Sea Grant Progrom Mission Committee

Good morning! I'm coming to you live from Sea Grant Week at San Diego, CA, where I've just been privileged to sit in on the Sea Grant Program Mission Committee Meeting. There was a lot to discuss, but I'll try to hit the highlights.

LaDon Swann, Mississippi-Alabama Sea Grant Consortium presided.

Of interest was the fact that no voting members for the PMC were present at the meeting. The opinion was also put forward that voting members of the PMC could replace ex-officio members.

Ralph Rayburn presented some helpful information on the Sea Grant Knauss Fellowship, citing a new adage that is bandined about in Washinton D.C., "If you need a good friend in D.C., get a Knauss Fellow." But the fact of the matter is, few Sea Grant programs follow up with their Knauss Fellows after they leave for Washington. This is a wasted opportunity, as Knauss Fellows are walking advertisements for Sea Grant! One recent Knauss Fellow has joined FEMA in studying how FEMA deals with climate change and ways to involve Sea Grant in this.

The PMC noted that means by which to improve long-term relationships with Knauss Fellows will be brought up with the Sea Grant Association.

Dr. Rayburn also brought up an issue of a recent draft put to Congress for proposed amendments to the Conservation Reserve Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, and the Food Security Act of 1985. The amendments would mitigate the impacts of agriculture (specifically nutrient pollution) on coastal and ocean water habitat and quality, promote restoration of habitats, improve water quality, and avoid the need for regulatory programs. Not only would this serve to reduce hypoxia in the Gulf of Mexico and other regions affected by nutrient pollution, it might also involve inland states that would otherwise have no reason to associate with Sea Grant (those that drain into the Gulf of Mexico). As agriculture accounts for 45% of water use in the U.S., this is a significant issue.

It was noted that international activites involving Sea Grant are on the rise and are absolutely not going away. The issue was raised to better define "international involvement," as well. Currently, international travel within Sea Grant is not authorized, so much as simply permitted if justified. This needs to be examined and possibly refined.

The PMC was invited to share their thoughts on the new RIT Performance Assessment. Here are some of the opinions put forth:

• Estimated costs are needed for each level, compared to the PAT. Is it worth, for example, a 20% loss of program activities to get an evalutaion of your program?
• The new process is more developmental than judgemental and provides constant feedback, allowing progressive refinement.
• Is it just a lightweight PAT? Are programs still competing against one another for funding? Funding should not be a competition.
• The PAT system did not judge on a uniform basis, where the RIT seems to do so, and is more constructive than critical.
• There seems to be no emphasis on the role of the Programs Officer, and their roles actually needs to be better defined and stressed.

Well, those are the highlights. I'm off to the next meeting. I'll post again later!