Monday, June 25, 2007

Fulbright and MTV partner for peace

A new Fulbright fellowship created by the State Department's bureau of educational and cultural affairs and mtvU, MTV's college network, is designed to recognize the potential for music to advance cross-cultural understanding.
The first four recipients have been selected and will begin their fellowships in

Friday, April 27, 2007

Fashion Group International 2007 Recycled Fashion Show to support Hoakies

Fashion Group International 2007 Recycled Fashion Show

"Salvage: Save the Fashion," will take place on Saturday, April 28, in the Lory Student Center North Ballroom. The show will feature garments created from recycled materials by students in the Department of Design and Merchandising, College of Applied Human Sciences.
The show is sponsored by the student chapter of Fashion Group International.
Doors will open at 6:30 p.m. and the show starts at 7 p.m.
Admission is $3 for students and $5 for non-students. You can purchase tickets at the Campus Box Office in person, by calling (970) 491-4TIX, or online at http://www.csutix.com.
All proceeds will be donated to the Virginia Tech Hokie Spirit Memorial fund.
Come and support CSU designers, stylists, and models!

The federal government wants to start tracking how well the nation's colleges teach

Harvard Physics Professor Eric Mazur is a pioneer in a growing movement that sees more aggressive evaluation as a way to transform higher education. Over the last two years, an increasing number of colleges and universities, including Harvard, have begun using critical thinking and writing tests to see if their students are learning what they should. And now the federal government is pushing to require all colleges to regularly assess students' progress -- and reveal the results to the public.

This month, the U.S. Department of Education is working with accrediting agencies to design new rules, pushing to require colleges to produce evidence that they're making progress with students and to require accreditors to compare the results of similar schools. The rules are inspired by work of the Commission on the Future of Higher Education, a bipartisan panel convened by Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings.

By Nov. 1, new rules have to be approved, and by July 2008, accrediting agencies must begin implementing the changes. But the effect on colleges, which are accredited every 10 years, would be staggered over time.

Good students who want to save money are turning to community colleges

As four-year universities have become more expensive, good students who want to save money are turning to community colleges to earn their core undergraduate credits. No longer wed primarily to a work force-training mission, many community colleges consider it a major, if not predominant goal, to prepare students to transfer to four-year institutions.

Tuesday, April 24, 2007

CSU Chancellor urges higher education institutions to avoid mistakes, adapt

Keynote at Higher Learning Commission conference
Higher education institutions must adapt to a new environment that relies less on state funding yet embraces public accountability and access for lower-income students, Colorado State University Chancellor Larry Edward Penley told a crowd of 3,800 higher-education leaders Monday.

Penley, recognized as a leader in identifying and acting on challenges facing higher education, was invited to give the keynote speech in Chicago at the annual conference of the Higher Learning Commission, the organization that accredits degree-granting educational institutions in 19 states in the country's North Central region.

Different and challenging environment for higher ed
"The writing is on the wall: Higher education confronts a very different and challenging environment," Penley said. "Seven countries with which we directly compete-Belgium, Canada, Ireland, Japan, Norway, South Korea, and Sweden-already are ahead of the United States in college-degree attainment. Meanwhile, here in the U.S., state budgets are strained by the rising costs of Medicaid, deteriorating infrastructure like bridges and roads, the need for more prison beds, and improvement of K-12 schools.
"Competition for what formerly was the state's budget for higher education is growing."
Need to face four costly mistakes
Publicly funded institutions need to face four costly mistakes in dealing with this new environment, Penley told the group Monday. He highlighted these mistakes and alternative "success strategies" for those charged to make the case for higher education:
1. Classic mistake: Whining about the money
Success strategy: Make higher education a partner in economic prosperity
2. Classic mistake: Threatening to privatize
Success strategy: Elevate higher education as a public good
3. Classic mistake: Focusing on the best and the brightest
Success strategy: Access WITH success for qualified students
4. Classic mistake: Eschewing accountability
Success strategy: Set challenging and measurable goals -and meet them
------------------------
Accountability with transparency
"We must make accessible our universities to those with lower incomes, but with equal commitment to those students' success," Penley said. "We must commit to accountability with transparency, with rising quality and value in our colleges and universities."
In Colorado, state support for higher education has dropped from 17 percent in 1997 to 9 percent today. Nationwide, the National Center for Higher Education Management Systems or NCHEMS projects state revenues will be 5.7 percent lower than necessary to meet anticipated services expenditures within the next eight years. Every state will face a shortfall of varying magnitude, according to the NCHEMS forecast.
Change management that is sensitive to environment
"Arguing that education is different - which it is - from other industries only means that higher-education leaders must engage in change management that is sensitive to our own environment," Penley said. "We cannot be complacent; we must adopt goals that challenge us to stretch and improve, and then develop strategies and restructure and reorganize to achieve these goals."
Those goals include building partnerships with state governments; finding alternate sources of revenue; seeking lower-cost, higher-output alternatives to traditional instruction; and controlling administrative costs, Penley said.
Capitalize on contributions to regional economic prosperity
Universities must also capitalize on their contributions to regional economic prosperity. At Colorado State, the university has developed a strategic plan tied to economic development and statewide outreach. As part of that plan, the university created an Office of Vice Provost for Outreach and Strategic Partnerships to more effectively deliver community services - everything from economic development to agricultural research - to a network of 55 offices throughout the state.
Additionally, the university has created a Supercluster program that will make it easier for businesses to commercialize groundbreaking research in areas of global concern such as clean energy and cancer. The first Supercluster, MicroRx, focuses on infectious disease and looks and acts like a business with a chief operating officer who can help business people navigate academia.
Higher education is essential to our country's future
"Higher education is essential to our country's future - its economic prosperity and our quality of life," Penley told the Higher Learning Commission conference attendees. "We are higher education's leaders. The future of higher education-and the future of our country-depend on our rising to the challenges that confront us. Let us embrace those challenges."
----------------
The full speech, "Making the Case for Higher Education: Our Four Mistakes," is available at http://www.president.colostate.edu/index.asp?page=speech_hlc_april_23_07.
Contact: Brad Bohlander Email: Brad.Bohlander@colostate.edu Phone Number: (970) 491-1545
Send to a Friend

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Solidarity

Virginia Tech Tragedy

Colorado State University President Larry Edward Penley.
April 16, 2007
To: The Colorado State University campus community
From: Larry Edward Penley
Re: Tragedy at Virginia Tech

By now many of you have heard about the horrific tragedy at Virginia Tech. Our deepest sympathy and condolences go out to the students, faculty, and staff of Virginia Tech as well as the surrounding community of Blacksburg.

We have several faculty members at Colorado State University who are alumni of Virginia Tech as well as faculty, students, staff, and administrators like me who are from the Blacksburg region. It is understandable that many of you may experience various levels of concern and/or grief as a result of this tragic event. Please be aware that support is available to anyone who needs it through the Employee Assistance Program, ComPsych, which can be reached by calling 800-497-9133 or at http://www.guidanceresources.com and enter CSUEAP under company ID.

I also want to assure you that Colorado State University places the highest priority on the well being of all those in our community. Accordingly, the CSU Police Department has an emergency response plan in place to respond quickly to any crisis situation that may arise; however, all members of the CSU community are encouraged to remain vigilant as always and to report any concerns to CSUPD. In addition, university students and employees are reminded that they can help keep their campus secure by reporting suspicious behavior, locking doors, being conscientious of building and personal security, and by generally looking out for one another.

Wednesday, April 11, 2007

University engineers tissues to reduce use of animals in research

University engineers tissues to reduce use of animals in research
April 9, 2007

Colorado State University is engineering tissue in a laboratory that can replace the use of animals in research. The Tissue Engineering Laboratory, established this academic year in the College of Veterinary Medicine and Biomedical Sciences, creates tissue from a combination of cells, materials and biochemicals that model living biological systems. The model tissue replaces live animals in the initial phases of many biological studies, reducing the number of animals needed for use in research.

"As a researcher, I want to understand tissue cellular responses and develop a greater capacity to mitigate or prevent damage," said Dr. Tom Eurell, veterinarian and expert in toxicology and immunology and director of the laboratory. "As a veterinarian, I want to minimize or eliminate painful experiments in animals. Tissue engineering allows me to do both.

"It is impossible with current technology to model whole systems of human or animal response and repair, and to model systemic inflammation," Eurell said. "But we have the technology to be smarter about what we use and to refine our techniques for the benefit of both animals and humans."

For example, Eurell engineers artificial corneas. He uses corneas from already euthanized animals or human corneas donated to research as a "starter" to engineer more corneas by isolating stem cells from the corneas and growing new tissue in the lab. Each donated cornea can be used to create 20 to 25 artificial corneas. This reduces the need for live animals to test a variety of products and chemicals for eye irritants.

"We are trying to understand the best ways to help the eye repair itself following injury, and there are many things we don't know about this process," Eurell said. "For instance, we are interested in determining what happens to cornea cells after they have been exposed to lasers from therapeutic procedures such as LASIK or accidental exposure such as exposure to lasers during manufacturing processes. Engineering cornea tissue allows us to add one more tool to research rather than testing an initial concept on animals. We can use engineered tissues to assess the concept and determine from those results whether or not we should even move on to the next steps in research."

Eurell is working with human corneas donated from local surgery centers that do human corneal transplants to develop multiple corneas for research within the lab. These engineered corneas are used in the lab to study how the cornea actually functions when healing after injuries. By developing these models, Eurell can better understand how cells interact during the healing process.

In addition to researching cornea repair, Eurell also works with colleagues at Colorado State to research how lung cells react to airborne particles of different sizes, the use of nanotechnology to address health issues, proteins within cells, and substrate and cell interactions.

Tissue engineering has been used for some time to repair or replace hard tissues, such as bones, in human and veterinary patients. More recent developments in soft tissue research, including corneas, skin and muscle, can greatly reduce the number of animals used to test compounds and research tissue repair after trauma.

'Helicopter' parents from all socioeconomic backgrounds

'Helicopter' parents from all socioeconomic backgrounds

'Helicopter' parenting, the term used to describe the behavior of parents who are known to hover too closely over children of any age, including college-age offspring, appears to cross ethnic, racial and socioeconomic status, according to what is believed to be the first scholarly research on the subject.
A researcher from the University of Texas-Austin indicates cellphones, smaller families, and parents who may be reliving through their offspring some of their own fond experiences while in college, may be contributing to the helicopter-like behavior.
High college costs are also cited as a likely reason for the revying-up of parents' involvement.
Read more in USA Today at: http://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/2007-04-03-helicopter-study_N.htm?csp=34.

Monday, April 9, 2007

Makers of the GRE scrap makeover plans

April 5, 2007
Plans for an extensive makeover of the GRE graduate school exam have been canceled, citing concerns all students couldn't be accommodated at test centers.
Currently, most student take the GRE on a computer, but the Educational Testing Service, which designs the exam, had hoped to change to a more secure Internet-based system and expand the number of locations where the test could be taken.
The GRE is taken annually by between 550,000 and 600,000 graduate schools applicants.
Learn more about the GRE and visit ETS online at: http://www.ets.org/portal/site/ets/menuitem.fab2360b1645a1de9b3a0779f1751509/?vgnextoid=b195e3b5f64f4010VgnVCM10000022f95190RCRD.

Job Fair

Teacher Job Fair April 10 and 11

The Colorado State University Career Center is hosting a K-12 Teacher Job Fair on April 10 and 11, in the Main Ballroom of the Lory Student Center. More than 150 school personnel from 70 Colorado school districts will visit campus to interview for teaching opportunities for the 2007-2008 school year.
Interview scheduling is 3-5 p.m. on Tuesday on a first-come, first-serve basis. Attendees must attend on Tuesday in order to ask for interviews on Wednesday.
The fair continues on Wednesday, April 11, from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.
For a list of school districts attending the Teachers Job Fair, visit http://www.career.colostate.edu/careerFairs/reports/OrgProfileListing.aspx?id=T041007.
There is no charge for CSU students and alumni; non-CSU affiliates may attend and pay the walk-in registration fee of $25.
--------------------
For additional information, visit http://www.career.colostate.edu/careerFairs/edfair.html

Tuesday, April 3, 2007

New study finds today's college students are more narcissistic and self-centered than their predecessors

College students think they're so special
Study finds alarming rise in narcissism, self-centeredness in ‘Generation Me’

Janet Hamlin / AP
getCSS("3088867")
NBC VIDEO

Generation Me Feb. 28:
According to a new study, college students are more narcissistic than ever.
Jean Twenge, the author of the study "Egos Inflating Over Time," discusses the trend.

NEW YORK - Today’s college students are more narcissistic and self-centered than their predecessors, according to a comprehensive new study by five psychologists who worry that the trend could be harmful to personal relationships and American society.

“We need to stop endlessly repeating ‘You’re special’ and having children repeat that back,” said the study’s lead author, Professor Jean Twenge of San Diego State University. “Kids are self-centered enough already.”

Twenge and her colleagues, in findings to be presented at a workshop Tuesday in San Diego on the generation gap, examined the responses of 16,475 college students nationwide who completed an evaluation called the Narcissistic Personality Inventory between 1982 and 2006.

The standardized inventory, known as the NPI, asks for responses to such statements as “If I ruled the world, it would be a better place,” “I think I am a special person” and “I can live my life any way I want to.”

The researchers describe their study as the largest ever of its type and say students’ NPI scores have risen steadily since the current test was introduced in 1982. By 2006, they said, two-thirds of the students had above-average scores, 30 percent more than in 1982.
We're all above average!Narcissism can have benefits, said study co-author W. Keith Campbell of the University of Georgia, suggesting it could be useful in meeting new people “or auditioning on ‘American Idol.”’

“Unfortunately, narcissism can also have very negative consequences for society, including the breakdown of close relationships with others,” he said.

The study asserts that narcissists “are more likely to have romantic relationships that are short-lived, at risk for infidelity, lack emotional warmth, and to exhibit game-playing, dishonesty, and over-controlling and violent behaviors.”

Twenge, the author of “Generation Me: Why Today’s Young Americans Are More Confident, Assertive, Entitled — and More Miserable Than Ever Before,” said narcissists tend to lack empathy, react aggressively to criticism and favor self-promotion over helping others.
The researchers traced the phenomenon back to what they called the “self-esteem movement” that emerged in the 1980s, asserting that the effort to build self-confidence had gone too far.

What do you think?

‘I am special, I am special’As an example, Twenge cited a song commonly sung to the tune of “Frere Jacques” in preschool: “I am special, I am special. Look at me.”
“Current technology fuels the increase in narcissism,” Twenge said. “By its very name, MySpace encourages attention-seeking, as does YouTube.”

Some analysts have commended today’s young people for increased commitment to volunteer work. But Twenge viewed even this phenomenon skeptically, noting that many high schools require community service and many youths feel pressure to list such endeavors on college applications.

Campbell said the narcissism upsurge seemed so pronounced that he was unsure if there were obvious remedies.

“Permissiveness seems to be a component,” he said. “A potential antidote would be more authoritative parenting. Less indulgence might be called for.”

The new report follows a study released by UCLA last month which found that nearly three-quarters of the freshmen it surveyed thought it was important to be “very well-off financially.” That compared with 62.5 percent who said the same in 1980 and 42 percent in 1966.
Yet students, while acknowledging some legitimacy to such findings, don’t necessarily accept negative generalizations about their generation.

Hanady Kader, a University of Washington senior, said she worked unpaid last summer helping resettle refugees and considers many of her peers to be civic-minded. But she is dismayed by the competitiveness of some students who seem prematurely focused on career status.
“We’re encouraged a lot to be individuals and go out there and do what you want, and nobody should stand in your way,” Kader said. “I can see goals and ambitions getting in the way of other things like relationships.”

Kari Dalane, a University of Vermont sophomore, says most of her contemporaries are politically active and not overly self-centered.

Enough about me, what do you think about me?“People are worried about themselves — but in the sense of where are they’re going to find a place in the world,” she said. “People want to look their best, have a good time, but it doesn’t mean they’re not concerned about the rest of the world.”

Besides, some of the responses on the narcissism test might not be worrisome, Dalane said. “It would be more depressing if people answered, ‘No, I’m not special.”’

Monday, April 2, 2007

Online calculator based on FAFSA now available

April 1, 2007
Students no longer have to wait until the last year of high school to learn whether the federal government will help pay for college.

Student's and their parent's can now go to http://FederalStudentAid.ed.gov and use the Department of Education's FAFSA4caster to get an idea of whether they are eligible for federal financial aid. The Web site also include tools that help families find scholarships as well as a tutorital on the financial-aid process.

The online calculator is based on the Free Application for Federal Student Aid, or FAFSA, which is required for most grants, loans, and scholarships. Typically, families cannot fill out the FAFSA and see an aid package until Jan. 1 of the year they plan to attend college. However, the FAFSA4caster can be completed at any time.

The tool estimates what the federal government would expect the family to contribute toward higher education costs. The online calculator will also indicate whether a student is likely to qualify for a Pell Grant.

Spanish-language version
A Spanish-language version of the forecaster will be available April 29.
Upgraded forecaster to estimate loan eligibility
In September, an upgraded forecaster is expected that will also estimate eligibility for federal loans.

Thursday, March 29, 2007

Here's a tip, don't go to meetings like this

Learn to lead more productive, fun and effective meetings
Meeting Management
Date: Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Time: 8 a.m. to Noon
Location: Room 205, University Square
Participants will learn:
- How to use meetings as an effective management tool;
- How to make meetings productive and engaging for all who attend;
- How to use different kinds of meetings to achieve your objectives;
- How to gain maximum participation and contributions from participants;
- New techniques for managing difficult people in meetings.
Topics include:
- Planning the meeting: Costs, decisions, planning goals, communicating with participants;
- Conducting the meeting: Ground rules, agendas, checklists, timing, assigning people to roles;
- Managing meetings: Meeting planner minutes and notes; Making your meetings work; Tool kit for participatory meetings; What comes up and what to do; Traps in planning and conducting meetings; Managing disruptive behavior.

Wednesday, March 28, 2007

Binge Drinking

National report finds half of college students binge drink and/or abuse prescription and illegal drugs
March 23, 2007
Forty-nine percent (3.8 million) of full time college students binge drink and/or abuse prescription and illegal drugs, according to Wasting the Best and the Brightest: Substance Abuse at America's Colleges and Universities, a new report released March 15 by The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University.
The report is the result of more than four years of research, surveys, interviews and focus groups, and is one of the most comprehensive examinations of substance abuse on the nation's college campuses.
Findings include:
- 1.8 million full-time college students (22.9 percent) meet the medical criteria for substance abuse and dependence - two and one half times the 8.5 percent of the general population who meet these same criteria.
- Between 1993 and 2001 the proportion of students who binge drink frequently is up 16 percent.
- Between 1993 and 2005 the proportion of students abusing drugs increased (343 percent of opioids like Percocet, Vicodin and OxyContin; 450 percent for tranquilizers like Xanax and Valium)
- Between 1993 and 2005, the proportion of student who use marijuana daily has more than doubled to 310,000
Consequences of Substance Abuse
- 1,717 deaths from unintentional alcohol-related injuries in 2001, up six percent from 1998
- 97,000 students were victims of alcohol-related rape or sexual assaults in 2001
- 696,000 students were assaulted by a student who had been binge drinking in 2001
- 38 percent increase from 1993 to 2001 in the proportion of student injured as a result of their own drinking
- 21 percent increase from 2001 to 2005 in the average number of alcohol-related arrests per campus. In 2005, alcohol-related arrests constituted 83 percent of campus arrests
----------------------

Tuesday, March 27, 2007

Dems kill math-science learning bill

Dems kill math-science learning bill
By Jennifer Brown Denver Post Staff Writer

A bill that would have required all Colorado high school students to take four years of math and three years of science was defeated Thursday by lawmakers who said it would cut into teaching the arts and increase the dropout rate.

The legislation, which won bipartisan support in the Senate, was killed on an 8-4 partisan vote by the Democrat-controlled House Education Committee after a two-hour hearing.
"My concern is we're not talking about a well- balanced education if we move forward with this bill," said Rep. Michael Merrifield, D-Colorado Springs. "When push comes to shove, there's only so much time in the curriculum."

Merrifield, a former music teacher, recalled students reluctantly dropping his class to meet graduation requirements.

But Rep. Rob Witwer, R-Jefferson County, said youths in Colorado - one of only six states without statewide graduation requirements - will fall behind without a more rigorous high school curriculum.

Just 9 percent of students who take two years or less of math in high school are ready for college work compared with 41 percent of students who take four years of math, Witwer said.
University of Colorado president Hank Brown and Colorado State University president Larry Penley wrote letters supporting the bill.

Brown, who for 16 years nominated Colorado high school seniors to military academies, said some of the top students did not meet academy requirements.

"The reality is that a number of our high schools in Colorado do not require enough instruction in English, math and science to achieve a basic mastery of those subjects," he wrote. "We are shortchanging our youth."

Penley said the legislation - Senate Bill 131 - would ensure that rural and minority students have the same opportunities to take advanced math and science courses as students in affluent urban districts.

Committee chairman Merrifield questioned how the university presidents would feel if lawmakers began "meddling in" medical school requirements.
Others wondered whether math and science classes are more important than art or foreign language.

"Our world is too complicated to narrow it down to two topics," said Rep. Judy Solano, D-Brighton.

Jefferson County teacher Deborah Piwonka said the future economy will revolve around math and science technology. "Don't sell our kids short," she said. "Set the bar high."

But Rona Wilensky, principal of New Vista High School in Boulder, said stringent math and science requirements do not mean better teaching or more engaged students.
"It also assumes that more seat time equals more learning," Wilensky said.

Democrats on the committee favored a more flexible bill from Rep. Nancy Todd, D-Aurora, that would help set up high school graduation guidelines.

House Bill 1118 would require the State Board of Education to create minimum graduation requirements, then allow local school boards to develop their own versions.

Friday, March 23, 2007

Jane Goodall to speak at CSU


World-renowned conservationist Jane Goodall to speak at Colorado State University April 25

Jane Goodall, Ph.D., with an orphan Chimpanzee at the Tchimpounga Sancturary in the Republic of Congo. Copyrighted photo by Michael Neugebauer.

March 19, 2007
Jane Goodall - world-renowned conservationist and U.N. Messenger of Peace - will speak at Colorado State University at 7:30 p.m. April 25 at Moby Arena followed by a book signing. The doors to Moby Arena will open at 5:30 p.m. Goodall's lecture is supported by the Monfort Family Foundation as part of the Monfort Lecture Series at Colorado State.

'A Reason To Hope'
Goodall's lecture, "A Reason to Hope," will address her amazing life and work as well as the power each of us has to make a difference, every moment of every day.
Flash photography will not be allowed at any time during the lecture.

Tickets are free
Tickets will be available beginning March 19 at the Campus Box Office by calling (970) 491-4TIX or visiting http://www.csutix.com.

The Campus Box Office, located in the Lory Student Center, is open from 10 a.m. - 6 p.m. Monday - Friday.
Admission is free; however, a ticket is required for entry to the lecture. There is a limit of six tickets per customer. To request tickets for groups larger than six, contact the Campus Box Office.

Tuesday, March 20, 2007

Tuesday, March 13, 2007

Enrollment of Women on the Rise

NSF data show women continue to gain in enrollments and degrees earned in science and engineering

According to the latest report released by the National Science Foundation, data shows a steady upward trend in students enrolling in and graduating from engineering and science programs, regardless of gender.
Every two years, the agency publishes, "Women, Minorities, and Persons With Disabilities in Science and Engineering," based on statistics that track enrollment and degrees awarded to both undergraduate and graduate students in American universities. The latest report includes data for 1997 through 2004.
Women especially gained ground in science classrooms.

Amendment 41 Facts

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)about Amendment 41

Categories:
Awards
Can a University employee accept an award for exemplary service, innovation, research, teaching or other similar contribution from the University?Yes. Any award from the University, regardless of whether the award takes the form of a plaque, gift or cash does not fall within the provisions of the Amendment because the University does not fall within the definition of “persons” from whom state employees are restricted in their ability to accept money, gifts or things of value.

Can similar types of awards be accepted from people or organizations outside of the University?The answer to whether awards from outside entities are allowable should be decided on a case-by-case basis, and depends primarily upon the form of the award and the conditions surrounding the acceptance or use of the award. For example, an unsolicited award given by an outside organization recognizing an individual’s past contributions to his/her discipline that takes the form of a plaque or gift that is trivial in value would be allowable under the “unsolicited awards” exception to the Amendment. A monetary award by an outside entity that conditions receipt upon the recipient’s agreement to complete a project or spend the funds in a specified manner also likely would be allowable. However, acceptance of a monetary award that is based solely upon the recipient’s past performance and that does not impose any restrictions on the use of the award would not be allowable absent further clarification from the legislature or the courts on this subject.

Complaints
Who is allowed to file a complaint with the Independent Ethics Commission?Anyone who believes they have knowledge of a violation of the Amendment’s provisions may file a complaint. A complaint can brought against a recipient of money, gifts or things of value or against a person who gave such items to a University employee. Likely complainants may include disgruntled colleagues, disaffected spouses, acquaintances or family members or individuals that work for entities that have given money, gifts or things of value to a University employee.

Conferences
Can I continue to attend professional conferences or similar training opportunities paid for by the University?Yes. Things of value such as training and professional opportunities given in the normal course of employment by the University to its employees are not covered by the Amendment.

Can I attend receptions or meals or events sponsored by outside individuals, corporations or organizations as part of such conferences or trainings?The answer depends upon whether the sponsored event is part of the regularly scheduled agenda of the conference covered by the conference registration fee, in which case attendance is allowable, or whether the event is an off-line occasion in which a sponsor specifically invites a university employee and no consideration is given by the employee such as speaking at the off-line event. In the latter case, attendance is allowable, but the value of the meal or event accepted by the University employee should not exceed $50. Any value received in excess of $50 should be returned to the sponsor through an appropriate form of reimbursement.

Consideration
What is the meaning of the term “consideration” as it is used in the Amendment?Consideration is a legal term which is not defined in Amendment 41 but has the generally accepted meaning of something of value given to another person such as money, goods or services. Consideration can come from agreeing to take an action, not taking an action you are entitled to take or an exchange of promises. For purposes of complying with the Amendment, money, gifts or things of value can be accepted in excess of the $50 limit so long as consideration of equal or greater value has been given by the recipient to the giver of the money, gift or thing of value.

Consulting/Advising
My department currently allows me to act as a consultant to outside entities. May I continue to engage in such activities?Yes. While the University employee should be mindful of University and departmental policies and other restrictions relating to conflict of interest and conflict of commitment that are relevant to such activities, contracts between University employees and outside persons or organizations in which the employee agree to provide specified services in exchange for a reasonable fee are allowable under Amendment 41 because adequate consideration exists.

Corporate Tables
I have been invited to sit at the corporate table of a local business at a community event. I understand individual tickets cost $100 and the per seat price of a corporate table is even higher. Can I attend?Attendance is allowable, but value in excess of $50 dollars should not be accepted by a University employee. A reasonable approach for handling such situations is to reimburse the corporation for the cost of the ticket price above the $50 limit.

Accordingly, in the situation described above, the University employee could simply write a check to the corporation for $50—the difference between the price of an individual ticket and the $50 value the employee is allowed to receive. Although such situations may appear awkward, defending against a complaint before the ethics commission would likely be more awkward, so caution is advised. Additionally, as discussed in more detail below under the topic “fifty dollar limit,” a University employee can accept up to $50 dollars in value from a corporation only one time per year. There is no limit, however, on the total number of corporations from which a University employee can receive an annual $50 benefit. Finally, depending upon the nature of the event and the discretion of the University, the employee may be able to seek reimbursement for the “Amendment 41 share” of the ticket price paid by the employee.

Can I sit at a table at an event that has been paid for by the University? What about my spouse attending with me?Yes, it is the University’s position that seats at tables that have been paid for by the University and at which the employee is invited to sit are not covered by the Amendment. Whether a spouse can attend without reimbursement to the institution by the employee depends upon applicable policies outside the scope of Amendment 41 and the terms of employment of the particular employee. Such questions should be addressed with the employee’s department.

Elected Officials
Must I restrict my contact with local or state elected officials?Amendment 41 does not prohibit contact with local or state elected officials. Rather, it prohibits the giving of money to such persons and limits the gifts or things of value that can be given to these individuals. Your contact with elected officials should be guided by relevant University policies, including the policy that only the Board of Governors, Chancellor, Presidents and other limited individuals have the authority to represent the official position of the institutions or the System to elected officials. Although elected officials are under the same restrictions as University employees and are responsible for monitoring their own individual compliance with the Amendment, University employees should avoid engaging in any behavior that may be perceived as “inducing” an elected official to violate the Amendment.

Exceptions
What are the exceptions to the gift ban?As described in the Office of General Counsel’s January 8, 2007 communication to University employees, the exceptions to the gift ban fall into the following eight categories: campaign contributions; unsolicited items of trivial value; unsolicited awards; unsolicited informational material; admission to events where the recipient is a speaker; reasonable expenses paid by outside entities where the recipient speaks or otherwise presents or represents the state; gifts given by a relative or personal friend on special occasions and benefits that constitute normal employee compensation or incentives.

Freebies
Can I continue to accept “freebies” such as pens, mugs, candy, product samples, canvas totes, t-shirts and the like from outside organizations or entities?Generally yes. As long as such items are unsolicited and of trivial value (less than $50 dollars in value) they can be accepted under an exception to Amendment 41. Although the Amendment does not limit the total number of such items that a University employee can accept, common sense and good judgment should used where numerous items are being received from a single source or where the value of any item received appears to exceed the $50 dollar limit.

Fifty Dollar Limit
How is the fifty dollar limit determined? How do I assign value to an item I received that has no price tag or other indication of value attached to it?According to the Amendment, a gift or thing of value having a fair market value or aggregate actual cost (for multiple items from the same source) greater than fifty dollars in any calendar year may not be received unless the giver of the gift receives consideration from the University employee of equal or greater value than the item the employee received or an exception applies.

A University employee is not limited in the number of sources from whom he or she can accept $50 in value, but is prohibited from accepting more than $50 per year from any single source. Although assignment of value is an inherently subjective task, the use of good judgment and common sense is essential in assigning values to items not containing a clear indication of value on their face. The most conservative approach would be to not accept or to return an item that the recipient has reason to suspect has a value in excess of $50 and is not covered by an exception to the Amendment.

Honoraria
Can I continue to accept honoraria?No, the Amendment specifically prohibits the acceptance of “honoraria.” Although the term “honoraria” is not defined, the Amendment does not prohibit receiving money for the performance of a service. Accordingly, if money received for performing a service such as speaking or making a presentation, that money should be characterized as a “speaker’s fee” rather than an honoraria.

Indemnification
Will the University defend and indemnify me if a complaint is brought against me in front of the independent ethics commission?Although indemnification and defense of University employees is a fact specific determination, the University likely will provide a defense to employees who have acted in the course and scope of their employment and have complaints brought against them. However, if an employee is ultimately found to have willfully or intentionally violated the Amendment’s provisions, there may be employment consequences to such employee.

Penalties
What are the potential penalties if I am found to have violated the Amendment’s provisions?Besides the potential public embarrassment and harm to reputation of defending against a claim in front of the ethics commission, a University employee who is found to have breached the public trust could be found liable for fine or penalty of up to two times the amount of the value received. Other laws and penalties may apply depending on the facts of the situation.

Scholarships
Can my spouse or my dependent child accept scholarships?Yes, as previously stated in the Office of General Counsel’s January 8, 2007 guidance to University employees, scholarships are acceptable as long as adequate consideration supports the receipt of such scholarships. In recent weeks, additional guidance has been received that indicates that most scholarships will be deemed to have adequate consideration associated with them. Acceptable consideration may consist of various requirements for receipt and maintaining of scholarships such as enrollment at a particular school or set of schools, maintenance of a certain grade point average, and maintaining a certain course load or course of study.

Speaking Engagements/Fees
Can I continue to speak at conference or events and accept a fee for such service?Yes, accepting a reasonable fee for speaking at an event or conference is allowable under the Amendment. Additionally, the payment of reasonable expenses such as travel, registration and meals associated with such speaking engagement is also allowable under an exception to the Amendment.

Special Occasions/Personal Gifts
What constitutes a “special occasion” under the exception that allows me to receive gifts or things of value in excess of $50 in value from personal friends or relatives on special occasions?The term “special occasion” is not defined in the Amendment. Until clarification is received, it would be reasonable to consider any event or occasion that is out of the ordinary or usual course a special occasion. Thus, events such as holidays, birthdays, anniversaries, graduations, religious celebrations and ceremonies, family reunions, gatherings or trips, club events, specially planned outings and similar events or occasions would all qualify as special occasions.

Spouses
My spouse is not a state employee and is not covered by Amendment 41, yet regularly receives gifts and items of value in excess of the $50 limit from individuals or entities that are defined as persons under the Amendment. Given the restrictions on my receipt of gifts or items of value from these same persons either directly, or indirectly through my spouse, can I continue to partake of these “benefits” given to him or her and/or can he or she continue accept such items without jeopardizing my employment or risking a complaint against me?

It is presently unclear under the Amendment to what extent the business or personal dealings of a University employee’s spouse will be considered as attributable to the University employee. Caution is advised in this area given the existing uncertainly. Until there is more guidance in this area, the most conservative and prudent approach would be to treat any gifts or things of value received by your spouse that you personally benefit from and have control over as covered under the Amendment and subject to applicable limitations.

Textbooks
I commonly receive free textbooks from publishers whom I assume would like me to look the textbook over and determine whether my department will use it. What are my options for keeping or returning or otherwise disposing of such items?

If unsolicited textbooks are received, regardless of the value, such items can be retained under an exception to the Amendment. Undesired textbooks can be returned or donated to others at the discretion of the recipient. Other forms of disposal, such as sale of such items, must be done in accordance with departmental and University policies.

Tickets
Can I accept tickets to sporting events or other forms of entertainment such as concerts, movies, plays or ski tickets?Yes, but the analysis detailed above under the topic “corporate tables” is equally applicable to acceptance of the types of tickets at issue here. Caution should be exercised, however, because unlike social or community events where it is relatively simple to determine the per person price of an event, sports and concert venues have differential values accorded to different levels of seating. The best policy would be to ask the giver of the ticket to state its value and pay the differential above the $50 limit.

Unsolicited Items/Returns
What should I do about unsolicited gifts or items I receive and don’t want? What do I do if I suspect the item’s value is greater than $50?Although the exception for unsolicited items of trivial value generally applies and the recipient need not worry about returning such items, unwanted items can be returned to their source with a note of explanation if desired. Such items can also be donated to another person or organization. Common sense and good judgment is necessitated, and an item of significant value such a gift card of more than a $50 value, cell phone, I-Pod, computer or the like should not be accepted or should be returned if received. Donations of such items to the institution rather than an individual for institutional purposes continue to be acceptable and are subject to normal record keeping requirements and policies concerning acceptable use of such items.

Vendors
May I attend a training seminar provided by a vendor that has a contract with the University where all travel, lodging and meals are paid by the vendor?Yes, so long as the interaction with the vendor is within the scope of your normal job duties and the primary purpose of the trip is to gain knowledge and training regarding the products, equipment or services that are being provided to the University by the vendor.

Wednesday, March 7, 2007

Cheating on Ethics Test

Caught cheatin' ... on ethics test
BY JIMMY VIELKIND and LEO STANDORA
DAILY NEWS WRITERS

Columbia University officials are lowering the boom on some graduate journalism students suspected of cheating on, of all things, an ethics exam.

The J-schoolers' alleged lapse on the final was reported yesterday by Radar Online.
The exam in question consisted of two essay questions to be completed in 90 minutes any time during a 36-hour period.

Students who took the test early were instructed to avoid discussing the questions with those planning to take it later, but the warning was ignored. One honorable young scholar got wind of what happened and blew the whistle, sources said. Vice Dean David Klatell told students in an e-mail that there had been a "serious problem" with the final and ordered them to attend a special session of the class "Critical Issues in Journalism" today - or fail.

The order applies only to the Friday morning section. The evening section is exempt.
It was unclear how many students could be affected.
The course, which includes such issues as "Why be Ethical?" and "Tribal Loyalty vs. Journalistic Obligation," is taught by New York Times columnist Samuel G. Freedman, who could not be reached yesterday.

One source said of the special session, "It's an 'Out yourself or you'll all have to suffer' situation."
A Columbia spokesman confirmed Klatell had fired off the e-mail, but did not release details about the "problem."

Groping

Deputy director of Tokyo University arrested for groping

Saturday, February 17, 2007 at 08:04 EST
TOKYO — A deputy director of Tokyo University was arrested for groping on a train earlier this week, police said Friday. Keiji Takehara, 53, allegedly touched the thighs of a 24-year-old woman who sat next to him on the JR Keihin Tohoku line from Hamamatsucho to Akihabara, police said.

The woman grabbed Takehara and dragged him off the train at Akihabara where station staff held onto him until police arrived. "I'm sorry for causing so much trouble," Takehara was quoted as saying. Takehara, who was released on bail, joined Tokyo University in 2004 as a career advisor after he left Recruit where he was a board member.

Upon his arrest he said, "I fell asleep on the train, and when I woke up, my hands were touching her."

Saturday, March 3, 2007

Scam Alert

Department of Education Electronic Announcement
Someone Impersonating an ED Official Is Offering Students Grants for a Processing Fee
To: All Destination Points
FROM: Kay Jacks, General ManagerFSA Application, School Eligibility and Delivery Services
SUBJECT: Financial Aid Fraud
SUMMARY: Someone impersonating a U.S. Department of Education official is offering students grants for a processing fee.
Dear Colleague:
It was brought to our attention recently that someone claiming to be a representative of the U.S. Department of Education (ED) is calling students, offering them grants, and asking for their bank account numbers so a processing fee can be charged. Specifically, the caller tells the student he understands the student has federal student loans and offers to replace the loans with an $8,000 grant. The caller explains that a processing fee must be charged and obtains the student's checking account information.
We urge you to remind your students that there is no ED program to replace loans with grants and that there is no processing fee to obtain Title IV grants from ED. Furthermore, students should never provide their bank account or credit card information over the phone unless they initiated the call and trust the company they are calling.
We recommend that you immediately e-mail or otherwise contact your current and incoming students to warn them about this scam. A student who is a victim of this or a similar scam should take the following steps:
1. Immediately contact his or her bank, explain the situation, and request that the bank monitor or close the compromised account.2. Report the fraud to ED's Office of Inspector General hotline at 1-800-MIS-USED (1-800-647-8733) or oig.hotline@ed.gov. Special agents in the Office of Inspector General investigate fraud involving federal education dollars.3. Report the fraud to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). The FTC has an online complaint form at www.ftc.gov/scholarshipscams and a hotline at 1-877-FTC-HELP (1-877-382-4357; teletype for the hearing impaired: 1-866-653-4261). The FTC will investigate if the fraud is deemed widespread; therefore, it is important that every student contacted by the person or people in question lodge a complaint so the FTC has an accurate idea of how many incidents have occurred.4. Notify the police about the incident. Impersonating a federal officer is a crime, as is identity theft.
When filing complaints, the student should provide detailed information about the incident, including what was said, the name of the person who called, and from what number the call originated (if the student was able to obtain it via Caller ID). Additionally, if unauthorized debits have already appeared against the student's bank account, the student should mention this fact in his or her complaint. Records of such debits could be useful in locating the wrongdoer.
For information about identity theft prevention, you and your students may visit www.ed.gov/misused. For information about preventing financial aid scams, visit www.studentaid.ed.gov/lsa.
Sincerely,
Kay JacksGeneral ManagerFSA Application, School Eligibility and Delivery Services

Tuesday, February 27, 2007

CU 420 Day Comin Up!

Oh, this really is the meaning of higher education. We're fast approaching MLK, no Veteran, no Presidents, no 420 Day!!! Celebrate your freedom kids! Idiots.

This article appeared last year in the New West publication.

CU Police Post 420 Pics Online, Offer $50 For Each ID’d Pot Smoker
By Courtney Lowery, 4-28-06


The campus police at the University of Colorado in Boulder have posted 150 rather damning photos of the annual 420 party at Farrand Field last week and are offering $50 a pop for identifications of the pot-smoking folks in the photos.Lieutenant Tim McGraw said the photos were posted late Thursday evening. When word got out Friday morning, "the phones were ringing off the hook," he told New West.By mid-afternoon Friday, 50 people had been identified, McGraw said. The 420 party (held at 4:20 on 4/20, of course) has been an annual event for the past several years and McGraw admits, it's been a frustrating case to crack. He said this is not the first time the Police Department has gathered photos of the party and the university often threatens in the days prior to the party that photos will be taken. But this year is the first that the department has used the web for an identification tool on the party pics. Identified students will be sent to the university's Judicial Affairs department and may face university sanctions. But, they likely won't be criminally charged, McGraw said.As for the photographer who snapped all the up close shots of smiling, boasting smokers (and one streaking blond guy), McGraw said, "we're not describing who took (the photos) right now."

Monday, February 26, 2007

CU and their important animal research

Colorado Monkey lab closing
The University of Colorado Health Science center has decided to shut down a controversial monkey lab. The monkeys have been involved in several experiments including AIDS research and brain operations. Many of the monkeys used were euthanized after the experiments.Some people have voiced concern about the safety and security of the monkeys at the facility. In August 2004 animal rights activists were successful in gaining the release of video from inside the lab.The monkeys will be moved from the campus over the next several months, CU says. Most of them will go to another primate research facility at Wake Forest University.CU officials say the move will be beneficial for the research involved as well as the animals. The monkeys will get to spend some time outdoors in their new home.

This is great, information from http://www.freethecu34.org/updates.html
September 1, 2006

Contact: Rita Anderson (303) 527-3372 or (303) 618-3227

In Defense of Animals Applauds Transfer of Monkeys to Sanctuary Animal Protection Organization Lauds CU Regents for “Doing the Right Thing”
Denver, Colo.—

After a years-long battle to convince the University of Colorado at Denver Health Sciences Center (UCDHSC) to end the use of primates in alcoholism experiments and transfer the monkeys to a sanctuary, members of the Committee for Research Accountability (CRA), a Project of In Defense of Animals (IDA), are celebrating the relocation of eleven bonnet macaque monkeys to a Texas sanctuary.

The monkeys, who range in age from infants to 20 years old, have all lived at UCDHSC since birth. They were the subjects of widely criticized maternal separation and alcohol studies led by researcher Mark Laudenslager.

“We’re delighted for these animals who have suffered loss and deprivation for years at CU,” said Elliot M. Katz, DVM, president of IDA. “They have lived most of their lives in a 100 year-old basement which did not even meet federal standards and will finally be able to live in the relative freedom of a sanctuary without the fear of being subject to cruel, ludicrous experiments in the name of so-called‘science.’ There they will be able to feel the sun on their backs and the grass under their feet for the first time in their lives.”

CU has been under fire since Laudenslager’s maternal separation experiments ended in October 2003. Earlier this year the University raised public ire when approximately 37 bonnet macaque monkeys were sent to Wake Forest University (WFU) in North Carolina. The monkeys at WFU will continue to be the subject of CU Laudenslager’s experiments to determine if poor mothering is a contributing factor to alcohol abuse in adolescent monkeys. Documents obtained by IDA indicate that Laudenslager will continue to conduct his studies long-distance from CU in Denver, even though the primate subjects of his experiments will be 2,000 miles away.

“We are grateful that CU is doing the right thing by sending these monkeys to a sanctuary,” said Rita Anderson, Director of CRA, which spearheaded the campaign. “In this day and age with modern research technologies and years of clinical studies, to attempt to addict monkeys to alcohol in archaic ‘research’ is frivolous and unacceptable. We hope this will be the end of all primate research at UCDHSC.”
For more information please visit www.FreeTheCU34.org.

UPDATE - MARCH 19, 2006
Talbott: Drunken monkeys? CU sees no evil
March 19, 2006
Boulder Daily Camera Newspaper, Boulder, CO Research shows that young monkeys who are separated from their mothers secrete extra stress-related hormones.
Young monkeys separated from mothers and friends are more depressed — and more susceptible to illness — than motherless monkeys who can see their friends.

Monkeys with inattentive mothers are more likely than well-mothered monkeys to drink too much alcohol. And monkeys who are hung by their toes in solitary confinement are likely to have a stroke.

OK, I invented that last one. But the first three examples summarize actual research conducted on bonnet macaque monkeys at the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center.
Surely, all would agree that stringing up monkeys just to measure their reaction is cruel. So why does CU not see that it is cruel to imprison monkeys for life, rip away their mothers and quantify the conditions leading to monkey alcohol abuse? The university refuses even to admit that its research raises these ethical issues.

The research on maternal separation, which lasted the better part of two decades, is concluded. But the research on monkey alcohol use continues. The experiments, funded by an $800,000 grant from the National Institutes of Health, will continue even though the monkeys are being spirited off to another state.

Last month, CU confirmed that its colony of bonnet macaque monkeys — known as the "CU 34," for the number of monkeys in 2004 — are being sent to Wake Forest University in North Carolina. The university suggested the move is to help the monkeys.

The primate lab at Wake Forest includes outdoor areas, which will more closely approximate the animals' natural habitat. That might sound humane, but even Alcatraz had a recreation yard. So after two decades of indoor captivity, the monkeys' days will more closely approximate those of Al Capone's prison life.

CU might even hope to score PR points with the move. But advocates for the animals are not thrilled. Rita Anderson of the Committee for Research Accountability, which has pressed for the monkeys' release since 2004, said CU officials seemed "perplexed" that she wasn't happy about the news.

In fact, CU documents show, the goal is to improve conditions for the researchers. "Sending them somewhere else is simply nothing but geography," she said.
She is right. Mark Laudenslager, the CU Health Sciences Center professor who's researched the captive bonnet macaques for nearly two decades, will still direct the poor-mothering, alcohol-abuse study, which will continue at Wake Forest.

There, Laudenslager's team will try to confirm that monkeys "experiencing poor-quality maternal care" while growing up will be more aggressive and consume more alcohol voluntarily. Laudenslager hypothesizes that this tendency will be particularly pronounced in monkeys with low levels of serotonin, a neurotransmitter linked with depression in humans.
A similar experiment could be conducted on humans (culled from jail or the drunk tank, perhaps). Human subjects differ from macaques in key respects. They can consent to be studied. Their physiology is relevant because it is, well, human. And at the end of the study, they will be free.

Monkey research is presumed germane to humans because macaques share 92 percent to 95 percent of the gene sequence with humans. Non-human primates resemble us in other critical ways, too. They think. They emote. They suffer. That should give us pause.
CU says it exceeds the legal standards for animal care. But that which is legal isn't therefore right. Shipping CU's monkeys to North Carolina does not render the research ethical. It only gives the ill-mothered, friend-deprived monkeys the chance to get some fresh air.
Reach Clint Talbott at (303) 473-1367 or talbottc@dailycamera.com. More info: www.freethecu34.org.

UPDATE - FEBRUARY, 2006 Please also See Press Releases: Denver, CO "IDA Blasts CU Plans to Send Monkeys to Wake Forest for Research" Winston-Salem, NC "Controversial Monkey Transfer from Colorado University To Wake Forest Medical Center Decried"
February 2006 letter to CU February 2006 letter to Wake Forest University

The primate colony at CU that previously numbered 34 has now grown to 48 bonnet macaque monkeys. Mark Laudenslager has been breeding these unfortunate monkeys in a feeble attempt to determine if poor mothering in monkeys is a contributing factor to alcohol abuse in adolescent monkeys. Imagine how many human lives will be saved if he learns the answer! Imagine the scientific value!

Now, because of the negative publicity and pressure to end Laudenslager's pathetic projects and release the monkeys, CU has, in their usual way of ducking the real issue, decided to get the monkeys off their back (yes, pun intended). Approximately 38 monkeys are scheduled to be sent to Wake Forest University in Winston-Salem, North Carolina. Interestingly, even though CU wants to rid themselves of the monkeys and the accompanying bad press, the ludicrous alcohol study will continue. Laudenslager plans to oversee the project from the CU Health Sciences Center even though the monkeys will be 2,000 miles away! He plans to make frequent trips to North Carolina to visit his research subjects. This makes about as much sense as the so-called research itself!

Based on CU's documents, Laudenslager has told Wake Forest officials he wants them to house the monkeys because they have more adequate "observation" facilities. Perhaps Wake Forest is unaware of the real reason, the fact that CU simply cannot handle any more bad press, be it athletics, professors or monkeys! February 2006 letter to Wake Forest University
When we asked for the retirement of the monkeys to a sanctuary in December 2003, CU responded by saying it would cost $10,000 to $15,000 per monkey in replacement costs. Now, however, these monkeys are slated to be given to Wake Forest, free of charge.

CU officials seem to believe if they send the monkeys to an institution two-thirds of the way across the country, activists will be appeased! NOTHING COULD BE FARTHER FROM THE TRUTH! They fail to understand it is the individual monkeys we are concerned about, not the location of their torture. Moving them to Wake Forest is nothing but geography!
Wake Forest plans to first use the monkeys in the alcohol study. They then plan to move them on to other research horrors at their institution, or sell them to other research facilities for their use and abuse. In addition, they may continue to breed them at Wake Forest in order to have a constant supply of babies for other unknown terrors!

Rita Anderson of the Committee for Research Accountability (CRA) recently met with interim Health Sciences Chancellor Gregory Stiegmann. After being told two years ago that "no amount of effort" would bring about a meeting with officials there, she was quite pleased that he agreed to meet with her. She found him to be a very thoughtful person, who listened without interruption to all she had to say.

Below you will find the text of a letter Rita presented to him at the meeting. The letter outlines most of what was discussed.

One of the issues they talked about was the possible release of 10 of the monkeys. The Chancellor instructed the CU legal counsel to work with Rita and CRA to place these monkeys in a sanctuary. Since very few, if any, sanctuaries are able to take primates without funding, Rita asked the Chancellor for CU's financial assistance. She does not yet have a response.

CU is likely currently paying for the care of many of these monkeys who are not covered under Laudenslager's National Institutes of Health grant. They paid for their care for the six months between Laudenslager's last fiasco (17 years of maternal separation experiments) and the current equally ridiculous alcohol study. Since they paid for the monkeys while they were living at CU, they certainly can and should pay for their future care. These institutions must learn they cannot simply "use and abuse" these wonderful sentient beings and then throw them out like a piece of leftover cabbage!

We'll keep you updated on future developments. In the meantime, please contact CU and Wake Forest to ask that these monkeys be released to sanctuaries instead of living the remainder of their years in fear and anguish!

LETTER TO CU HEALTH SCIENCES CHANCELLOR GREGORY STIEGMANN
Dear Chancellor Stiegmann:
Congratulations on your appointment as interim Chancellor of UCDHSC. In the next few months you will have the opportunity to make many positive changes for CU and the Health Sciences Center.

Thank you for agreeing to meet with me. I asked for this meeting to discuss matters of concern to many citizens. The issues of primate research and Mark Laudenslager’s (“Laudenslager”) unnecessary and cruel experiments are being discussed across the nation and even around the world.

Many citizens are outraged at the fact that their tax dollars are being used to conduct experiments concerning monkeys and alcohol when there is a desperate need for credible research that will actually contribute to human health and save human lives. I frequently speak with people who are shocked and stunned to learn that the University of Colorado would encourage such a waste of money and lack of ethical concern.

We have collected approximately 8,300 signatures asking for the release of the monkeys to a sanctuary. Many of these petition signatures have already been presented to former CU President Elizabeth Hoffman and the CU Regents.

As you know, for 17 years Laudenslager conducted redundant maternal separation experiments on monkeys to determine what happens when a baby monkey is separated from his/her mother. The project, which ended in October 2003, cost taxpayers millions of dollars. This type of research was conducted extensively in the 1950's and 1960's. We already know that babies do not thrive when deprived of nurturing.

When that project ended, I asked for the release of the monkeys. I was told that CU officials would discuss it with me if I found a primate sanctuary that was willing to take the monkeys. When I found such a place, accredited by both national sanctuary associations, I immediately called the Health Sciences Center. In response I received a letter saying it would cost me $10,000 to $15,000 in replacement costs for the release of the monkeys.

At the time I was unaware that, as a condition of the approval of this project by CU’s Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (“IACUC”), the researcher had already agreed to release the monkeys at the conclusion of the study. This was not done. In fact, the former veterinarian, Dr. Ron Banks, was fired because he did not agree that the monkeys should continue to be held at CU. One of the IACUC members who also disagreed was not reappointed to the committee. Two additional IACUC members resigned.

For months afterwards, Laudenslager sent a series of rather frantic emails to the NIH, asking for money to fund a new experiment so he wouldn’t lose the monkeys. He stated, “My administration is getting on me about unsupported monkeys” and “I am under extreme pressure by my institution to cover the per diems for the genotyped monkeys”.

Finally, in July 2004, after months of begging, he was funded and began yet another ludicrous 5-year study to determine if poor mothering in monkeys is a contributing factor to alcohol abuse in adolescent monkeys. For the first year alone, funding for this project amounted to $768, 509.
How many human lives will be saved by knowing this information? Little will be gained other than to provide this researcher with a job and a paycheck.

In December 2004, in response to a letter I wrote to CU, Dr. John Sladek sent a 5 page document to the CU Regents. The first page was mostly a weak attempt to convince them that I was perhaps a member of the Animal Liberation Front, PETA or was possibly a violent terrorist. The following 4 pages were devoted to what he considers the merits of animal research. However, never once then or at any other time have I heard him discuss the merits of Laudenslager’s research projects. I can only conclude he has nothing positive to offer.

Clinical alcohol studies with human subjects have already been conducted. One such study shows that children of “hands-on” parents - those who have established a household culture of rules and expectations for their teen’s behavior and monitor what their teens do - are at one quarter the risk of smoking, drinking and using drugs as teens with “hands-off” parents.

Joseph A. Califano, Jr. is the chairman and president of the National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University and the former U.S. Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare. He states that, “One factor that does more to reduce teens’ substance abuse risk than almost any other is parental engagement . . . Parental engagement in children’s lives is the key to ridding our nation of the scourge of substance abuse.”

Why then is CU concerned about the connection between monkey parenting and monkey alcohol abuse? Not only is there a vast difference between environmental factors for humans and monkeys, there are differences between parenting behavior in various species of monkeys.
I recently learned of the possibility that most of the monkeys at CU will be transferred to Wake Forest University (WFU); however Laudenslager’s study is slated to continue. He will be making several trips to WFU each year but will be mainly overseeing the project long-distance. Interestingly enough, no money will be generated for CU, such as the $10,000 to $15,000 per monkey that I was quoted. The monkeys are to be given to WFU free of charge.

Does CU believe that by moving the monkeys to another location there will be no further negative publicity for them? Nothing could be further from the truth. Given the fact that Laudenslager continues to work at CU, with their approval to waste our tax dollars, and the fact that his highly questionable study continues to involve primates, we will not only continue but will step up our efforts. Lest anyone is concerned, however, this will not involve terrorist or violent activities.

I do plan to attend and speak at the March 1 Regents meeting in Colorado Springs, and will be inviting the press to hear what I have to say.

Health Sciences officials are well aware that I have been in contact with a primate sanctuary (accredited by both national sanctuary organizations) willing to take some of the monkeys. However, it has recently come to my attention that CU officials have been making anonymous phone calls in an attempt to find a sanctuary willing to take some of the monkeys with no funding being offered. Much negative media attention has already been generated in the newspapers and on television about Laudenslager and the monkeys. I have attached a small sample, one article from the Boulder Daily Camera and a second one from the Rocky Mountain News. Also included is a letter I wrote and presented to the CU Regents at their March 23, 2005 meeting. The attached brochure continues to be distributed nationwide.

Our goal has always been two-fold: 1) to stop Laudenslager’s pointless and wasteful studies using monkeys, and 2) to obtain the release and retirement of these monkeys to a sanctuary, with funding assistance from UCDHSC. Since CU was able to provide for the monkeys for several months between Laudenslager’s experiments, and I believe may still be providing financial assistance to many monkeys not covered under his current study, it stands to reason that CU would be willing to help provide for the monkeys’ future. This would be an excellent way to begin making it back into the good graces of the public and the press.

Chancellor Stiegmann, I appreciate the opportunity to meet with you to discuss this very important matter. You have an excellent opportunity to make a positive impression on the public when they see that CU and UCDHSC is doing the right thing. Sending the monkeys to another institution is nothing but geography and does not solve any problems, for CU or for Wake Forest. It simply takes our work to two locations instead of one.

I ask that you take immediate steps to terminate Laudenslager’s alcohol study entitled “Early experience and low 5-HT markers in alcohol abuse”, and that you make the decision to release the monkeys to accredited primate sanctuaries with financial assistance from the University.
I look forward to meeting with you. Thank you for taking the time to look into this very important matter.

Yours truly,
Rita L. AndersonCommittee for Research Accountability, a Project of In Defense of Animals

LETTER TO WAKE FOREST UNIVERSITY
February 23, 2006Nathan O. Hatch, PresidentWake Forest UniversityBox 7305Reynolda StationWinston-Salem, NC 27109
Richard H. Dean, President and CEOWake Forest University Health SciencesWake Forest UniversityBox 7305Reynolda StationWinston-Salem, NC 27109
Gentlemen: As you may be aware, the University of Colorado at Denver Health Sciences Center (UCDHSC) is considering the transfer of several groups of bonnet macaque monkeys to your primate facility. The ostensible reason is that UCDHSC lacks adequate observation facilities for primates. You may not be aware, however, of the apparent desire of CU to rid itself of these monkeys, who have been used in questionable and controversial research and as a result have generated much negative publicity for the university.
The source of the controversy has been the experiments of Mark Laudenslager, whose current study is entitled “Early experience and low 5-HT markers in alcohol abuse.” Prior to this, Laudenslager conducted maternal separation studies on primates for 17 years. Laudenslager’s work has drawn fire from psychologists and other professionals, and has garnered the attention, not only of the local press, but also national media. Attached are two of the many Colorado newspaper articles that have appeared in the last 2-1/2 years concerning these studies and other issues at UCDHSC.
According to CU records, the plan is for Laudenslager to continue to direct his research from CU, even though the monkeys would be located in North Carolina, 2000 miles away. On this fact alone, the motivation for this transfer is apparent.
The Committee for Research Accountability has asked CU to terminate Laudenslager’s experiments and retire the monkeys to a sanctuary. (See attached letter to UCDHSC Chancellor Gregory Stiegmann, with whom I met last week.) By this letter, we are officially asking Wake Forest to decline to participate in this project by refusing to accept the monkeys and advocating instead for their retirement to a sanctuary.
Should Wake Forest decide to proceed with the transfer, I can assure you that the negative publicity and community activism will follow the primates to your university. Thousands of citizens have signed letters and postcards decrying both the treatment of the monkeys and the waste of tax dollars on this type of research. We hope to inform these citizens that Wake Forest has taken a stand for good science and the humane treatment of animals by declining to join CU in this questionable venture.
For your information, I have included a sample brochure, pin, window sticker and t-shirt that have been distributed widely across the United States, and will give you an indication of the level of opposition to CU’s plan. If you have questions or wish to discuss this matter, please feel free to contact me. Thank you for your consideration.
Very truly yours,
Rita L. AndersonCommittee for Research Accountability, A Project of In Defense of Animals
Enclosurescc: William C. Gordon, Provost William B. Applegate, Sr. VP, WFU Health Sciences and Dean of WFU School of Medicine Mark E. Welker, Associate Provost for Research

UPDATE - JUNE, 2005CU gets flak over monkey study. Organization blasts ongoing research into alcohol abuse. Rocky Mt News front page June 30, 2005
UPDATE - APRIL, 2005FreeTheCU34.org addresses the CU RegentsRead the "Silver and Gold" article and representative speeches here
UPDATE - DECEMBER, 2004 Daily Camera Coverage of FreeTheCU34.org, Boulder, CO
UPDATE - AUGUST, 2004 Rita Anderson of the Committee for Research Accountability, along with Tammy Fiebelkorn (dressed in a monkey suit), and CU English Professor Ed Rivers, attended the CU Regents meeting at Fitzsimmons in Aurora. Channel 2 came with their camera and interviewed Rita and Tammy at length prior to the meeting and did a nice piece on the 10:00 news.Rita was invited to speak and was given 2 minutes to present the CU 34 issue to the Regents. The monkey (Tammy) stood by her side during the presentation and everything was captured by Ed on video for the documentary he is doing.The regents have agreed to put our issue on the agenda for the December 8 meeting in Boulder, so we plan to be there. If you are able to go in support, please contact Rita at 303-618-3227 or by email at guardianship@aol.com for details on when and where.Thanks to all who continue to support our cause. Without your voices, there is no hope for the monkeys!
UPDATE - JULY 31, 2004 In MemoriamWe're sad to report that Pensy Marshall, a CU 34 supporter, died in Boulder on July 12, 2004.Pensy called in March when she learned about the plight of the monkeys at UCHSC and immediately asked what she could do to help. She then worked very hard to collect signatures on postcards and attended our April vigil. Her family has now asked that contributions be made to the CU 34 campaign in her name.She was one of those caring individuals who understood how important it is to help the animals in any way she could. She volunteered at the Boulder Humane Society and did her best to make this a better world for our friends of other species.Pensy's kind heart and generosity of spirit were apparent in the way she lived her life. She will be missed by humans and non-humans alike.
UPDATE - JUNE 24, 2004 Today's edition of the Silver & Gold Record (the CU paper for faculty and staff) included an open letter to CU President Hoffman from Rita Anderson, Committee for Research Accountability, a Project of In Defense of Animals. Those also signing in support of the letter were 1) Christopher Kuni, Professor of Radiology, CU Health Sciences Center, 2) Ed Rivers, CU Professor of English, 3) Marc Bekoff, CU Biology Professor and co-founder with Jane Goodall of EETA, 4) Julie Thompson, CU Student, 5) Matt Bear, National Endowment for the Animals, 6) Dave Crawford, Rocky Mountain Animal Defense, and 6) Sarah Florez, CU Partnership for Animal Welfare.The letter is the same one that was hand-delivered to President Hoffman earlier this month and can be found below as "Letter No. 2" under the date of June 3, 2004.We'll continue to update the site as developments occur!!!
UPDATE - June 3, 2004Click here for the text of the June 3, 2004 article in the Colorado Daily newspaper.Individuals representing several groups joined together once more to take petitions (including the on-line petition), an email from Belgium with 19 names and postcards with signatures to CU President Elizabeth Hoffman's office, asking for the release of the CU 34. Yesterday we took 3100 signatures which, along with the 1700 we've already taken to her, total 4800! The persons present were Rita Anderson of the Committee for Research Accountability (a Project of In Defense of Animals), Matt Bear of the National Endowment for the Animals, Ed Rivers who is a President's Teaching Scholar and CU English Professor, Jane Harper of the Fairview High School Roots and Shoots program, and Sarah Florez with the CU Partnership for Animal Welfare group. Although President Hoffman was not in at the time, we presented the information to her assistant and said we were there to once again ask for the release of the CU 34.Ed Rivers was, as always, there with his video camera to preserve our efforts for the video he is putting together about the campaign. Thanks, Ed!Also in attendance was a reporter and photographer from a local Boulder newspaper. Today they ran two pictures and wrote a great article in the June 3 edition of the Colorado Daily. They even included the fact that President Hoffman's "hairdresser" signed a postcard asking for the release of the monkeys.You will find below the two letters we presented to President Hoffman's assistant. One simply asks for the release of the monkeys, on behalf of all of you who signed your names. The second one is considerably longer and explains exactly why we want the monkeys released and outlining our questions and concerns.Again, a BIG THANKS to everyone who is helping on this project in any way, including those of you who have signed your name. You are each like a drop of water that, when joined with many other drops of water, become a mighty river - the river to freedom for the CU 34. Please keep the river flowing by continuing to spread the word and asking others to sign the petition and send it on.FOLLOWING IS THE TEXT OF THE TWO LETTERS PRESENTED TO PRESIDENT HOFFMAN'S ASSISTANT ON JUNE 2, 2004 –LETTER NO. 1 -Dear President Hoffman:This letter is written on behalf of the persons and organizations listed below, as well as 4,787 signators on petitions and postcards, some of which were delivered to your office on April 17, 2004 - the rest are attached. These signatures represent CU faculty and staff, CU alumni, students, taxpayers and citizens from the United States, Canada, Portugal, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Brazil, United Kingdom, Ireland and Germany. We request that you immediately release the 34 primates being held at the CU Health Sciences Center in Denver at no additional cost to citizens. Attached you will find a letter which explains this matter in more detail.Thank you for doing the right thing!Very truly yours,Rita L. AndersonCommittee for Research Accountability,a Project of In Defense of AnimalsOn behalf of: Dave Crawford, Rocky Mountain Animal DefenseMatt Bear, National Endowment for the AnimalsSarah Florez, CU Partnership for Animal WelfareEd Rivers, President's Teaching Scholar, CU Professor of EnglishJane Harper, Fairview High School, Jane Goodall's Roots and Shoots ProgramJulie Thompson, University of Colorado, Jane Goodall's Roots and Shoots ProgramLETTER NO. 2 -Dear President Hoffman:For approximately 17 years, Dr. Mark Laudenslager of the CU Health Sciences Center conducted maternal separation experiments on macaque monkeys. Some of these monkeys were then sent to the University of Washington Regional Primate Research Center to be injected with a simian form of HIV - those monkeys were all eventually killed. Many consider maternal separation and maternal deprivation experimentation to be wasteful, unnecessary and redundant. We already know if you deprive an infant of nurturing, that baby does not thrive.We've all been led to believe that the use of animals in medical research is necessary "for the health of humans." What human health benefits can be gained from separating infant monkeys from their mothers? Why did CU allow this questionable research to continue, year after year, at a cost of $7 million to the taxpayers? Will you continue to permit even more money to be wasted in the name of medical research?Even though Dr. Laudenslager's project ended in October, 2003, the monkeys that he used (as well as many other monkeys) are still being held captive at the Health Sciences Center in Denver. None of these 34 monkeys are currently involved in research. At the end of the maternal separation experimentation, I asked for the release of the monkeys and was told UCHSC officials would discuss this with me if I would find a sanctuary who was willing to accept them.When I found a primate sanctuary (accredited by both national sanctuary associations) that was willing to accept the monkeys, I immediately contacted UCHSC. In December, 2003, I received a letter from Dr. John Sladek, Vice-Chancellor for Research, indicating that it would be necessary to pay CU between $10,000 and $15,000 per monkey for their release. I found this quite shocking in light of the fact that a September, 2001 email written by Dr. Laudenslager stated "The vet is a little anxious about being stuck with them in two years and having to euthanize the colony". If they were considering killing these monkeys, why then would the University ask for this money "to replace the monkeys? This is considered by many to be equivalent to ransom.Based on statistics found on the CU website, it costs approximately $136,000 per year for the care and feeding of these animals. Considering the tight economic times and the many budget cuts CU has had to make, what is the justification for keeping these monkeys at UCHSC? A representative of your Public Relations Department stated the monkeys are being kept to "attract grants". Clay Evans, columnist for The Boulder Daily Camera said this sounds "like this is as much about keeping a few Ph.D.'s and grad students in beans as about truly advancing the cause of human health." How many better ways could CU find to use this $136,000 each year?With all this talk about money, we must not forget about ethics, which should always be a key factor when there are lives involved, be they human or non-human. These primates have served their time and deserve to spend their remaining years enjoying a life free from fear and emotional or physical pain. Consider the 36-year old monkey who was stolen from her home in the wild, only to be forced to live her life in the confines of a pen and submit to the whims of her captors, day after day, year after year. What about the 31 monkeys who were born at CU's breeding colony and have never known a "natural" life? Some of these monkeys, who have lived their entire existence in a basement cage, are now the same age as students who enter your University. However, they have probably never known sunshine or green grass, only repeated experimentation at the hands of humans. I ask you, Dr. Hoffman, do you feel it is ethical to continue to hold these monkeys at UCHSC? Jane Goodall stated, "If anyone other than white-coated scientists treated monkeys, dogs, cats, rabbits, pigs ... as they do behind the locked doors of the animal lab, he or she would be prosecuted for cruelty."In November, 1996, after being approached by local citizens about the possible release of monkeys from the Health Sciences Center, Dean Richard Krugman responded by saying, "Your suggestion to address the social and behavioral needs of the monkeys in their post-research period is in direct parallel with our institutional policy for these animals. As point of fact, we have previously transferred animals no longer required for research investigation to alternate housing facilities . . . You see, we are not only interested in biomedical knowledge, we are also interested in proper care for animals we did once own and animals who have contributed to the advancement of the medical database and clinical care."Dr. Ron Banks, D.V.M., wrote the following to the same individual in March, 1997, "It is good to see others as committed as we are to the quality care of these very important animals."Why has the University changed its policy of purported concern for the animals in the last eight years? Releasing these sentient beings would indicate to the public and the taxpayers that the University is indeed interested in the welfare of the primates who have been living at your facility. After repeatedly calling your office to ask for a meeting with you about this matter, I was told to contact the Health Sciences Center. However, even though Dr. Sladek's December letter to me stated to contact him if I had questions, my calls to his office have been ignored. I also requested a meeting with Chancellor Shore, but received no response. I appreciate that Dr. James Stevens, interim veterinarian, has been willing to speak with me on numerous occasions; however, I was recently told that "no amount of effort will bring about a meeting with Dr. Sladek" because I have "caused the University problems". Apparently, my speaking out about the welfare of 34 sentient beings who are being held captive is considered to be nothing more than making trouble. Although Universities are traditionally places for openness and freedom of speech, there seems to be no room for discussion at CU. Why is this? Why is the University allowed to freely spend taxpayer money with no accountability to citizens? Why was $7 million spent on "maternal separation" experiments? If left unchecked, will millions more be wasted on archaic projects in the name of "human health" and "science"?Although CU tried for years to keep a lid on problems in the athletic department, it finally exploded into a major issue. The Commission investigating the athletic problems at the University recently stated that you "failed to exercise sufficient oversight until pressured by the governor and lawmakers". I certainly hope that will not be the case with regard to the primates being held at UCHSC. It might be wise to face this problem here and now before it grows any further and causes more negative publicity to the University. As represented by the many phone calls and emails you have received and the nearly 4,800 signatures from citizens that have been presented to your office, many people feel this is an issue of the utmost importance. These people include CU alumni, CU faculty and staff, students, taxpayers and concerned citizens from around the world. This has been reported in the Denver Post, Boulder Daily Camera, Silver & Gold Record, Colorado Daily, Boulder Weekly, and Channel 9 News, among others. Please take the time to read the attachments for comments from local citizens, those from across the U.S., and the 9 other countries represented by the signatures.We ask that you hear our voices and consider our reasoning, then release these 34 monkeys immediately to the sanctuary at no further cost to citizens and taxpayers. The University of Colorado can then be recognized for doing the right thing.Very truly yours,Rita L. AndersonCommittee for Research Accountability,a Project of In Defense of Animals

UPDATE - May 13, 2004Because of the care and concern from people around the world, we now have a total of nearly 4,200 signatures (petitions, postcards, etc.) toward our goal of 10,000! The Boulder Fairview High School Roots & Shoots group collected over 300 signatures in just one day! The signatures represent citizens from the U.S., Canada, U.K., Portugal, Ireland, Belgium, France, Switzerland, Brazil and Germany. We will be presenting our next installment of signatures to the University of Colorado in the near future.Keep those signatures coming in and don't forget to continue emailing friends and family to ask for their help. MANY THANKS TO ALL OF YOU FOR YOUR COMPASSION. WE WILL FREE THE CU 34!
UPDATE - APRIL 17, 2004At 1:30 on the afternoon of April 16, 2004, Rita Anderson of the Committee for Research Accountability, Sarah Florez of CU-Partnership for Animal Welfare, Dave Crawford of Rocky Mountain Animal Defense and Matt Bear of National Endowment for the Animals, paid a visit to CU President Elizabeth Hoffman's office in Boulder to present a total of 1,667 signatures. This represented 562 postcards and 1,105 signatures from the on-line petition. Although President Hoffman was not there, we spoke with her representative and asked, on behalf of ourselves, our organizations and the 1,667 persons represented by the signatures, for the immediate release of the CU 34. Matt Bear spoke up to say the 1,667 signatures was just the "first installment".That evening, we held a vigil in front of the CU Health Sciences Center in Denver. There were approximately 75 people in attendance. We had music provided by Matt Bear, including a beautiful song he wrote, "Set Us Free" (which you can hear on this website). There were several readings of quotes and poems about animal issues, which, by request, are also being included on the website.Since so very many people had helped out, Rita Anderson of the Committee for Research Accountability attempted to thank all of the groups and individuals who made it happen. However, as so often happens, she later remembered one very important person who had not been thanked - Ed Rivers. Ed is a CU English Professor who worked very hard videotaping the whole vigil and is putting together a CU 34 video which will also include our visit to President Hoffman's office and media coverage. Thanks, Ed, for being there and for your dedication to the monkeys!Rita then asked those present to follow along in a two-block march to see where the monkeys are housed. She felt it was important for everyone to see exactly where the monkeys live - in the basement of a 100 year-old building with the windows covered, with no sunlight or view of the outdoors. The police, however, stopped us about ½ block short of our goal. We were allowed to have a moment of silence, then Matt Bear sang another awesome piece, "Give or Take". As we left to go back, there were several teary eyes.WHAT YOU CAN DO NOW!As Rita stressed to everyone at the vigil, just because we've held a vigil does not mean our work is done. In fact, we've just begun. Since the original goal of 1,500 signatures was reached in less than a month, the new goal is 10,000 SIGNATURES. We plan to continue visiting President Hoffman's office as we gather more signatures and more support.Please continue to send emails to your friends with the website address. Ask them to sign the on-line petition and send emails to their friends. The FREE THE CU 34 campaign has gained international attention and we now have supporters from the U.S., France, Canada, Belgium and Switzerland!It is also most important to keep sending polite emails and phone calls to President Hoffman, asking for the release of the CU 34. As the weeks go by, we need to continue to let her know that we will not go away until the monkeys are released and retired to the sanctuary.Don't forget to send your letters to the local newspapers. Be sure to include your full name, address and daytime phone number (name only is printed in the paper). Contact info for the large papers is:Denver Post (openforum@denverpost.com)Rocky Mountain News (letters@rockymountainnews.com)Boulder Daily Camera (openforum@dailycamera.com) - limited to 300 wordsTHANKS TO EVERY ONE OF YOU. WITH YOUR CONTINUED SUPPORT