interesting article- politicians worst fear coming to pass

Glad you came down to earth coach I was reading this thread and almost cringing at some of the retorts and statements made (not anyone in particular). The reality is, I don't envy our WDFW biologists in any way shape or form. The folks with the data are often the folks who have to submit their ideas, only to have to compromise them time after time due to special interest.

Also, this whole questions about the models our scientists use is less than easy to answer as there is NO reliable way to know exactly what the oceanic conditions will do to the fish. The only useful tool we have at this point is statistical extrapolation. While I'm not a fisheries guy, I've had to deal with software that does all sorts of statistical calculations for what is know as cosine similarity. I'm fairly certain that a lot of the models we have use this techinque to determine convergence to a similar past event based on comparison via cosine similiarity, plus some additional statistical "juice".

In my field of software engineering, sufficiently difficult problems are tested for results by trying to simplfy the problem. In most cases you identify the critical variables, and then run samples with various data input. The hope is that the input you give it works out in the end to giving the expected result. Sometimes this works, other times it doesn't. This kind of testing is called black box testing, and it is the only meaningful way to check your suppositions for a sufficiently complex system that you do not have visibility in to.

In the case of computer science, we can run millions of iterations in a matter of days. In the case of fisheries, they can only collect the data based on yearly cycles. Past data is *critically* important, and in the whole scheme of things (this is a guess), we problably only have reliable data with enough information about ocean conditions based on the last 100 years. As time progresses, and with the assumption that no new variables are entered, we will have our statistical models converge more closely with real life, but the certainty of things will *NEVER* approach 100%.

So where does this rant leave us? No where really, I'm just hoping that people can realize that for the most part the fisheries biologist are the folks fighting hardest for the fish and that science is NOT always black or white. If we can help convince legislature that our particular opinions are more valuable than others, then we can begin to change the rules that the biologists and the management runs under then we can try to make so the gray area in our science will skew more towards honest conservations and away from additional consumption.

-- Cheers
-- James

GT,

You were in a battle? I'm sorry to hear; hope you weren't injured.

Like Edward Abbey claimed, "I have an old war injury. I broke my leg skiing in Vail during the Vietnam War." I always liked that one.

t.i.c.,

Salmo g.

I'm aways of this earth. Blunt. I hear what you're saying though. In Salmo's case, we're big boys and always work things out. He insults my intelligence periodically or my style, and I give it back to him. Then we come to common ground, I've a big enough man to apogize and mean it, and go back to caring about the fish. If you read his comments on my lack of mental ability, I believe in your definiton he was as far above the earth or uppity as anyone in any recent post. But I have settled into the fact that my delivery which (will not change) is abrasive and opens myself up for stereoytyping and attacks on my person without knowing me or what I stand for. I can handle that also, and will always be able to. Every Coach need a Salmo and every Salmo needs a Coach in their life. And lastly James, how much did you learn about the issue as Salmo and me got either other fired up? I'm not as simple as many would like to believe. That is part of this also.

(Salmo, I didn't want you to puke up your lunch, I really didn't. I'll cover it when we go to Kid Valley. Hope you didn't stain anything. Coach)

And don't forget James that many special interest group both for and against wild fish have biologists on staff to either make clear, or muddy the truth we seek. No James, not all biologists are are out there doing what is best for the fish. Some are paid henchman who could give a damn if our children get to see the return of salmon and steelhead. But Salmo is one of the good guys, no doubt. Coach

More accurately I should say the state biologists are like that. I've met several, and to a person, they all have the most idealistic view of how fisheries should be.... But point taken

There used to be a cartoon that circulated around the agencies something like "How The Fisheries Biologist is pictured" consisting of a dozen little drawings with subcaptions like "By the staff" (picture of a Nazi commandant), "By the Public" (picture of a geek with thick glasses), "By his peers" (Picture of a clown), ect. I'd like to find a good copy of that classic to make a scan.

The Yakima Basin Aquatic Science Conference this year was keynoted by Robert Lackey, EPA, Corvallis. I copied his presentation here His gloomy prediction was wild salmon would be reduced to remnant runs in CA, WA, OR, ID, and southern BC by 2100.

Paul,

I would be interested in seeing his presentation, but when I clicked the link, I only get the first and second (I think) slides, plus his bio and an outline. Any chance of getting the whole presentation?

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Hmmm- I don't know. The way I converted his power point uses frames. You should see a frame that contains navigation buttons across the top, and a frame with TOC on the left. It's too bad Dr. Lackey didn't put more speaker's notes into his presentation, because they would appear in a frame on bottom. Is it possible that your browser can't use frames? If this is a problem for a lot of people, maybe I should find the original ppt file and make a link to it.

Try this: http://ykfp.org/par06/ppt/day1/sessiona/LACKEY.PPT

5 minutes to download, but works great. Thanks! Very depressing and alarmingly accurate in my estimation.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.