Aubrey Garman
Doctor Jennings
Campus Woods – Ecology & Place
10 October 2022
The Parasitic Relationship Between the Woods and Wright State
Wright State University (WSU) is filled with diversity and unique relationships, and I’m not talking about the people found occupying the space. Instead, there’s a world of foliage and fauna that roam the outskirts of the college campus. From oak trees to hundreds of species of birds that come and go, there are more unique species than there are students and faculty members. Due to this, the woods have withstood the intense pressure put upon it from construction and human impact. Going back to 1964 when Wright State University begun up until the twenty-first century, Wright State has used and as some would say, abused, the animals and foliage found within. Therefore the woods have impacted the development of Wright State throughout its time being expanded.
During the first twenty years of Wright State’s campus there was talk of what to do with the surrounding area. Obviously, the school felt the need to expand into the surrounding field. Fields weren’t the only things surrounding the school, in fact, as it can be viewed “from aerial photographs it is clear that… the margins of the woods in 1964 are very close to those today” (Runkle). It appears as though preservation of the woods were a part of the plans since day one. In fact, in that same year, letters from members of the school (Emil Kmetec, Jerry Hubschman, and Dean Moulton) were sent in regard to the protection of the woods. They asked for portions of the woods to be set aside for educational purposes. This came to fruition as attempts to educate about the surrounding woods were set in place. Within the Wright State’s newspaper, The Guardian, in 1970, there was a page discussing an “Environmental Teach-In Planned for April 22”. In the article it was explained how the preservation of nature is essential to ensuring a better life for the students and future of the nation. Then, in 1971, trails were established so students could walk throughout the woods and use them for educational purposes. Later in the 1970s, a letter was sent from Tim Wood (Biological Sciences Professor Emeritus) to the Fairborn Zoning commission talking about the importance of the Preserve “and urging that commercial development not be made adjacent to it” (Runkle). Runkle, an important figure within Wright State and to the woods, similar to that of Tim Wood, has worked for decades to better the woods, despite Wright State’s involvement and construction. His work can be found within the next fifteen or so years, in which he attempts to improve the woods.
While the first twenty years were effective in expansion within the Wright State Dayton campus, so were the next fifteen. During this time; however, even more measures were taken to bring about more research for biology and ecology students. From the bird blind being built in 1992 for teaching to a small pool being “built by power lines near (the) Nutter Center for salamander research by graduate student Shauna Weyrauch” (Runkle) in 1995. The same student even held an informal poll in which fourteen (out of fourteen) students admitted that the biology preserve is valuable to the education of students. Thirteen said that it would be essential for recruiting students, and lastly nine felt that they personally used the woods for their education. The increase in educational services of the woods have helped protect it from further destruction conducted by Wright State. Even within 1999, the woods trails were upgraded “for leisure and recreation” (Jennings), making it more valuable for students and staff members. Wright State was expanding in more ways than one, and by surveying their biology students it could’ve been easy to see that developing into the woods would be detrimental to the things living in it. Along with that, they would’ve seen that human involvement can be positive and respectable.
Through the past twenty or so years, there were up and downs with regards to human involvement with the woods. Whether they were positive or negative uses of the woods, Wright State University has found ways to further interact with the ‘wilderness’. From art students to the ROTC, the woods have been utilized and protected. Specifically, on Sept. 3, an article was written regarding how a student used materials found from the woods for a sculpture, indicating how the woods have increased in value to students of any major. Despite all of this, in 2004, “The Pavilion, a basketball support facility, built on the site of what had once been an old field originally in the Biology Preserve” (Jennings). The construction bled into the old growth section of the forest; trees being cut down in the process in defiance of the objections brought forth by the Biology Preserve Committee of the Department of Biological Sciences. Wright State has, for years, been going back and forth with the woods, deciding whether to destroy them or protect them.
An especially important interaction between the woods and the development of WSU is the salt barn. In pursuit of storage space for the salt barn, WSU cut “down potential bat nesting trees in 2014” (Norris et al.). In turn, this created the Bat Conservation Easement in January of 2017. This easement set aside fifteen acres of land deemed suitable for reconciliation after the attack on the endangered bat species found within the Wright State woods. While we are attempting to encourage a better relationship with the woods (via more classes involving the woods, the annual Runkle Woods Symposium, etc.), it’s still clear that Wright State wants to use the land for more “practical” things.
A symbiotic relationship can mean many things, some of which are mutualism, some are communalism, and some are parasitism. The relationship between Wright State and the woods in which it encapsulates boggle between parasitic and communalistic. All the way from the early 1960s to the 2020s, they have had a rocky relationship, straining from tearing down the forest to protecting it with the utmost respect. It’s hard to see where Wright State stands as it destroys habitats and then puts up bird blinds, so biology students have a chance to explore the ‘wilderness’. Despite all of this, people are working towards the development of Wright State, while respecting the space in which foliage and fauna live.
Work Cited
“Environmental Teach-In Planned for April 22.” The Guardian [Wright State University], 11 March 1970, p. 6. The Guardian, March 11, 1970 (wright.edu).
Jennings, Hope. “WSU WOODS history 97-10.” Pilot, WSU WOODS history 97-10 - Fall 2022 - Campus Woods: Ecology & Place (ENG-4110-01) (wright.edu), 10 October 2022.
Norris, Olivia et al. Endangered Bat Conservation in WSU Woods. 2020, Endangered Bat Conservation in WSU Woods (wright.edu). PowerPoint Presentation.
Runkle, James R. Email to Roger Gilpin. 4 March 1997.
“WSU Master Plan Revised by Board.” The Guardian [Wright State University], 19 November 1969 published, p. 1. The Guardian, November 19, 1969 (wright.edu).
Doctor Jennings
Campus Woods – Ecology & Place
10 October 2022
The Parasitic Relationship Between the Woods and Wright State
Wright State University (WSU) is filled with diversity and unique relationships, and I’m not talking about the people found occupying the space. Instead, there’s a world of foliage and fauna that roam the outskirts of the college campus. From oak trees to hundreds of species of birds that come and go, there are more unique species than there are students and faculty members. Due to this, the woods have withstood the intense pressure put upon it from construction and human impact. Going back to 1964 when Wright State University begun up until the twenty-first century, Wright State has used and as some would say, abused, the animals and foliage found within. Therefore the woods have impacted the development of Wright State throughout its time being expanded.
During the first twenty years of Wright State’s campus there was talk of what to do with the surrounding area. Obviously, the school felt the need to expand into the surrounding field. Fields weren’t the only things surrounding the school, in fact, as it can be viewed “from aerial photographs it is clear that… the margins of the woods in 1964 are very close to those today” (Runkle). It appears as though preservation of the woods were a part of the plans since day one. In fact, in that same year, letters from members of the school (Emil Kmetec, Jerry Hubschman, and Dean Moulton) were sent in regard to the protection of the woods. They asked for portions of the woods to be set aside for educational purposes. This came to fruition as attempts to educate about the surrounding woods were set in place. Within the Wright State’s newspaper, The Guardian, in 1970, there was a page discussing an “Environmental Teach-In Planned for April 22”. In the article it was explained how the preservation of nature is essential to ensuring a better life for the students and future of the nation. Then, in 1971, trails were established so students could walk throughout the woods and use them for educational purposes. Later in the 1970s, a letter was sent from Tim Wood (Biological Sciences Professor Emeritus) to the Fairborn Zoning commission talking about the importance of the Preserve “and urging that commercial development not be made adjacent to it” (Runkle). Runkle, an important figure within Wright State and to the woods, similar to that of Tim Wood, has worked for decades to better the woods, despite Wright State’s involvement and construction. His work can be found within the next fifteen or so years, in which he attempts to improve the woods.
While the first twenty years were effective in expansion within the Wright State Dayton campus, so were the next fifteen. During this time; however, even more measures were taken to bring about more research for biology and ecology students. From the bird blind being built in 1992 for teaching to a small pool being “built by power lines near (the) Nutter Center for salamander research by graduate student Shauna Weyrauch” (Runkle) in 1995. The same student even held an informal poll in which fourteen (out of fourteen) students admitted that the biology preserve is valuable to the education of students. Thirteen said that it would be essential for recruiting students, and lastly nine felt that they personally used the woods for their education. The increase in educational services of the woods have helped protect it from further destruction conducted by Wright State. Even within 1999, the woods trails were upgraded “for leisure and recreation” (Jennings), making it more valuable for students and staff members. Wright State was expanding in more ways than one, and by surveying their biology students it could’ve been easy to see that developing into the woods would be detrimental to the things living in it. Along with that, they would’ve seen that human involvement can be positive and respectable.
Through the past twenty or so years, there were up and downs with regards to human involvement with the woods. Whether they were positive or negative uses of the woods, Wright State University has found ways to further interact with the ‘wilderness’. From art students to the ROTC, the woods have been utilized and protected. Specifically, on Sept. 3, an article was written regarding how a student used materials found from the woods for a sculpture, indicating how the woods have increased in value to students of any major. Despite all of this, in 2004, “The Pavilion, a basketball support facility, built on the site of what had once been an old field originally in the Biology Preserve” (Jennings). The construction bled into the old growth section of the forest; trees being cut down in the process in defiance of the objections brought forth by the Biology Preserve Committee of the Department of Biological Sciences. Wright State has, for years, been going back and forth with the woods, deciding whether to destroy them or protect them.
An especially important interaction between the woods and the development of WSU is the salt barn. In pursuit of storage space for the salt barn, WSU cut “down potential bat nesting trees in 2014” (Norris et al.). In turn, this created the Bat Conservation Easement in January of 2017. This easement set aside fifteen acres of land deemed suitable for reconciliation after the attack on the endangered bat species found within the Wright State woods. While we are attempting to encourage a better relationship with the woods (via more classes involving the woods, the annual Runkle Woods Symposium, etc.), it’s still clear that Wright State wants to use the land for more “practical” things.
A symbiotic relationship can mean many things, some of which are mutualism, some are communalism, and some are parasitism. The relationship between Wright State and the woods in which it encapsulates boggle between parasitic and communalistic. All the way from the early 1960s to the 2020s, they have had a rocky relationship, straining from tearing down the forest to protecting it with the utmost respect. It’s hard to see where Wright State stands as it destroys habitats and then puts up bird blinds, so biology students have a chance to explore the ‘wilderness’. Despite all of this, people are working towards the development of Wright State, while respecting the space in which foliage and fauna live.
Work Cited
“Environmental Teach-In Planned for April 22.” The Guardian [Wright State University], 11 March 1970, p. 6. The Guardian, March 11, 1970 (wright.edu).
Jennings, Hope. “WSU WOODS history 97-10.” Pilot, WSU WOODS history 97-10 - Fall 2022 - Campus Woods: Ecology & Place (ENG-4110-01) (wright.edu), 10 October 2022.
Norris, Olivia et al. Endangered Bat Conservation in WSU Woods. 2020, Endangered Bat Conservation in WSU Woods (wright.edu). PowerPoint Presentation.
Runkle, James R. Email to Roger Gilpin. 4 March 1997.
“WSU Master Plan Revised by Board.” The Guardian [Wright State University], 19 November 1969 published, p. 1. The Guardian, November 19, 1969 (wright.edu).