- Email: [email protected]
Geochemists, organize!
0016.7037/YO/53.00
Gnxhchrmrm er Cinmochrmrca Acla Vol. 54. pp. 26-266 Copyright (c I990 Pergamon Pres pk. Pnnled in 1J.S A.
+ ..M
EDITORIAL
Geochemists, Organize! LARRY A. HASKIN Past President ISessential to nearly all aspects of geological science, and we geochemists are relatively numerous. If we include in our definition of geochemists those who concentrate on applying chemical principles and techniques to geoscientific problems, from core through atmosphere, and go beyond to the planets and stars and include cosmochemists and astrochemists, we are roughly comparable in number to geophysicists. There is a large and thriving American Geophysical Union (to which many geochemists belong) and a large and thriving Geological Society of America (to which many geochemists belong), but the largest organization of geochemists, The Geochemical Society, is rather small (about 1700 members). In addition to the GS, several other societies or divisions are devoted to one aspect or another of geochemistry. We geochemists simply have not organized ourselves into a coherent group comparable to the AGU or the GSA. Some of us do not bother to belong to any professional society, despite the potential importance of membership to our profession. Geochemistry is so broad and so important that, conceivably, instead of a large AGU, there could have been a large GS that held two national and several regional meetings a year. with geophysicists attending GS and GSA meetings. However, the geophysicists were aggressive, organized, and took the lead, and we geochemists did not. Consideration of our present needs and options are more germane than speculations on why we did not. It seems unlikely that we geochemists could now create a dominant society, nor is there an evident need to try. Nevertheless, we must do more than we are doing to ensure the future of geochemistry; it will not survive in good form automatically just because it is important. This requires better organization, and the basis for that is our common ground. An outsider might suggest that we have no common ground. Our work spreads us among almost all aspects of geoscience. Individually, we opt to present our work mainly at meetings where we can communicate with colleagues in geology and geophysics who share our own, immediate areas of interest. We seek the benefits of their insights and the clues and constraints from their studies. We regard it as informative and useful, but less essential, to communicate regularly with geochemists whose interests do not overlap strongly with our own. This makes sense to us; if it did not, we would behave differently. However, we are responsible for an important slice of geoscience and we should ensure its continuation. What is this vital common ground that we share, that could diminish if we are not mindful? The essential common ground we share, the part that only we can continuously protect, is the “chemistry” part of geochemistry, our mutual commitment to the notion that the perspective of chemical principles and the application of chemical procedures are crucial to a coherent understanding of geoscience. The other part of our common ground. the “gee” part. binds us only loosely: that is the part we share with geologists and geophysicists. Without a strong society devoted to it, geochemistry risks being co-opted by geology and geophysics, particularly as geology develops into a more quanfitative science. So what? Most of us received our training in geology departments, anyway. Why should we be so fussy as to insist on being called “geochemists” ? The answer is this: Without a strong senSe of identity among ourselves and a clear recognition of our common ground of chemistry and its importance, there could be a decrease in emphasis on chemical principles and modern chemical methods and, thus, a decrease in real understanding of geoscientific phenomena from the perspective of chemical systems. Surely we agree that the geochemists’ perspective is vital to the success of the geosciences as they strive to treat complex phenomena more quantitatively. Our failure to maintain a strong chemical perspective would diminish the breadth of the theoretical and observational tools the geosciences need to attack complex problems successfully. It would soften our sense of what constitutes an adequate demonstration of understanding a phenomenon and what does not. We must insist on calling ourselves geochemists, on having the importance ofour chemical underpinnings recognized explicitly. Otherwise, we risk having insufficient voice in guiding the future of the geosciences, and having insufficient training in chemistry for future geoscientists. We geochemists are unlikely to have sufficient impact on advancing and protecting our essential common ground ofchemistry merely as members of societies devoted primarily to other goals, even societies with explicit divisions of geochemistry. We can have that impact if we join together as members of a society whose main thrust is the advancement of geochemistry in the broadest sense. The Geochemical Society should be that society. So, what do YOUneed to do‘? If you are a geochemist, or work extensively enough in geochemistry to recognize its importance, but do not already belong to the Geochemical Society, please join. Then press the officers and councils for improved opportunities and services. If you already belong, please continue, and welcome into the society an increased number of geochemists and respect the consequent expansion of breadth of fields and society interests. Membership costs you money, of course, but not that much; it is a bargain for what you get, and an even greater bargain for what you should get from the society. GEOCHEMISTRY
265
766
Editorial
What do you get from membership in the GS? Right now, you get bargain rates for dues, which include a subscription to the standard-setting journal of our profession, Geochimicu et Cosmochimica Acta. You get member’s rates for registration at improved GSA meetings, and a strong voice in setting up the technical programs at those meetings (see my editorial in last month’s issue of Geochimica). You get monographs on major geochemical topics at a low price. You get a newsletter. and Goldschmidt Conferences. You are about to get improved handling of dues and subscription notices and other member inquiries; the society is setting up a small central office. What could you get from membership in the GS? You could get the above, plus more, if you support the organization. The GS could become an effective focus for all areas of geochemistry: experimental, observational, theoretical, and applied. You could get improved opportunity for participation in national meetings. You could get a more regular and more frequent newsletter, with information on meetings, abstract deadlines, and symposium and theme session topics. You could get improved opportunities for publishing. Perhaps most important, you can ensure the future importance of geochemistry to the geosciences. In short, you can get what geochemistry and geochemists need, and help define what those needs are. Our profession needs your support. If you don’t already belong, join the GS now. (Or at least get a friend to join. )
Gnxhchrmrm er Cinmochrmrca Acla Vol. 54. pp. 26-266 Copyright (c I990 Pergamon Pres pk. Pnnled in 1J.S A.
+ ..M
EDITORIAL
Geochemists, Organize! LARRY A. HASKIN Past President ISessential to nearly all aspects of geological science, and we geochemists are relatively numerous. If we include in our definition of geochemists those who concentrate on applying chemical principles and techniques to geoscientific problems, from core through atmosphere, and go beyond to the planets and stars and include cosmochemists and astrochemists, we are roughly comparable in number to geophysicists. There is a large and thriving American Geophysical Union (to which many geochemists belong) and a large and thriving Geological Society of America (to which many geochemists belong), but the largest organization of geochemists, The Geochemical Society, is rather small (about 1700 members). In addition to the GS, several other societies or divisions are devoted to one aspect or another of geochemistry. We geochemists simply have not organized ourselves into a coherent group comparable to the AGU or the GSA. Some of us do not bother to belong to any professional society, despite the potential importance of membership to our profession. Geochemistry is so broad and so important that, conceivably, instead of a large AGU, there could have been a large GS that held two national and several regional meetings a year. with geophysicists attending GS and GSA meetings. However, the geophysicists were aggressive, organized, and took the lead, and we geochemists did not. Consideration of our present needs and options are more germane than speculations on why we did not. It seems unlikely that we geochemists could now create a dominant society, nor is there an evident need to try. Nevertheless, we must do more than we are doing to ensure the future of geochemistry; it will not survive in good form automatically just because it is important. This requires better organization, and the basis for that is our common ground. An outsider might suggest that we have no common ground. Our work spreads us among almost all aspects of geoscience. Individually, we opt to present our work mainly at meetings where we can communicate with colleagues in geology and geophysics who share our own, immediate areas of interest. We seek the benefits of their insights and the clues and constraints from their studies. We regard it as informative and useful, but less essential, to communicate regularly with geochemists whose interests do not overlap strongly with our own. This makes sense to us; if it did not, we would behave differently. However, we are responsible for an important slice of geoscience and we should ensure its continuation. What is this vital common ground that we share, that could diminish if we are not mindful? The essential common ground we share, the part that only we can continuously protect, is the “chemistry” part of geochemistry, our mutual commitment to the notion that the perspective of chemical principles and the application of chemical procedures are crucial to a coherent understanding of geoscience. The other part of our common ground. the “gee” part. binds us only loosely: that is the part we share with geologists and geophysicists. Without a strong society devoted to it, geochemistry risks being co-opted by geology and geophysics, particularly as geology develops into a more quanfitative science. So what? Most of us received our training in geology departments, anyway. Why should we be so fussy as to insist on being called “geochemists” ? The answer is this: Without a strong senSe of identity among ourselves and a clear recognition of our common ground of chemistry and its importance, there could be a decrease in emphasis on chemical principles and modern chemical methods and, thus, a decrease in real understanding of geoscientific phenomena from the perspective of chemical systems. Surely we agree that the geochemists’ perspective is vital to the success of the geosciences as they strive to treat complex phenomena more quantitatively. Our failure to maintain a strong chemical perspective would diminish the breadth of the theoretical and observational tools the geosciences need to attack complex problems successfully. It would soften our sense of what constitutes an adequate demonstration of understanding a phenomenon and what does not. We must insist on calling ourselves geochemists, on having the importance ofour chemical underpinnings recognized explicitly. Otherwise, we risk having insufficient voice in guiding the future of the geosciences, and having insufficient training in chemistry for future geoscientists. We geochemists are unlikely to have sufficient impact on advancing and protecting our essential common ground ofchemistry merely as members of societies devoted primarily to other goals, even societies with explicit divisions of geochemistry. We can have that impact if we join together as members of a society whose main thrust is the advancement of geochemistry in the broadest sense. The Geochemical Society should be that society. So, what do YOUneed to do‘? If you are a geochemist, or work extensively enough in geochemistry to recognize its importance, but do not already belong to the Geochemical Society, please join. Then press the officers and councils for improved opportunities and services. If you already belong, please continue, and welcome into the society an increased number of geochemists and respect the consequent expansion of breadth of fields and society interests. Membership costs you money, of course, but not that much; it is a bargain for what you get, and an even greater bargain for what you should get from the society. GEOCHEMISTRY
265
766
Editorial
What do you get from membership in the GS? Right now, you get bargain rates for dues, which include a subscription to the standard-setting journal of our profession, Geochimicu et Cosmochimica Acta. You get member’s rates for registration at improved GSA meetings, and a strong voice in setting up the technical programs at those meetings (see my editorial in last month’s issue of Geochimica). You get monographs on major geochemical topics at a low price. You get a newsletter. and Goldschmidt Conferences. You are about to get improved handling of dues and subscription notices and other member inquiries; the society is setting up a small central office. What could you get from membership in the GS? You could get the above, plus more, if you support the organization. The GS could become an effective focus for all areas of geochemistry: experimental, observational, theoretical, and applied. You could get improved opportunity for participation in national meetings. You could get a more regular and more frequent newsletter, with information on meetings, abstract deadlines, and symposium and theme session topics. You could get improved opportunities for publishing. Perhaps most important, you can ensure the future importance of geochemistry to the geosciences. In short, you can get what geochemistry and geochemists need, and help define what those needs are. Our profession needs your support. If you don’t already belong, join the GS now. (Or at least get a friend to join. )