeg

Ralph F. Smith

?

Executive Council, Government of

Saskatchewan, Regina

Helen T. Soudek

?

Research Associate, Natural Resource

Institute, Winnipeg

.

66

---

DI

I ?

I

APPENDIX B

DRAFT SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATION DESCRIBING

?

THE PRACTICUII PROCESS

2.4 The Practicurn Research Process

The regulations governing the Master of Natural Resource

Management Degree require that every candidate for the

degree shall submit a Practicum.

?

This is in place of a

thesis, which is the normal requirement for the Master's

degree in other programs.

2.4.1 ?

Practicum Definition

The memorandum which established the N.R.I. in 1968 defined

the practicum as:

"A

research project dealing with an actual problem

in resource administration or allocation resulting

S

in the preparation

of

anofficial report. Require-

ments are met either by working in a government or

private agency on a selected and approved topicor

by independent work within the Natural Resource

Institute."

2.4.2.

?

Purpose

The practicum is central to the teaching program at the N.R.I.

It is an interdisciplinary research reporton a resource manage-

ment problem done in conjunction with agencies and individuals

at the University of Manitoba and

in

the larger Canadian com-

munity. The practicum topic must be approved by the Director

and may include independent work within the Natural Resource

Institute.

The practicum is intended to be a field study report that

deals with a problem in resource management. The practicum

.

?

serves a 3-fold purpose:

67

---

?

1. ?

It develops the student's ability to conduct

applied interdisciplinary research on an ac-

tual problem of resource management or alloca-

tion.

ii.

It meets his academic requirements, and

iii.

It demonstrates his effectiveness as an

employee.

Each student will attempt to obtain employment on a resource

task, during the inter-year summer session of the program. The

work done in the summer will with the employer's consent, form

the basis of the practicum report.

?

2.4.3.

?

Interdisciplinar

y

Aspects

The student will be expected to bring to bear upon the prepa-

ration of the Practicum, knowledge gained in the course work

as well as the practical experience derived from work in the

?

?

field. ?

Emphasis should be on the inter-disciplinary aspects

of the situation under study and solutions should be tested

against the following criteria:

i.

economic feasibility

ii.

technical feasibility

iii.

political feasibility

iv.

administrative feasibility

v.

ecological feasibility

?

2.4.4. ?

Procedures

A set of working procedures has been developed in association

with the practicum process. While the following procedures are

those normally followed the Director of the Institute may

alter these at his discretion.

.

Le

---

• ?

I .

?

The student, in conjunction with staff at the Institute

and interested people at the University, in government

or in the private sector, develops a topic for inter-

disciplinary

research on a resource management problem.

The topic will lead to the development of a detailed

research proposal completed in the student's first

year, (part of the Institute's course 56.710 Research

Planning and Strategy). Approval of the research

Proposal by the Director is required prior to begin-

ning the data collection phase of the research process.

ii. ?

The student will identify persons who could make a

valuable contribution on an advisory committee to

supervise the applied research process. The Director's

approval on selection of committee members is required.

Members selected will be formally invited by the

Institute to sit on the advisory committee..

iii. The advisory committee shall have the following structure:

a.

The Director will sit on all advisory committees

and will chair the oral examination. In some

cases, the Director may participate in a committee

•

?

as a regular member, in which case his designate

will assume the role of the Director. In addition

to the Director, the committee shall consist of no

less than three members, one of whom must be a

member of the Faculty of Graduate Studies from

a faculty other than the Natural Resource Institute

and who will ensure that the regulations of the

Faculty

of

Graduate Studies are followed.

b.

The student will select one member of the committee

to act as a senior advisor.

c.

Both academic and non-academic members of the

corn

mittee shall either be recognized experts in the

subject area of the practicurn or shall possess a

special knowledge which makes their participation

appropriate.

iv.

?

The student, in consultation with the members

of

the committee,

will proceed with research on the problem and will produce a

draft report for circulation to the committee members.

V. ?

Committee members will provide constructive criticism

of

the first draft and will recommend changes necessary for

a final draft. The student, having incorporated the advice

•

?

of the committee, will circulate a final draft. The senior

advisor of the committee will notify the Director of the

acceptance of the final draft and a date for an oral ex-

amination

of

the report will be set.

?

(J

b

---

vi. The oral examination will be an open meeting, with the

exception of the period where practicum acceptability

is to be considered. The format of the oral examina-

tion follows:

a.

The oral begins with the Director's description of

the format.

b.

The oral generally takes one to two hours. The

student begins with an oral summary of the practicum

research. The balance of the oral is taken up with

questions from the committee.

c.

After the committee has had the opportunity to test

the student's knowledge on the research process and

the practicum topic the Director will suggest that

the student and other non-committee members leave

the room and the acceptability of the practicum will

be considered.

d.

The committee will assess the acceptability of the

practicum on a pass/fail basis. The decision is

by majority vote. If the decision is pass, the

committee members will sign the acceptance form.

Conditional acceptance is possible where minor re-

visions are to be made. In such a case, the

Director will reserve his signature until satis-

fied that the revisions have been made. If the

decision is fail, the committee will indicate re-

quired revisions and offer suggestions which will

assist the student in a subsequent oral examina-

tion. Only two, attempts at the oral examination

are allowed. A second failure will result in a

requirement to withdraw from' the program.

70

?

' ?

..'.

?

.

---

REVIEW OF SFU PROPOSAL FOR AN INTERDISCIPLINARY?

PROGRAM IN NATURAL RESOURCES MANAGEMENT.

Introduction

The management of natural resources in Canada has presented the

nation's universities with an important new challenge: the development

of specialist programmes which also provide a broadappreciation of the

field as a whole. No wholly satisfactory response has emerged so far.

Either the programmes that have been offered have been focussed on a

single resource - such as water, forests or fisheries - or they have

been founded mainly on one discipline - such as biology, law or econo-

mics. The ventures at the Universities of British Columbia, Manitoba,

Toronto and Laval provide illustrations. What is needed is a programme

that covers several resources, facilitates specialization in a discipline

of the student's choice, yet offers training in the basic elements of

related disciplines. Such an offering needs to be organized around a

core of courses to be taken by all students and a series of options

that enable them to broaden their overall perspectives and skills.

The proposed programme goes a long way towards meeting these

requirements. It is sound in concept, imaginative in content,

'

and

probably realizable in practice. It appears to have the backing of

several key disciplines - notably biology, geography, and economics.

There appears to be interest in the proposal, not only on the part of

students now at the University but also on the part of a number of

federal and provincial government agencies. The potential clientele

may be even wider.

While this reviewer is favorably disposed towards the proposal,

he believes that there are several ways in which it could be strengthen-

ed. Suggestions are offered below as to possible deficiencies and ways

in

which the latter might be remedied.

1. Involvement of Particular Disciplines

A programme of Natural Resources Management Studies should pro-

bably involve as a minimum the Departments of Biology, Geography, -

?

71

---

-2-,

Economics, Political Science, and Sociology. Depending on the specific

contributions to be made, it could also benefit from the involvement of

the Departments of Mathematics and Chemistry. The present proposal

clearly indicates a high commitment from Biology and Geography. Only

one professor, however, from Economics would be involved, albeit an

individual with an international reputation in the field. No specific

commitment is made by Political Science or Sociology. These latter

deficiencies are unfortunate, since some understanding of the policy-

making process, public administration, public participation, and

social impacts of resource development would seem to be critical dimen-

sions of a resource manager's training. Concrete proposals for faculty

and courses on the foregoing matters should be solicited from Political

Science and Sociology and incorporated into the Programme. Encouragement

should be given to Economics to increase its commitment.

2.

Quality of the Graduates

The Programme's success will depend in large part on the calibre

of students that it attracts. Experience elsewhere in resources studies

and environmental studies programmes has shown that the most effective

ones have been those which have demanded a somewhat higher level of entry

than that required for normal programmes at the University. It should be

sufficiently high to ensure that there is something special to be gained

from qualification in such a programme but no so high as to turn all

potential candidates away.

To an important extent the proposed programme will attract mainly

the more highly motivated and committed students, who have already done

well in their 'home' discipline. Many of them will also be more mature,

and may have had several years of experience as resource managers. The

question of quality of candidates, therefore, may not arise. Even so,

a statement that a higher than normal entry level is expected, and that

certain prerequisites must be fulfilled, will give the Programme both

stature and protection.

3.

Need for Graduates

- ?

72

?

Evidence from a variety of sources, including annual reports of

?

0

---

-3-

• ?

government agencies, reports of the Science Council of Canada, and

statements of executives of firms in the private sector, often point

to the need for more broadly trained resource managers. The dossier

describing the Programme refers to this demand but provides little

concrete evidence of it. Some additional material made available to

this reviewer indicated that a number of government agencies had

shown an interest but again there were no detailed accounts of the kinds

of training that would be most useful, nor the potential demand for

plans in the Programme. The Steering Committee should be encouraged

to obtain such ev'idence by contacting federal and provincial govern-

ment agencies, as well as firms

in

the private sector. It is believed

that this could be accomplished relatively quickly through the contacts

already established.

Attention should be paid in particular to the kinds of taks that

graduates from the Programme might be expected to perform. Among these

might be such matters as:

- environmental impact assessment

• ?

- technology assessment

- resources planning

- resources management

•

?

- policy analysis

Comments might also be made on the 'home' disciplines that are

especially in demand by government agencies and the private sector in

the resources field.

4. Administrative Structure

The ultimate success of a Natural REsources Management Programme

will depend in large part on its organizational structure. Unfortunately,

little is said about this

in

the dossier. Some very helpful comments

were made, however, in the on-site visit. It appears that the present

thinking visualizes a Programme, headed by a Director, advised by a

Steering Committee, and supported by faculty from a number of contri-

butory Departments. The Programme would be under the jurisdiction of

the Faculty and late Disciplinary Studies.

The most critical element in the entire

?

structure is probably

.

73

---

-4-.

the Director of the Programme. This should be an individual who has a

considerable reputation

in

the resources field as a scholar, and who

has had administrative experience in organizing ventures of this kind.

He or she should have a deep sense of commitment to this area of study

and should have the ability to convince other bodies of its value.

Preferably he or she should have had experience or have contacts in

the field of government and with private industry in resources manage-

ment. It is essential that such an individual should have great

facility in working with people from a wide variety of disciplines.

Such qualifications are highly demanding and it is probable

that the list of potential candidates of the required calibre in Canada

will be somewhat restricted. There are such individuals, however, in

a number of Canadian universities in the disciplines of Geography,

Political Science, Psychology, and Biology. They would need to be

induced by the prospect of initiating an exciting new programme which

would have adequate secretarial, technical and other support, and a

salary commensurate with the individual's experience and opportunity

costs elsewhere. Assurance would have to be given that the Director

would be able to have a major influence on the shaping of the eventual

Programme, and that he or she would be given adequate resources to

travel to obtain additional support and to recruit needed faculty.

The Programme would be of interest to several bodies outside

the University. The ideas of these bodies should be actively sought,

perhaps through an Advisory Committee or Council, such as that which

was established to assist the Westwater Research Centre at U.B.C. in

shaping its programmes. This would not only furnish an invaluable

source of counsel but also an avenue of communication to potential

students who might join the Programme.

While there is no explicit statement on the point, it seems

that the Programme would be mainly a daytime venture, with courses

offered in the period 8:30 - 5:30 p.m. The potential market for it,

however, could be extended considerably by offering some of the courses

in

the evening.

?

is

74

---

-5-

S ?

5. Course Offerin

It is clear that considerable thought has been devoted to the

design of a core programme and a series of related optional course.

In broad terms, the offerings seem ideal, It should be recognized,

however, that concepts and needs change over time, and consequently,

there should be provision for alterations in the Programme over time.

A periodic review, say every 4 or 5 years, should be built into the

• programme.

There are some courses that might be offered more efficiently

as two parts rather than as joint ones. A case in point is the one

on Regional Resources Planning and Environmental Impact Assessment.

Perhaps this course might be offered as two courses: one on Resources

Planning, of which Regional Resources Planning would be a part; and

another on Impact Assessment, covering economic, social, and environ-

mental éttects of resource development.

S ?

6. A Resource Studies Institute

A Natural Resources Management studies programme would be en-

riched by a closely allied research programme. The latter miaht not

only encourage a wide involvement of faculty but may also furnish addi-

tional sources of financial support. Experience has shown that the

most successful resources management and/or environmental studies

programmes have been those in which there has been a substantial

research component. The Steering Committee should be encouraged to

consider the possibilities of applying for a development grant from

one of the major funding bodies, such as NRC or the Canada Council to

undertakea major inter-disciplinary programme of studies on resources

management. A logical outcome might well be a Resources Studies

Institute.

W. R. Derrick Sewell

Professor

Department of Geography

4 November 1977

?

University of Victoria

0.-

?

75

---

SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY

Proposed Masters Program in Resource Management

?

Commentary by F. Kenneth Hare

General

The proposal addresses itself to a problem faced by all Canadian

universities today how does one create useful interdisciplinary degree

programs that meet real social needs directly? The answer it comes up

with is also similar to others. A small group of believers in a small

number of disciplines tries to entrain sceptics from other areas. I

sympathize greatly, because that is what I have to do myself.

Resource management is obviously one of Canada's major professional

areas, but it is rarely recognized as such. Instead one finds foresters,

agriculturists, biologists, geographers, economists and self-trained

amateurs holding the managerial jobs. Everyone knows that a mixture of

skills and training is required, but it is usually held that these are best

acquired on the job, rather than in a university.

Simon Fraser's venture is one of several that attempts to alter this

apprenticeship idea.

?

Most schools of forestry have been trying to broaden

their curriculum in this direction, and some —Toronto, for example have

actually put together masters' programs in resource management; so has

Wisconsin's College of Agriculture (or rather the research institute that

grew out of it —Irving Fox at U.B.C. knows the story). But Forestry and

Agriculture both have their own gardens to tend, and in any case tend not

to attract the kind of student who will profit most from interdisciplinary

training. I also know of one attempt —Toronto again —to mount such a

program within a business school.

I agree with the proponents that if such training is to be attempted

at all, it should be at the graduate level, and that the entrants should

have a firm grounding in one of the contributing disciplines.

Provided that the University is able to make the new appointments

mentioned, I see no reason why the proposal should not be accepted now. In

summary my recommendation is a rather cautious "go ahead."

.

76

---

-2-

The expertise will be sufficient, if afforced as suggested, but no

more than sufficient. There are some things about the listing of staff that

puzzle me. Why does the proposal say that only physical geography can

contribute? In the first place Mary Barker is a behaviourist, not a

physical geographer. And in the second there are many aspects of geography

that ought to contribute. Why are so few geographers apparently involved?

I'd be happier if the biologists included one or two with more

obvious signs of deeper involvement in resource-related studies, and would

welcome more input from specialists in recreation and its offshoots.

A heavy burden is going to fall on Professor Knetsch's shoulders.

There should be a major input from the economists into this problem. His

background among the RFF resource economists is correct for this kind of

program —but my experience with economists is that they always have so

much to do, and so many opportunities of doing their own thing, that it is

hard for them to function well in team efforts of this sort.

Much will depend on the Director, and his field of specialization.

Presumably he will be cross-appointed to a parent discipline. Speaking

. ?

from personal experience, I'd say that he'll have his work cut out to keep

up the program's momentum.

The quality of the graduates will depend on the standards of admission,

and on the degree of commitment of the various staff members to the new

program. I see no reason why they should not compete with those from the

small number of competing centres.

The number of graduates needed is not, in my judgement, very large.

Presumably the various provincial resources and lands departments will

continue to draw most of the entering staff from specialist groups (like

forestry, mining engineering, economics, ecology) rather than from this

kind of interdisciplinary grouping- It has been well said - if in exaggeration -

that the only civil servants needing interdisciplinary training of this

sort are deputy-ministers! But there is a slow demand for graduates in

resource utilization or environment, and this is more true of the western

provinces than the east. This demand will continue, and may even slowly

expand.

.

0

?

77

---

-3-

The stated objectives are presumably to lay on the program that has

been designed —and if given the go-ahead, I'm sure that the team named can

?

40

do it.

Administrative structure hardly arises. There will be a Director,

and a group of instructors. I presume that the Faculty of Interdisciplinary

Studies will have some kind of supervising committee. My own Institute has

a Management Committee on which representatives of the contributing depart-

ments sit. We find this useful, but guard our prerogatives as regards

initiatives, and relationship to the Graduate School.

Overall, I'd say that this proposal fails to fire me with enthusiasm,

but that it should go ahead if SFU is satisfied that the proponents really

mean what they say. I know only one of them at all well —Mary Barker,

whom I supervised when she was an honours student, and encountered again

here when I came to Toronto. If she has had a significant hand in the

proposal, and if she proposes to throw her weight into it, then my cautious

approval becomes less cautious. She could well direct the program.

A

.enneth Hare

78

?

9

---

Colorado State University

Fort Collins, Colorado

80523

College of Forestry and Natural

Resources

Office of the Dean

alu

.

.

September 5, 1977

Dr. Bruce Clayman

Associate Dean of Graduate Studies

Simon Fraser University

Burnaby 2, British Columbia

Dear Dr. Clayman:

I have read the outline for your proposed interdisciplinary

Master's program in natural resource management with considerable

interest. Comments on your specific questions are as follows:

1.

Academic Expertise. Those faculty members listed are heavily

concentrated in the biological disciplines, although there

does seem to be a good representation of the biological dis-

ciplines listed. The listed faculty are very deficient in

the social, managerial and mathematical areas, but the core

courses listed in the curriculum indicate that some of these

faculty members will have input to the program. It would be.

very helpful if the faculty members in these latter areas

could be drawn more closely into the program, much in the

same fashion as the biologists.

2.

The graduates of the program, as it presently is outlined,

will clearly be of inferior quality to those produced by

leading institutions in integrated natural resource manage-

ment. The major deficiency is that the students do not have

experience with any mechanism for integrating the various

fields to which they are exposed. This is always the most

difficult aspect of any such program; because it is so dif-

ficult, it clearly needs attention. The program that you

now have outlined does present the students to a number of

different disciplines, but provides no means for them to

bring the disciplines together.

In our experience in such areas, we have found three approaches

useful in establishing the necessary interdisciplinarity within

the students. These are:

a. Algorithmic

b. Experiential

c.

Psychological

The algorithmic aspect of integration relies upon mathematical

procedures which incorporate the inputs from the various dis-

ciplines. The most useful mathematical procedure that we have

79

---

Dr. Bruce Clayman

?

2

?

September 5, 1977

found is a mathematical programming technique, such as linear

programming. We have found, however, that a multi-objective

programming, such as goal programming, is even more helpful

for students in the natural resource fields. I note that

there is a letter attached to the material which was prepared

by Dr. Brian Alspach, of your Department of Mathematics, com-

menting on the lack of a course in optimization. Our ex-

periences indicate that Dr. Aispach is certainly correct;

however, the number of techniques that he would propose to

include in his course has been very confusing to students

operating at this level. Instead of treating the whole array

of optimization procedures, we have found it more useful to

deal only with linear programming and goal programming. This

does place at the students' disposal a sufficient mechanism

for bringing together the various inputs.

To cover the experiential aspects of integration, we have found

it very useful to do project-oriented studies where the students

work in teams. Each team is made up of the various disciplines

that are involved in bringing the information together. The

students are rated primarily upon their ability to work with the

team. We find that this procedure points out the need for team

work in integration, and also points out the students' ordinary

learning experience in college does not readily apply itself to

integrated resource management projects. Students come to

realize that a whole new area of skills needs to be developed.

The third area is psychological. It appears clear to us that

students who are ordinarily attracted to strict disciplinary

approaches and who do well in these approaches are not necessarily

those best suited for integrated resource management procedures;

students with a more social outlook rather than the aloofness

of science seem to do much better. We have not developed a

satisfactory testing technique for identifying these students

a priori, but do feel that it is an important area of consideration.

3.

The need for graduates in this area is strong and is increasing.

It is true that most young people in their professions need

disciplinary expertise in order to get their first job and to

perform well during the first few years of their professional

careers. Advancement into higher-level positions, however, very

often depends upon a broader background, such as you are attempting

to give in this natural resource management program.

4.

As presently outlined, the program is not likely to meet its stated

objectives primarily because of the lack of emphasis on integrating

mechanisms as outlined above.

.

0

---

Dr. Bruce Clayman

?

3 ?

September 5, 1977

S. The administrative structure is apparently satisfactory as far

as the professional people are concerned. It does not appear

to me, however, that there is need for a field technician

in this program. A field technician indicates that the program

is based upon biological disciplines only; these would be in-

volved in field studies rather than a broader range of disciplines

including the social sciences, etc.

A more likely need for technician support would be in the computer

science area. I would anticipate that you will find that some

computer model will be required to provide a common language

point for all of the disciplines involved, and some computer

support will certainly be required.

Under separate cover, I am sending you a series of models that we

have developed to deal with natural resource management problem areas,

such as you will be addressing. One of these, "Feedback," provides a

general framework for the others and a brief outline of the other pro-

cedures. Of the individual procedures, the one titled "Goal" has been

most useful in classroom teaching efforts towards natural resource

management.

In summary, I would emphasize that your outline seems to work from

the premise that natural resource management is a collection of biological

. ?

sciences, but that social sciences may somehow be involved in the questions.

I would urge you to take the viewpoint that natural resource management is

an integrative science which happens to include biological sciences as

one aspect of the overall question. Rather than having the program out-

lined by biological scientists, as it appears to have been, I would sug-

gest that you visit closely with people who are actively involved in the

natural resource management field, and get their input into designing

the overall program. Specifically, I would urge that you include some

quantitative integration mechanism, such as mathematical programming,

as a core part of your program.

S,j1erely yours,

Donald A. JA.m,tson

Associate ,15,ian

DAJ ew

Enclosures (separate cover)

0

?

81

---

.

?

. ? S.. ?

;

? • ,

?

,: ?

,

?

. ?

:; ?

..

:.,j:• ?

• ?

,

?

r ?

'

• ?

' ?

.:. ?

: ?

•:.• ?

:. ?

.:'

. ?

$

'. ..

••i; ?

..:• ?

•: ?

. . ?

,

?

,

.

? .

?

.

?

. ?

.,... ?

. ?

;:

?

..

?

::,. ?

.•:. ;

?

':.' ?

::

?

•

?

•

?

''.

?

.. ?

I

?

, ?

. ?

i

?

l.

; ' ?

:

?

t ?

I

?

I ? ' ?

:

?

? ?

•,

?

:, ?

..,•'

? " ?

,

'

11 I

. ?

.

?

..

?

,::: .

?

, ?

: ?

. ?

: ?

•

?

,

?

:

•

?

:H' ?

.,;

?

4'.:

?

. ?

'1''.

r

, ?

I

.

?

I ?

b

I

?

I ?

I ? '

?

! ?

t ?

I'. ?

f

I

?

'

?

i

i/

?

i

?

) ?

! ?

r

?

t

?

':' ?

I

?

&

?

& ?

'

.

?

4

?

* ?

i ?

,-

?

I ?

4 ?

;

?

£ ?

;i

; ?

t ?

4 ?

r ?

' ?

:

t

?

iioR1r ON

I

?

THE PROPOSAL

i.

OF SiMON F1ASER UNIVERSITY

I ?

-

?

-_----rT-_-

?

1.

?

t ?

FOR A MASTER'S PROGRAM IN NATUJA1J RESQUCE

,IA

I

?

-.

?

1.

-

?

'

?

'.

.

£

?

)

?

1.

4 ?

I

•

is

'

? ?

t ?

$

?

t ?

'

c.

)4

?

t ? ' ?

*. ?

%' ? ., ?

M1\NAGEMENT ?

,

I.

I

t

y

( ?

, , ?

tj ?

1 ?

\

?

ç

'

4 ? ' ?

I

?

d ?

, ?

:

1.:

s

?

•

?

.

?

,: ?

., ?

. .

?

: ?

•••

I

?

?

.

?

: ?

. ?

. ?

: ?

' ?

•

?

' ?

'

?

,

.

?

:;; ?

•: ?

• ?

' ?

.::!t;

?

.

?

'.

; ?

:

(

?

, ?

':^,,;

,t

?

-

I

?

I ?

' ?

)I ?

'

?

J

?

I r

?

'

?

: ?

• ?

__l ?

(t ?

. ?

• ?

' ?

,

1.

I

?

:41

t ?

,l ?

•'

A

?

i

?

e

?

: ?

- ?

..

?

••c'•. ?

•

?

•

?

•

? . ?

'

.

?

''-' ........... ?

a... ?

• ?

f

' ? ' ?

•

?

.1

?

1

4

..

4

?

, ?

': ?

'•

?

L ?

'•'

}: :

?

;

r ?

c ?

r ?

?

?

'

?

•

" -

?

-

?

. .,

.^^ ^

?

0

I•

c

?

4 ?

' ?

. ?

' ?

,t ?

r ?

,

?

•,

?

T

?

4 C

\

?

I

?

..

?

1_ ?

l ;

?

t ?

\ ?

III

l ?

C ?

t ?

J ?

_( ?

:

•

?

YIl

?

by ?

L

?

• ?

'

?

I ?

)

\

. ,

?

. ?

. ?

.

?

.

?

..

?

•,,

?

..•

?

:1 ?

.

?

,. ?

..•

?

•.

?

,

?

....

?

. ?

..,,

?

..

•

?

.

?

.': . ?

• ?

:

?

:

:1 ? ." ?

' ?

I

t

?

1. ?

Paul E Nickel, Director and Professôr ?

'

",

,

?

Torn

Henley, Assistant Director and Assistant Proessor

?

?

Ian Gillies, Research Associate

Natural Resource nsti1ute

?

,

University of Manitobé. .

?

, -^,;.14, - .

!^

­

J-^^

:

?

November 27,

?

977

?

/ -

. ,

,I

, - ^-,^ie-),

-I, ?

,

`I - ': ,

I--

?

i*l

I

I ?

. ?

if

:

,

,

? ,

?

............

?

- ?

fe..,. ?

44. ?

•

?

S

?

. ?

..,.4'i

JJ

?

41

?

1

t.

•'i.! ?

•. ?

:.

?

.

?

;.I i&

?

I ?

I

: ?

. ?

•.

?

..

?

.,"•.

4.

?

.

?

. ?

. ?

. ?

. ?

•?:.., ?

:

4

?

I ?

4

It

?

.5

?

44

4 ?

4.

* ?

4

?

44 ?

4

4' ?

I. ?

t ?

4

4 ?

4 ?

4 ?

I

.....................

........

.................................................

?

.

?

................................;..,...1. ........

1

?

4

4. ?

: ?

4I ?

I

0

82

?

)

?

1 ?

I

?

1

4. ?

1

?

4 ?

1 ?

44

1 ?

A ?