The University of Idaho is mulling over the idea of becoming a dry campus in the hopes of creating a safer environment.

The fact that the university is trying to improve their environment is a sign of progress, but will enforcing a dry campus really achieve that goal?

The National College Health Association Assessment found that since 2005, the amount of students at UI who decide not to drink has escalated from 15 percent to 21 percent.

The approach has changed as well since then and this may be a reason for the recent decline of alcohol consumption at the university.

According to an article published in the Spokesman-Review on March 1, UI psychologist Sharon Fritz said “Twenty years ago … we would tell them ‘drinking is not a good thing, don’t do it.’ Our message shifted to say ‘it’s illegal if you’re underage, your lowest risk is not to do it but if you are going to do it, do it in a way that is not risky for you and everybody else around you.”

WSU has been a dry campus since 1997, but that has not changed its reputation of being a party school.

A February 1998 column in the Moscow-Pullman Daily News covered the implementation of WSU’s dry campus policy and analyzed the results:

“The purpose of having a dry campus is to protect students…simply moving the locations of the parties is not enough…Students leave college with some wicked partying memories, but do they really leave knowing how to be adults?”

The population of the Palouse hit on an important factor – that banning liquor on campus will not necessarily change the drinking habits of students on campus.

“It really doesn’t matter, but the school should recognize that underage people and people of age, are going to get alcohol from other sources, so why not sell it and try to make a buck or two?” said sophomore Zachary Campbell, Hall President of Northside.

A positive aspect could be a stronger public image of the university and that “parents would feel that their child would be safer,” said Campbell.

In short, UI’s intention to create a safer campus environment is a goal worth striving for, but whether a dry campus will reach that goal is unlikely and the funding and work that would go into implementing such a policy would not be worth it.

Yet this is still merely an idea and as Fritz assures “We’re merely exploring this possibility – I have heard no conversation that this is the direction we’re going at all.”

And as the Moscow-Pullman Daily News column suggests, “Students, take responsibility for your behavior… in short, grow up.”

It is ultimately our responsibility to both create a safe campus environment and create a good reputation for our school. No policy or its implementation can do that job for us.