Everyone would be happier if the Seahawks won today. Clo signing out -
I'm fine with "60 year old crusty guys", that describes half the people in my industry.So much for complimenting your logic. This post makes no sense. So you don't like 60 year old crusty guys, fine. Don't want to support a cause because someone speaks out against you...illogical.
I'm fine with "60 year old crusty guys", that describes half the people in my industry.
I wasn't referring to myself in that post. I'm not a dozen+ people. When you Google occupy Skagit this site comes up, along with all the posts by WW. Wouldn't take long to find this thread.
Careful, 100,000,000+ 'deadweights' are what determines who's president. Never underestimate #s. Just sayin'Christ. This thread
I would argue that anyone who decides NOT to attend Occupy Skagit based on this thread isn't all that committed to the cause in the first place. Who wants dead weight around when you can have dedicated individuals?
Whatever needs to be decided in regards to Occupy Skagit has already been decided. The contents of this thread will have absolutely no impact on whether there is another C&R season on the Skagit or not.Careful, 100,000,000+ 'deadweights' are what determines who's president. Never underestimate #s. Just sayin'
Then why this push to get local businesses out? Why get commissioners out? Why get board members out?Whatever needs to be decided in regards to Occupy Skagit has already been decided. The contents of this thread will have absolutely no impact on whether there is another C&R season on the Skagit or not.
Amazing the logic displayed in this thread.
Great article and interesting work! Thanks to the OP for sharing. Alsoa, anything that you can add based upon your time there?
Hi Freestone,.... Cabezon...what do you think about this from a genetic point of view? Has it gone on long enough to determine if it has improved the genetic and reproductive fitness of the fish? Does anyone one know if they have or plan to introduce out-of-basin strays?
Now you're just actively destroying the cause out of embarrassment for being in the wrong. Maturity isn't strong with this one either.
This would address one of the major problems with the lack of genetic diversity among hatchery populations, especially in populations that are at severe risk of extinction. Similar work was done with selective breeding of California condors; that work would be considered a success in producing a genetically-diverse population that has successfully been re-introduced into the wild. In both the condor and salmon cases, sustaining genetic diversity, especially in the face of declining population numbers, is a huge step toward the possibility of recovery. Directed matings avoid the bottleneck effect (see http://wallace.genetics.uga.edu/groups/evol3000/wiki/fb221/Bottlenecks_and_Founder_Effects.html) that can occur at small population sizes if reproduction is allowed to continue "randomly". [Of course, if one wants wild populations to eventually be self-sustaining, it helps if there is quality habitat and reduced human-driven mortality, but one issue at a time...]
I doubt that there have been enough generations to track the success of this strategy, especially in light of the natural fluctuations/variability that salmonids experience. I would assume that the issue of how to handle strays would be included in the permitting plan. I would think that the genetic diversity that strays would add to a basin's population would be encouraged.
Several of your questions appear to be on Dr. Garza's research agenda. You can read more about his research interests and the titles of his publications here: https://swfsc.noaa.gov/staff.aspx?id=709. His background is in population genetics, not fisheries per se. His publications have appeared in fisheries journals and several prestigious academic journals.