Approved and adopted by the SRM Board of Directors – May 4, 2020
Society for Range Management
PurposeAs a condition of continued membership in the Society for Range Management (SRM or Society), each individual or entity joining the Society agrees to abide by the SRM Code of Ethics and Standards for Professional Conduct. SRM seeks to maintain the highest level of professional integrity among its members to enhance its reputation as a professional society advocating objective, science-based rangeland management.
A violation of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Professional Conduct by any member of SRM reflects unfavorably on the Society and the profession it represents. Such violations are, therefore, a serious matter which must be addressed to ensure equitable treatment of both the individual and the membership at large. A guiding principle is that all deliberations will retain the maximum level of confidentiality in order not to inadvertently tarnish the reputation of any member of SRM.
Ethics Review CommitteeAn Ethics Review Committee will be appointed within 30 days after a formal complaint is received in writing. After receiving the complaint, the board will be appointed by the President. The committee will consist of a Chair and three members as a minimum. The suggested structure of the committee should consist of at least two past officers or Board of Directors members and two individuals that closely represent the disciplinary nature of the complaint.
Candidates for service on the Ethics Review Committee will be selected based on significant and continuous service and leadership in SRM as elected officers and other leadership positions, and other individual members that have demonstrated personal integrity and adherence to professional standards.
Procedure for Making and Addressing ComplaintsAny member or non-member of the Society may file a complaint against a member of SRM who they reasonably and in good faith believe has committed a violation of the Code of Ethics or Standards of Professional Conduct.
The complainant shall be required to file a written complaint with the Society’s Executive Vice President (EVP). Upon confirming that the complaint is complete, the EVP shall forward the complaint and any supporting documents to the Chair of the SRM Ethics Review Committee (ERC). The ERC Chair will not divulge the names of the complainant or any substantiating witnesses.
This written complaint should contain the following:
The name of the SRM member against whom the complaint is made (the respondent).
A complete description of the nature of the complaint, including dates, locations, circumstances, and other pertinent information.
The names and contact information of any witnesses or individuals with first-hand knowledge, preferably included as co-complainants.
A clear description of how the respondent has violated a specific provision of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct.
Upon receiving the complaint, the Chair will make it available to the ERC. If any member of the ERC has a pre-existing personal or professional relationship with either party or is previously aware of the alleged violation, he or she shall be recused from participation in the matter.
The ERC will then examine the complaint and any supporting documentation to determine whether the submission and supporting evidence warrant further action. Allegations of illegal activities or issues outside the SRM Code of Ethics will not be considered by the ERC and instead referred to employers or legal authorities as appropriate.
If after initial review a majority of the ERC determines that the complaint is without merit or outside the scope of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, it will inform the complainant, close the matter, and destroy all records of the complaint.
If the ERC Determines Further Review Is WarrantedNotification:
The ERC will contact the respondent and inform them of the nature of the charges, but not the identity of the complainant. If the respondent admits the violation, the ERC will determine appropriate sanctions such as censure, suspension, or loss of membership. If the respondent denies the complaint, the ERC will proceed with an investigation.
Response:
The ERC will forward all complaint materials to the respondent, who may submit a written response and supporting evidence within thirty (30) days. Copies of this information should also be supplied to the complainant. The respondent may request a hearing before the ERC either in person, by telephone, or video conference whereby all participants may be heard simultaneously. Such hearing shall be scheduled by the Society’s Executive Vice President on a date and time mutually agreeable by all parties and members of the ERC.
Hearing and Review:
After the hearing, the ERC will consider the documentation, statements, testimony, and submissions supplied by both the complainant and the respondent and formulate a written finding. The ERC may ask for additional information from either party if needed.
No Violation Found:
If the ERC finds no violation of the Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct, the complaint will be dismissed and the file closed, with both parties being notified of the finding in writing.
Violation Found:
If the ERC finds that a violation has occurred, it shall prepare its written findings and a recommendation for sanctions (if any) for review and consideration by the Society’s Board of Directors. Recommendations must be approved by a majority of participating ERC members.
Board Decision:
The Board shall meet (in person, by telephone, or video conference) to confer and render a final decision as to the sanction(s) to be imposed, if any. Any sanction(s) must be approved by a majority of the Society’s Board of Directors. The Board’s decision will be issued within thirty (30) days of receiving the ERC’s findings and recommendations. A copy of the ERC’s findings and the Board’s final decision will be provided to both the complainant and the respondent.