Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
1 hour ago, ozark trout fisher said:

Eh,  I would say criticizing their data quality based on interns/grad assistants doing the collection  (how do you think large-scale research gets done?) or worse, one misidentified fish, seems relatively flimsy. Yes, mistakes get made, but the vast majority out there (even "young folks", which for some unknown reason apparently matters) know danged well what  they are doing. I respect the opinions of experienced anglers, but I by nature trust scientifically collected data a decent amount more.  One mistake does not equate to a bad dataset. It means that human beings did the sampling.

To use your example, catching mostly smallouth from a stretch doesn't mean they predominate. Maybe you just target good smallmouth habitat, and skip slower water. Those are the kind of biases you create when you base too many conclusions off what you catch, that probaby would not be reflected in normal data collecting techniques (imperfect as they obviously are )

The quality of the data collected is just as important as the interpretation of the data. I've seen so much faulty data collection in my business that I barely trust any data unless I collect it myself. There are rookies in every profession. 

"Honor is a man's gift to himself" Rob Roy McGregor

Posted
25 minutes ago, snagged in outlet 3 said:

If Phil shuts this down what am I going to do while I'm eating triscuits and not working at work?  Have some sympathy on me please.

Vienna sausage and Triscuits are a match made in heaven.

  • Root Admin
Posted

You guys shouldn't take all this so personal...  I don't like the mean spirited dialog I'm reading.  At all.

 

Lilleys Landing logo 150.jpg

Posted
10 minutes ago, Mitch f said:

The quality of the data collected is just as important as the interpretation of the data. I've seen so much faulty data collection in my business that I barely trust any data unless I collect it myself. There are rookies in every profession. 

Agreed, to some extent. But I'm not entirely sure what you're suggesting in place of current data collection techniques. If you want an experienced fisheries biologist doing all of the sampling to consider the data worthwhile, then you're okay with every round of sampling taking just this side of a decade.

And without hard data, you have no place to start in terms of management.

Posted
24 minutes ago, ozark trout fisher said:

Agreed, to some extent. But I'm not entirely sure what you're suggesting in place of current data collection techniques. If you want an experienced fisheries biologist doing all of the sampling to consider the data worthwhile, then you're okay with every round of sampling taking just this side of a decade.

And without hard data, you have no place to start in terms of management.

Many times the difference between a good day of fishing and a bad day of fishing is knowing where the fish are. All the data collectors have to do is miss one big rootwad in a spot and skew the data for that entire section of river. Are the people collecting the data committed enough to make sure things are done right? Do they have an experienced field agent with them? Is it a hot day and are they getting fatigued too easily? 

So, to answer your last question, yes, I would rather have an experienced field agent collecting the data...if it takes a decade then there is a serious problem. 

"Honor is a man's gift to himself" Rob Roy McGregor

Posted
58 minutes ago, fishinwrench said:

  Maybe they'll get around to my area eventually and get some scratches on their gear.  

I guess we can add "never been to an MDC surplus auction" to the mountain of evidence you haven't the slightest idea what it is you're talking about. 

Posted
30 minutes ago, Quillback said:

Vienna sausage and Triscuits are a match made in heaven.

Volpi salami and crisp garlic bagel chips!

"Honor is a man's gift to himself" Rob Roy McGregor

Posted
3 hours ago, top_dollar said:

Doesnt change the fact that what he said never actually happened.... 

I'm really wondering how you know this? Were you there?

"Honor is a man's gift to himself" Rob Roy McGregor

Posted
19 minutes ago, Mitch f said:

It sounds like you're content with marginal data? I'm not. 

Nope.

Science (especially of this variety) gets done on the backs of by and large younger folks who, generally, know exactly what the heck they're doing and are willing to work in the kind of adverse conditions that most wouldn't and get essentially none of the credit. I have never been affiliated with the MDC and I'm not in fisheries , but I am nonetheless extremely familiar with this sort of work. Its a good life, but it ain't easy or cushy, and most take a great deal of pride in what they do and the quality of their work. 

And I am I think understandably touchy when people call the data that is collected poor unless that have some solid evidence that this is the case. Many of those folks out there you are calling out are people I know, and trust.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.