SASAqS medals

Recipients

(Incomplete list)

Name Type Date
Tony RibbinkSilver1985
Brian AllansonGold-
Mark ChutterGold1990
Marjorie ScottGold1993
Graham NobleGold-
Jackie KingSilver1996
Arthur HarrisonGold1996
Paul SkeltonSilver1997
Kader AsmalGold1999
Charles BreenGold1999
Tally PalmerSilver1999
Bryan DaviesGold2003
Steve MitchellSilver2003
Bill RowlstonSilver2003
Jay O'KeeffeGold2004
Neels KleynhansSilver2004
Mary-Jean GabrielBronze2004
Annelise GerberBronze2004
Steve MitchellGold2009
Digby CyrusGold2011
Bruce EllenderBronze2012
Ryan WassermanBronze2013
Jenny DayGold2013
Pete AshtonGold2014
Alan WhitfieldGold2015
Janine AdamsSilver2015
O. Nelson OdumeBronze2015
Jackie KingGold2016
Tally PalmerGold2016
Johan van VurenGold2016
Tatenda DaluBronze2016
Rob HartGold2017

Medal award criteria

SASAqS awards medals in Gold, Silver and Bronze. Eligibility is set out as follows in the SASAqS Constitution.

6. AWARDS
(a) The Society shall award Gold and Silver Medals on appropriate occasions.
(b) A Gold medal shall be awarded on rare occasions in recognition of an exceptionally high standard of research in the aquatic sciences, or an exceptionally valuable contribution to the management, conservation or development of aquatic ecosystems or resources, over an extended period.
(c) A Silver medal shall be awarded irregularly in recognition of the exceptionally high standard of a specific piece of research in the aquatic sciences or of the exceptionally high standard of a particular contribution to the management, conservation or development of aquatic ecosystems or resources.
(d) A Bronze medal shall be awarded irregularly in recognition of the exceptionally high standard of a specific piece of work by a junior scientist or manager. This work shall normally be in the form of a dissertation.

The Bronze medal should be for the best student thesis in a year motivated by the supervisor, as judged by the medals committee (in the light of the examiners' reports and review by the medals committee).

The Standing Committee on Awards met in 1999 and clarified some of the uncertainties related to wording from the constitution
Not all awardees need be SASAqS members. This would be open to the Awards Committee's discretion but should be guided by the fact that the awardee should have contributed to Southern African Ecosystems and/or have had some involvement with the Society. The award for a major work need not have been peer reviewed in an international journal as the "work" is not always of a research nature. There was no period of exclusion before a piece of work that had been motivated for an award, but which had been turned down, could be resubmitted for an award. The Awards Committee does not have the power to either upgrade or downgrade a nomination in terms of the medal to be awarded. This would have to be referred back to the proposer with a recommendation to resubmit in the appropriate category. Generally it was agreed that the Awards Committee should be allowed to act in the spirit of the Society on the strengths and merits of each motivation. The secret ballot process for voting on nominations by awards committee members is as follows. Members of the committee will receive nominations from the Awards Committee Secretary with a form to simply mark acceptance or rejection of the proposed medal. The member places the completed form in an unmarked envelope, puts this into a second envelope and posts it to the Secretary who collates all unmarked envelopes and sends them to the Awards Committee Chairman.