'); } -->
No surprise here. The University of Idaho has put Marie Bulgin on paid administrative leave while investigating comments made by the controversial head of the U of I's Caine Veterinary Teaching Center.
Bulgin - a past president of the Idaho Wool Growers Association - has said that there is no evidence that wild bighorn sheep can contract disease from domestic sheep. This is a controversial claim in wildlife circles. Bulgin has made that assertion in federal court and in legislative hearings, even though the Caine center has had evidence to the contrary since 1994.
Bulgin has said she was unaware of the unpublished study suggesting a disease link.
"(Bulgin) will not be involved in research projects on sheep and sheep-related diseases, nor publish or otherwise disseminate research materials regarding sheep or sheep-related diseases pending the outcome of the university's investigation," the university said in a statement issued Wednesday.
I'm not sure the U of I had much of a choice - but the damage may be done. This mess is already hurting the Caine center.
The Cody, Wyo.-based Wild Sheep Foundation is rethinking whether it wants to fund Caine center research. "We would be better using our interest and funding to go somewhere else where they are going to truly do science and not pull this mess that Bulgin has done," foundation director Neil Thagard told the Lewiston Tribune.
University research relies on the ability to find funding partners. Donors simply aren't going to want to put their money into research labs that have a bias, real or perceived.
Beyond the what-did-she-know-and-when-did-she-know-it Bulgin investigation, it's a good time for the U of I and incoming president Duane Nellis to take a good look at the wisdom of having a research lab director who has such close ties to industry.
PASSWORD, PLEASE
Updated resume? Check.
Glowing reference from high school chemistry teacher? Check.
Twitter password? WTH?
At City Hall in Bozeman, Mont., that was all part of the job screening process - at least briefly. Unbelievable.
Applicants were asked to fill out a form listing "any and all, current personal or business websites, web pages or memberships on any Internet-based chat rooms, social clubs or forums, to include, but not limited to: Facebook, Google, Yahoo, YouTube.com, MySpace, etc." The form had a space where an applicant is supposed to write down passwords.
Word spread quickly about this foolishness, and Bozeman rescinded the policy Friday.
The city's logic (using the term advisedly) here was that this would enable City Hall to gauge the moral character of an applicant.
Sharon Fisher at NewWest.Net did a fine job of listing the flaws. It violated the applicant's privacy - and, potentially, compromised the privacy of anyone who is an applicant's Facebook "friend." It asked applicants to violate Internet user agreements by sharing passwords. It suggested a certain social media illiteracy; for instance, City Hall can set up its own Facebook account and ask a job applicant to sign on as a "friend" (thus allowing the city to visit the applicant's Facebook page).
Of course, it also seemed like an identity theft problem waiting to happen. But if an applicant relinquishes his or her identity by divulging a password, can that identity truly be "stolen"? For that matter, if applicants are foolish enough to share passwords, should they really be hired to work as police officers or firefighters?
QUICK TAKES
® In Wednesday's Statesman, gold medalist Kristin Armstrong and husband Joe Savola gave us a list of five streets cyclists should avoid. Four of the five are partially or entirely under state jurisdiction: State Street, Eagle Road, Broadway Avenue and Chinden Boulevard. That explains why cycling safety is a state issue.
® Yup, the Fry Co. is located both in Idaho and Boise. So the name Boise Fry Co. certainly applies. Snark aside, I am glad the proverbial cooler heads prevailed, settling the dispute between the restaurant and the Idaho Potato Commission. Peace for our time.
Kevin Richert: 377-6437
Story Comments
We welcome comments but ask that you remain on topic. Some comments may be reprinted elsewhere in the site or in the newspaper. Comments that are profane, personal attacks or otherwise inappropriate or are off topic are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked. Do not flag comments merely because you disagree with the comment.