 FUSE
 Strength of Astronomy
 Tables of Contents
|
Cassiopeia -- 1999-DS |
Those who have read the published English version of the Long Range Planning Panel (LRPP) report, can appreciate the outstanding quality and importance of that document for the future of astronomy in Canada. With a significant fraction of the new facilities and resources proposed in the report, Canada can undoubtedly continue as a major player in 21st century astronomy.
First, a few words about the recent past. When one considers the harsh budgetary cuts NRC/HIA has had to go through, the achievements of the 1990s have been spectacular. This is due to the strong leadership and world vision of its Director, Don Morton, and to the competence and unrelenting commitment of the whole HIA staff. HIA/NRC has lost several people whose extradordinary abilities will be extremely hard to replace. However, I am relieved to see that the younger people who have been hired over the last few years are the ``Right Stuff''.
Budget reductions at universities and at NSERC were also a major hit on university astronomers in the late '80s and most of the '90s. Through these difficult times, we managed to obtain the resources to build the Gemini Twin Telescopes, to get involved in NGST and to participate in several other ventures. We also did great science; the impact of papers by Canadian astronomers rates third after the USA and the United Kingdom. The fruitful interaction between all Canadian astronomers, NSERC, HIA/NRC CSA and industry was the key of these successful partnerships.
The new millenium comes to us with new challenges. I wish to share a few thoughts with the readers of Cassiopeia; these thoughts popped out in my mind while reading the LRPP report.
First, I believe that the real impact of the new capabilities as proposed by the LRPP report, mostly large new off-shore international facilities, will benefit our community only if we can increase the number of university astronomers in a significant way. This is a challenge in light of the limited number of positions in Canadian universities. Several universities suffer from a serious generation gap, and we, of the older generation, are running out of steam. Moreover, as shown dramatically in a recent paper by Brad Gibson et al. (cf. http://www.aas.org/publications/baas/v31n4/phdlongterm.pdf), a majority of Ph.D.'s educated in Canada have taken jobs outside Canada, mainly in the USA. We need to be able to reverse this trend, and this is our first challenge.
HIA/NRC faces the second challenge. Most of the resources requested to fund the construction and the operation of the new facilities proposed in the LRPP report will go to HIA/NRC (see Table 1 of the LRPP Report, p. 12). I fear that HIA would be ill-prepared to handle these huge additionnal resources and its present structure would be inappropriate, even in the case where only a small fraction of the requested additional funding was obtained. For example, HIA national laboratories, DAO & DRAO, are at present in a difficult and unhealthy competition with JCMT, CFHT and Gemini for new resources. The new facilities would increase tensions. How HIA will handle these conflicts of interest is not clear. In the following, I raise some issues and I propose a solution.
HIA/NRC is also asked by Government to become more open to the user community -- mainly the university astronomers, other government laboratories and industry. In particular, HIA will need to adopt clear policies on how to integrate the needs and the vision of the broader community. The HIA Advisory Committee can play this role, but its mandate needs to be drastically re-inforced.
How will the new resources, that we are dreaming about following the LRPP report, be managed? This has not been dealt with in the LRPP report; it was not its purpose, but it is an important issue for all of us. I am an optimist, and I imagine that HIA/NRC will get funding for a few of the major projects proposed in the LRPP report. My questions then are numerous, among them the following:
HIA facilities will face an increased number of conflicts of interest, competing for resources needed for its own objectives against resources for off-shore observatories which benefit the broader community. Most Canadian astronomers, fully involved in their university life of teaching and research, do not have much time to promote and defend their needs in the off-shore facilities and their support. If, in the near future, NRC obtains and transfers to HIA important new sums for funding new capabilities, the temptation (which is fully normal) for HIA Canada based labs to get fat will be very hard to resist, especially if the decision and managing authority reside within its walls. HIA will need help to resolve these difficult issues and to make the best choices.
I do believe that we need to explore together, HIA/NRC, NSERC and CASCA, a new model for managing the important facilities of HIA, and the current and new resources that may come following the implementation of the LRPP report recommendations. A higher ``neutral'' overseeing authority which would manage the NRC/NSERC national and international efforts in astronomy for ensuring the best science and the widest benefits of these challenging projects might be needed. The model of AURA Inc., the managing organization of STScI (HST/NGST), NOAO (KPNO, CTIO, NSO) and Gemini, is a possible model of a managment structure for Canada. AURA Inc. is under contract with NASA and NSF, and these contracts are recompeted at regular intervals of time.
I strongly believe that we can build, from our past success and through a successful parnership, a powerful network of capabilities for Canadian astronomy in the 21st century.
|
FUSE
Strength of Astronomy
Tables of Contents
|
Cassiopeia -- 1999-DS |