August 20, 2018, 04:02:15 PM
 
*
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
 
 
 
Total time logged in: 0 minutes.
 
   Home   Help Login Register  

     
 

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: It's time to stop tinkering and just ban crabbing for one year  (Read 31391 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
GA
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 174
Location: Southern NJ





Ignore
« Reply #140 on: October 13, 2014, 06:06:31 PM »

It appears the chart applies a linear regression to force a single trend over the time period. One could equally apply a polynomial regression, which would not be flat (or add a year or two or subtract a year or two to the data set). I presume this data represents something scientists derive as an average ocean temperature. Obviously, an average of such a large mass, even tiny changes are drastic in consequence. While ocean depth, water density, and stratification all play major roles in your global data, we are talking about the bay here, not 25,000 feet of ocean waters spread across the globe.
It is a linear regression (ordinary least squares), which makes my point visually. There is no evidence that tiny changes would have drastic consequences, if anything tiny changes are more likely to have no effect on such a large mass. The bay is directly connected to the ocean so it is relevant, bay temperatures change in correlation with ocean temperatures.

What I was referring to was the storms generated by the global warming, and the impact of those storms on the bays crab population. Those storms are driven by the global information you reached for. It is obvious, even to a layperson, that modern storms during 99-08 routinely covered 1/2 to 2/3 of the continental US. They are obviously much larger, and the larger ones were more frequent. But scientists cannot adequately explain or model the shift that began about 2008. The best reasoning at the moment is that the oceans absorbed more heat than the models predicted. If they did, it is not understood why. Also it is just since that time that scientists discovered there is more non-liquid water than in all the oceans combined, locked up in rocks below the mantel. But that is the beauty of science. It always self-corrects and advances, unlike a political view.
There is no evidence of storms being "generated" by global warming. What are you referring to? Tropical storms, hurricanes or land based thunderstorms? Whatever heat the oceans absorb they release via meteorological events like el nino in the pacific. The rest is wishful thinking for modelers who lack a computer science education. I have had discussions with climate scientists and they are largely computer illiterate so their modeling exercises are futile.
Logged

Jennifer
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 57
Location: Delmarva





Ignore
« Reply #141 on: October 13, 2014, 07:06:05 PM »

You seem to have a high enough level of understanding to accept that in averaging a large data set or a large volume of water, that it takes drastic changes to shift that average up or down slightly. So the reverse of that is what I said / meant. If the world's global ocean temperature average rose even just a mere tenth of a degree, that would require either a substantial volume of water to change temperature, or a smaller volume would have to change drastically. So if bay temps rose 2 degrees, then yes I trust the consequences on bay creatures would be drastic, but the global average would only shift by a tiny fraction, and maintain the flat line on your chart. From what I have seen of political debates, the data is cherry picked where if you shift the time line slightly (I suggested one or two years) you see a drastic difference that negates the position. The old saying, "liers figure, and figures lie." I don't know if that saying applies here, so I did not make an accusation. I have heard scientists with legitimate criticisms. But most of it is political rhetoric and BS (some of it is special interest generated). Again, the beauty of science  is it self-corrects, and advances when those criticisms are valid.

Storms are called different names because they behave differently over water and different land terrains (or just colloquial differences between hemispheres or climate zones). Where the Earth is closest to the sun (the equator), the oceans pick up heat. That heat is dissipated as you said via ocean currents (interacting with water density differentials) like the Atlantic Conveyor, or La Nina/ El Nino (did I get that right?? -lol!). But it is also dissipated atmospherically in the form of storms and air currents. Storms over water gain in strength, size, and intensity by picking up heat energy from water that is warmer. Storms are just Earths way of moving excess heat from the equator to the poles, even if those storms do not take a direct route north and south.
« Last Edit: October 13, 2014, 08:59:44 PM by Jennifer » Logged

Success can be caused by luck or by making mistakes. The more mistakes that ultimately lead to one's success, the less luck is a factor, and the better that success is handled.
Ron
Lifetime Member
Global Moderator
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 20148
Location: Somers Point, NJ



RonMeischker https://www.linkedin.com/profile/view?id=220842455&trk=nav_respon RMeischker
WWW
« Reply #142 on: October 13, 2014, 08:50:43 PM »

Jennifer is way above my pay grade.

 Grin
Logged

9th Annual Assault on Patcong Creek Crabbing Tournament & BBQ
America's Largest Crabbing Tournament
June 22-23, 2018
Somers Point, NJ

http://www.assaultonpatcongcreek.com

To Register:
http://assaultonpatcongcreek.com/the-crabbing-tournament/tournament-registration/

Check out the tournament's page on Facebook!
https://www.facebook.com/assaultonpatcongcreek
Jennifer
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 57
Location: Delmarva





Ignore
« Reply #143 on: October 13, 2014, 08:55:24 PM »

ok, Since Ron said so, I'll be more quiet. Embarassed I'm still hoping for his contribution -lol
« Last Edit: October 13, 2014, 09:11:40 PM by Jennifer » Logged

Success can be caused by luck or by making mistakes. The more mistakes that ultimately lead to one's success, the less luck is a factor, and the better that success is handled.
genecrabman
Member
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3893
Location: Outer Banks N.C.


OBX CRABS @ HALF-FAST SEAFOOD 252 202 6469




Ignore
« Reply #144 on: October 13, 2014, 09:31:29 PM »

Who should people trust..Guys that have earned a living working the Bay, or Guys with PH D's.....That never earned a living from getting blisters on their hands...

All the smart people talked Va. into Banning Crab Dredging and that was promised to save the crabs....Cut back on Female harvest and that will save the crabs......Cut back on hours and days of crabbing time and that will help save the crabs....
I see a Pattern...
People are getting rich from these studies........

And it's not working...

Remember the "Save The Bay" bumper stickers? They've been around for 40 years...Let's clean the Bay and you'll have plenty of crabs again...
Logged

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Redbone
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 116
Location: Pasadena




Ignore
« Reply #145 on: November 07, 2014, 07:45:19 AM »

Just five years ago I was catching just as many crabs as I did in the 80s. Then we had two tropical storms that dumped as much rainfall as Agnes and the following year Sandy hit. Last winter was the coldest in decades. Those events and the fact that millions of gallons of sewage are dumped each year have more to do the crab population than anything else. I wouldn't put much faith in DNR graphs.
Logged
Jennifer
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 57
Location: Delmarva





Ignore
« Reply #146 on: November 07, 2014, 03:22:28 PM »

The graph was not a DNR graph. Someone posted data, and I tried to see what information was below the surface. Using math principals in this way is how the oil and gas industry does what they call "Data Mining." It is math that the medical, pharmaceutical, and insurance industries operate on. It is the problem solving tools that Mr Jack Walsh used in taking GE from a $4B company to a $400B enterprise. It is the math that took Japan from a reputation of making junk to world class industries. It is often referred to as data driven decision making.

It is correct, as you alluded to, that complex systems are driven by multiple factors, and there are interactions between some of those factors. The math helps to facilitate which factors are statistically significant, rather than relying on "gut" feelings. But it can do much more. It can distill those interactions between variables, and quantifyibly correlate the significant factors with past outcomes to make meaningful predictions based on probabilities.

I have no experience with the crabbing industry or crab population efforts on the Chesapeake Bay. I have very little "gut" feelings about causes, or any ties to regulatory efforts, agendas, or decisions. I merely looked at only the data that another person provided here, which obviously should be realized that it is not enough data to get the whole picture or enough detail to make solution yielding conclusions. It should tell you nothing more than that an analysis will provide more information than listing the data.

From the perspective of problem solving, whatever efforts have been done in the past, I would concluded from this data alone, that rather than working to maximize the harvest, efforts would better serve the industry if the variation were reduced. Get the annual harvests more consistent first, and then it becomes more apparent what factors are contributing, and what efforts are more effective. Once harvests are more predictable, then efforts to improve the yield will be more productive.



Rely on the scientists to better define the problem and then collect real world data. Then use mathematics to determine if the data is meaningful to the outcome(s). As you repeat that process, the problem becomes so well defined, that the solution usually becomes so obvious that there is little bickering about what needs to be done. Efforts of trial and error based on biased perspectives with "gut feelings" will segregate parties of specific interests.

So if you believe sewage is a main factor, get some data, such as the amount going into the Bay and those (weather related cycles), or testing data to show what parts of the Bay are more effected.
Since the crabs are migratory and the bay is so large and open to ocean water exchanges, what time of year run off or sewage spikes may make the effect greater or smaller, not simply location.

It seems most people focus on the total annual harvest as the gross measurement of outcome. I would suggest you all discuss between yourselves what the objective really is. Is getting the crab population to grow the real objective, or is it really only about the harvest? Set a target, not for the harvest, but the population level believed to be optimal, and for the variance between harvests. Having an objective of harvest is short sighted and narrowly focused. Learning what provides for a larger population will ensure heritage of the Bay for posterity and the future of traditional livelihoods built on what the bay provides.





From what I could tell from just two weeks on this forum, there is mistrust and frustration between commercial crabbers, researchers, and regulatory bodies. I suspect it is because you have different, and even competing objectives. Often those objectives are believed to be apparent, and even obvious, so they are not even defined much less communicated to each other, and where they are defined and communicated, there is inadequate understanding in those communications.

I have heard that there is an effort for branding in which that issue divides commercial crabbers of various states. I would point out that there has not been enough Chesapeake crab supply to meet demand for over fifty years. State branding will only serve to highlight that under production, and will create confusion among consumers in pricing and quality issues, resulting in divided markets. I would suggest, for what my opinion is worth, you focus more effort on differentiating imported crab from domestic crab if your objective is to better serve consumers and maintain demand for Atlantic coast crabbers. Make Atlantic Coast Blue Crab your brand affiliation. Reduce the deception to your customers and bring more integrity to the industry by differentiating imported crab and Gulf Coast crab from Atlantic Coast crabs. Start building trust (cooperation) and tearing down the walls that have been built up by competition in an "under-served" market. State branding may very well lead to greater price instability where there is already great variability. I hope people think this one through.

Review the basics, like objectives of participants, and only after all objectives are stated, get agreement on a definition of the problem. Define stakeholders, like posterity, public interest, commercial interests, recreational interests, consumer interests, etc. Right now you have organizations that already exist with board members to represent restaurants, wholesalers, crabbers, etc. But where is the "voice of the customer" in those models? Who represents the consumer on those boards? It is all taken for granted. No one seems to recognize the assumptions or their importance. The foundations are flawed when the basics are poorly executed. Divisions among members amplify competing perspectives. Unity becomes difficult when the foundations are not built for cooperation.
« Last Edit: November 07, 2014, 03:57:34 PM by Jennifer » Logged

Success can be caused by luck or by making mistakes. The more mistakes that ultimately lead to one's success, the less luck is a factor, and the better that success is handled.
Redbone
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 116
Location: Pasadena




Ignore
« Reply #147 on: November 07, 2014, 04:14:42 PM »

It has nothing to do with "gut feelings " it's from experience. When you crab after a sewage spill pull your pots and all or most of your crabs are dead. So keep reading and looking at graphs
Logged
Redbone
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 116
Location: Pasadena




Ignore
« Reply #148 on: November 07, 2014, 04:21:09 PM »

The only thing we should ban for a year is Dan Rodricks and that fish wrap he writes for
Logged
Jennifer
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 57
Location: Delmarva





Ignore
« Reply #149 on: November 07, 2014, 05:23:57 PM »

Your experience is a valuable resource and source of information. Experience is useful and helpful in problem solving when used in appropriate ways. I am suggesting that if appropriate ways have been used, my short exposure has not shown me evidence of it.

Whether it be phrased as gut feelings or jumping to conclusions, if the problem were easy, it would be solved and there would be no problem. I am not suggesting or trying to convince you that spills are not a factor. I do believe that before one could / should correlate spills with outcomes, the foundational work needs to be solidified and perspectives need to be unified.

Try thinking of it this way. If there are a lot of crabs, then as you say, you might find that a spill results in many dead crabs in your pots. But say for instance, that a winter count is high, but some virus reduces that population before summer. Then the spill, while still just as important, will not solve the larger problem. I hope you understand that you may be right that there is a cause / effect relationship, but what is the real definition of the problem?

You may be correct, or someone else may believe it to be a disease / virus, and someone else may argue about weather, etc. But solutions cost money and affect livelihoods. I am merely pointing out there is an approach that reduces some of the costs and unnecessary efforts by identifying and focusing on the factors that have the highest significance, whatever they turn out to be. I do not know what the factors are, or what they are not. Data should determine that; and experience is an important part of knowing what data to collect and analyze. Using experience in this way is more productive and more cost efficient than using experience to jump to prospective solutions.

What I was arguing is if there is organization or structure to solve the problem, and do the fundamentals need to be refined. As I have stated, I have poor awareness of what organizations exist, what they have done, their scope and boundaries. I am only offering an opinion of what I see as someone who has a little knowledge and experience with solving complex problems that are systemic and obscured by variability.

I don't know the author or publication you cited or your reason(s) for derision.
Logged

Success can be caused by luck or by making mistakes. The more mistakes that ultimately lead to one's success, the less luck is a factor, and the better that success is handled.

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

Redbone
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 116
Location: Pasadena




Ignore
« Reply #150 on: November 08, 2014, 01:57:08 PM »

Dan Rodricks is the liberal goof who suggested that we should ban crabbing for a year  which got this discussion started and he writes for the Sun newspaper
Logged
Jennifer
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 57
Location: Delmarva





Ignore
« Reply #151 on: November 08, 2014, 03:02:28 PM »

Thank you, I did read it when I first posted to this thread. I can appreciate your honesty in your views. I assume that is the purpose of this forum.

As I have twice posted on this site, one of the things I suggest that would help people to solve the Crab problem is to reduce variations in the harvest. Banning crabbing for one year would do the opposite, by creating two spikes, one down and one up.

Such efforts are what is referred to as type I or type II errors, or without the jargon, over-control or under-control. i.e. making changes when you shouldn't or just giving up and not making adjustments when they are necessary. Both are a common human nature response to a complex system that displays non-normal behavior, but it is counter productive to attaining stability in either the harvest or the crab population.

Large fluctuations in the crab population, I assume have rippling effects on other wildlife inhabiting the same ecosystem. And if you consider that other wildlife have longer lifespans or longer offspring rearing than the crab's short 3 years, those other populations may not be able to react quickly enough to large spikes up or down in the crab's population.

So while you may come to the same conclusion for reasons of political preference, there is logical reasoning to also arrive at that same conclusion, with out emotion.

« Last Edit: November 08, 2014, 03:06:20 PM by Jennifer » Logged

Success can be caused by luck or by making mistakes. The more mistakes that ultimately lead to one's success, the less luck is a factor, and the better that success is handled.
saltysenior
Member
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 796
Location: stuart,fl.


ex-wye rat---who now C B C




Ignore
« Reply #152 on: November 09, 2014, 09:56:13 AM »

Thank you, I did read it when I first posted to this thread. I can appreciate your honesty in your views. I assume that is the purpose of this forum.

As I have twice posted on this site, one of the things I suggest that would help people to solve the Crab problem is to reduce variations in the harvest. Banning crabbing for one year would do the opposite, by creating two spikes, one down and one up.

Such efforts are what is referred to as type I or type II errors, or without the jargon, over-control or under-control. i.e. making changes when you shouldn't or just giving up and not making adjustments when they are necessary. Both are a common human nature response to a complex system that displays non-normal behavior, but it is counter productive to attaining stability in either the harvest or the crab population.

Large fluctuations in the crab population, I assume have rippling effects on other wildlife inhabiting the same ecosystem. And if you consider that other wildlife have longer lifespans or longer offspring rearing than the crab's short 3 years, those other populations may not be able to react quickly enough to large spikes up or down in the crab's population.

So while you may come to the same conclusion for reasons of political preference, there is logical reasoning to also arrive at that same conclusion, with out emotion.

      do you believe in cycles, caused only by Mother Nature ??
Logged
Jennifer
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 57
Location: Delmarva





Ignore
« Reply #153 on: November 09, 2014, 04:13:23 PM »

The short answer is absolutely, with out any doubt. Obviously that is observable and there is evidence. But your question is very important because there is more to it than the obvious. Things in nature will vary. And most things in nature vary to a pattern; not all, but the overwhelming majority of things form what is commonly called a normal distribution or the bell curve you may remember from grade school. Whether it is human head sizes, tree diameters, etc. we see this bell shaped curve reveal itself. We call that "normal variation" where only "chance causes" are present, and things vary normally. (mathematicians call it a Gaussian distribution)

But unusual events or influences can change those outcomes. We call these elements "assignable causes, or special causes." It is possible to distinguish between random variation and variation due to special causes, to make attempts at identifying root causes.

The harvest is not a natural event. People try to control it. We can harvest a lot, or as much as possible, or none at all. When all things are stable (not fixed or static, but "stable"), the crab population, will follow a natural pattern, and vary about some average; and that average can be expected to be some equilibrium or balance with natures interactions (predator population, shelter, disease, etc.)

So think of it this way. Storms are natural and reoccurring events. As long as they are typical in numbers, frequency, timing, and direction, they contribute to normal variation in the crab population. But say one year the storms come from a different direction, just when crab eggs are floating on the surface. Now, storms still contribute to the normal variation in the system, but also create undue influence on the outcome (crab population). The storms that are different are assignable causes of variation, and the change in direction can be considered the root cause.

I say all this, because if I explained it satisfactorily, you will see that the harvest is not some blight upon the crab population. It is a normal occurrence that contributes to normal variation in the crab population, and influences the average crab population. But when the harvest is irregular (and it may be irregular due to drops in crab population - what is known as a feedback loop), it has an irregular, or non-normal effect on the population.

Ideally, we would want the harvest to vary normally and center about some average. From the data Mikie offered early in this thread, we can see that the harvest has not been exhibiting normal variation, and is not predictable. We also see that the variation is so large, that predictions produce confidence intervals so large as to make the prediction meaningless. For example, say we could predict with a 95% level of confidence that next years harvest would be between zero and 700 million. What good would that do?
« Last Edit: November 09, 2014, 04:17:26 PM by Jennifer » Logged

Success can be caused by luck or by making mistakes. The more mistakes that ultimately lead to one's success, the less luck is a factor, and the better that success is handled.
Crabby Captn John
Registered User

Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 277
Location: ocean isle beach




Ignore
« Reply #154 on: November 26, 2014, 10:43:43 PM »

There are a lot of ways to manage the resource except in NC where finfish are always mismanaged. One thing that everyone from NC has learned is when managers pit commercial and recreational users no one wins, especially not the resource. Any reductions must be shared by both user groups. Sad to hear what is going on up there as the last 2 years have been my best ever.

Catch shares is a horrible idea as someone explained earlier. Once started the entire catch will be owned by very few large corporations and they will set prices and there will be no mom & pop operations. Every user should fight catch shares as another liberal boondoggle like Obama-care.
Logged

A D V E R T I S E M E N T

crabster2
Registered User

Offline Offline

Posts: 487
Location: parkville, md

I Love Crabs!




Ignore
« Reply #155 on: December 17, 2014, 11:17:30 AM »

I have a better idea, Md seems to be having more crab population problems than any other state, and what is the one thing that separates Md from other states?   Trotlines, ban trotlines and the problem will be solved. 
"and what is the one thing that separates Md from other states?"

Ans: all of these out of state crabbers coming into MD to crab, and now trying to tell Md what to do. Angry
Logged

A D V E R T I S E M E N T


Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

 
 
Home
 
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
Simple Audio Video Embedder


Google visited last this page August 13, 2018, 09:21:35 PM
wordpress