UC Profs Better Remember the Sunscreen
One can only imagine the researchers’ glee when the news arrived. I envision them falling atop each other in a pile, laughing and hugging and belting out silly songs. “We got the grant! We got the grant! They fell for it!”
Indeed, if University of California profs keep bottles of hooch hidden away for special occasions, they probably brought them out recently when it was announced that they could begin spending state and federal grants totaling $800,000.
Spend them on what, you ask?
A cure for some disease? An exploration of a vexing social problem? Ways to improve the lives of insects?
Not quite.
As if the answer to a researcher’s prayer, the UC-led team is taking the next two years to study California beaches. You didn’t think “study” and “beaches” could be used in the same sentence, did you?
The head of the team is an economics professor at Berkeley. He must be an incredibly sharp cookie. Is this really a good use of his time?
Is this how Einstein got started?
There’s only one question such a two-year study of California beaches could possibly answer: Is this the cushiest grant ever awarded or what?
“The bottom line,” a USC professor says, “is that there is an economic benefit associated with the use and enjoyment of our beaches.”
Sir, with all due respect, the bottom line is that this is an egregious waste of money.
I say that from a scientist’s perspective. I live less than a mile from Huntington State Beach and, believe me, I’ve done plenty of research down there--almost all of it from behind dark glasses.
Here are some of my major findings: The sand gets hot in the summer, bikinis never go out of style, a cold soda tastes good on a sunny day, parking is too expensive.
I’m willing to turn over all of this information to the research team, asking nothing in return.
I sound like kind of a wet blanket, don’t I?
Hey, wet blankets! Maybe that could be part of the research.
What Does $800,000 Buy?
Had I learned about the beach project during working hours Friday, I’d have made a quick phone survey and asked local cities or school districts what they could do with $800,000.
It’s probably best I didn’t. After hearing me lay out the details, any city manager or school superintendent likely would have let out a prolonged wail or, quite possibly, a stream of profanities.
The beach project kicked off a few months ago, but for some reason, news of it has been slow to reach these parts. Maybe they’re keeping the thing under wraps, or maybe they’re just too darned embarrassed.
In this, the all-important first year of the project, the team will study beaches in Orange and Los Angeles counties. Next year, the team will pack up its notebooks and suntan lotion and trudge north to Ventura, Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo counties.
The team says its findings will give the most comprehensive look ever at what beaches mean to the California economy and way of life. It may well be a model for other studies, the team says.
Okey-dokey. Sort of in the way the Mercury program paved the way for man eventually landing on the moon. Sure. Right. Gotcha.
Am I just a jealous, bitter old goat?
Well, sure. But in a world of important unanswered questions, does a two-year beach study really tackle any of them?
Just last week NASA announced it was giving $14 million to UC Irvine molecular biologist Alexander McPherson to build devices for growing protein crystals at the International Space Station. A long overdue project, but two other things strike me.
First, McPherson says his work has various implications for humans, including helpful research for such things as HIV inhibitors and cancer drugs.
Second, what a sucker McPherson must be.
His UC counterparts are getting $800,000 to spend two years on the beach.
McPherson is getting $14 million and, the way I understand it, not a penny of it is budgeted for wienie roasts.
*
Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Readers may reach Parsons by calling (714) 966-7821 or by e-mail to dana.parsons@latimes.com
