Tim Smith

This should be a blast so I'm going to try, JB. Some things are up in the air a bit, but I'm going to be there if I'm in the country.

Rick, do you have time to do spawning survey there next spring before the work begins? Locate nests, etc?

Manager, Conservation Training Programs at the Chicago Botanic Garden The Chicago Botanic Garden seeks a Conservation Scientist and Manager for its award-winning Conservation and Land Management Intern Program for its Plant Science and Conservation Division. Duties include management of the intern program, including recruitment, hiring, training and placing approximately 100 interns per year for several land management agencies (approximately 60% time) and conducting an active conservation-oriented research program (40% time). The successful candidate will have the opportunity to work with graduate students from several Chicago region universities if desired. Requirements include a Ph.D. in ecology, botany, biology or a related field, expertise in restoration ecology or land management practices/policy, and a desire to work in a non-profit environment. Must have excellent organizational and communication skills and maintain strong working relationships with several federal agencies. The position supervises a financial administrative assistant and a research assistant and maintains oversight of the program’s $1.5 million budget. For further information about the position, contact Kayri Havens at khavens@chicagobotanic.org. To apply, send cover letter with statement of research and teaching interests, curriculum vitae, and contact information for three references to: Human Resources Department, Chicago Botanic Garden, 1000 Lake Cook Road, Glencoe, IL 60022. Review of applications will begin November 1, 2007 and continue until a suitable candidate is found.

Graduate Research Assistantships – MS and PhD Supervised by Scott Peacor and Jim Bence Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Michigan State University Subject: Aquatic ecology and fisheries research: theory and modeling. We seek PhD and MS students interested in ecological modeling or statistical applications to join a research effort seeking to understand how interacting processes affect population and community level patterns. Students will develop and conduct theoretical/model based research, with the option to include empirical components. Potential modeling approaches include analytical process based and statistical/data analysis models (e.g. Bayesian, neural nets).The study system for this project is Saginaw Bay (in Lake Huron). Project goals include both basic and applied questions. Starting date is flexible, stipends are competitive based on qualifications, and health and tuition waiver benefits are included. Interested individuals are encouraged to provide the following materials as soon as possible: (1) cover letter describing general and specific research interests/experiences, and potential start dates. (2) brief statement of professional goals (e.g., plans after finishing the graduate training), (3) resume, (4) transcripts, (5) list of three references (names, email addresses, phone numbers, and postal addresses), and (6) GRE and TOEFL scores. (TOEFL scores are required for applicants whose native language is not English. Photocopies of transcripts and GRE/TOEFL scores are okay initially.) Please email (preferred), mail, or fax all application materials to: Scott Peacor Peacor@msu.edu Department of Fisheries and Wildlife 10d Natural Resources Building Michigan State University East Lansing, MI. 48824. USA.

That was an interesting movie and there was a fishing scene there. I remember the anglers standing in the middle of a long shallow riffle with bedrock under it in a big gradient drop with rods holding...what was it...rattletraps? I remember their gear choice just screamed "THE DIRECTORS DON'T FISH." Another fishing movie was Waterworld, where Kevin Costner tows himself as bait behind his boat to catch seamonsters.

Postdoctoral Position in River Ecology: Biological Indicators and Environmental Flows Applications are being accepted for a postdoctoral position in the Department of Biology, Trent University, Peterborough, Ontario, Canada. The position will be focused on developing and modeling biological indicators that can be used to assess the effects of altered flow regimes in riverine ecosystems. The project will be done in collaboration with hydrologists from the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources. The candidate must have experience in and an excellent understanding of stream ecology and statistical methods as demonstrated by a good publication record in international journals. Strong leadership skills are also required as the postdoctoral fellow will be expected to provide some guidance and assistance to junior members of the laboratory. The position is available for 1 year with the possibility for renewal depending on funding and performance. The salary is fixed at $36,000 per year. Preferred start date is January 2008. To apply, send a cover letter, curriculum vitae, examples of publications, and the names of three academic references to the address below (e-mail is preferred). Review of applications will begin on November 1, 2007 and will continue until filled. Contact: Dr. Marguerite A. Xenopoulos, Trent University, Department of Biology, Peterborough, ON, Canada K9J 7B8 [mxenopoulos@trentu.ca] For more information visit: http://people.trentu.ca/mxenopoulos

Well yes there is a link between timber cutting and riverine temperatures. Siltation = less water depth = less insulation from solar radiation = higher water temperatures. Embedded substrates (silt packed around rocks) = less subsurface flow = higher water temperatures. Less canopy = more direct radiation= higher temperatures. That said, temperature isn't necessarily the major limiting factor for smallmouth bass in trout streams. In many places, temperatures cycle wildly on a daily basis. Depending on the time of day and year, fish can find just about any temperature they want to find. There are plenty of rivers in the west that currently only support salmonids that would readily support smallmouth bass in some reaches. The only thing that's saving those trout populations is the lack of an idiot to put smallmouth bass in them. Other rivers that you would never think of as bass habitat...are. The Merced River flowing out of Yosemite is incredibly clear and cold and yet is full of smallmouth bass just outside the park.

Position Announcement: PhD Student for Riparian Biogeochemical Cycling Study in Central Idaho. Announcement: I am seeking a highly motivated PhD student to participate in an interdisciplinary study on the role of salmon carcasses in soil and plant biogeochemical cycles including linkages to the aquatic and terrestrial food webs. Ocean-reared salmon have been extirpated from a vast region in central Idaho for almost 100 years due to hydro power development and irrigation. We will be reintroducing carcasses to assess their influence on ecosystem productivity. The PhD student will establish and conduct soil nutrient input and vegetation manipulation experiments, soil and plant analysis, including stable isotope analysis and gross soil nutrient fluxes. The student will primarily be responsible for the soil and vegetative component of this project, but will also be expected to collaborate with stream ecologists, fish biologists and wildlife biologists on the project. The stipend is $25,000 per year including tuition waiver. The successful candidate will be a PhD student in the College of Natural Resources at the University of Idaho. The project includes faculty, biologists, technicians and post doctoral scientists from University of Alaska, Washington State University, Idaho State University and Idaho Fish and Game. Field Working/Living Conditions: The field sites are riparian forests along several first and second order streams in the Boise, Payette and Weiser watersheds in central Idaho. This is a beautiful landscape to work in with few mosquitoes and little summer rainfall. The candidate will be camping in remote field sites and will be expected to spend a significant part of the spring/summer months in the field. Technical Qualifications: The PhD candidate should be familiar with biogeochemistry, forest ecology and ecosystem processes associated with plant productivity and nutrient cycling. Experience working with stable isotopes is advantageous as is familiarity with nitrogen gross mineralization techniques. Good experimental and laboratory skills with evidence of ability to publish research results in refereed journals are highly desired. Applicants are required to have a master’s degree in forest ecology, ecosystem ecology, biogeochemistry or other appropriate field. Personal Qualifications: The candidate should be self-motivated, focused, able to work independently and work as part of a multidisciplinary team. You should be capable of driving to remote sites on gravel roads, hiking several kilometers and are comfortable camping in primitive areas. How to Apply: To apply for this position, please email the following to Kathleen Kavanagh; katyk@uidaho.edu: (1) your CV (including GRE scores and percentiles); (2) a 1-2 page description of your research interests and ideas; please also describe your technical and personal qualifications for this position; (3) contact information for three references. Inquiries are welcome. Application Deadline: Applications will be considered until the position is filled. Starting Date: A starting date of January 2008 or earlier is ideal. However, students who can join this project in the spring or summer of 2008 are also encouraged to apply.

Position Title: M.Sc. and Ph.D. Assistantships in fish ecology Location: Fish Ecology and Conservation Physiology Laboratory, Carleton University/Ottawa, Canada Responsibilities: Our lab is seeking strong candidates with an interest in the behaviour and physiology of freshwater and marine fish. Projects are typically interdisciplinary, ranging from basic (e.g., energetics of parental care, the relationship between physiological stress and population level processes) to applied (e.g., hydropower impacts, catch-and-release science). All projects involve substantial field work and collaboration with a diverse team of stakeholders and scientists. Ideal candidates will be creative, self-motivated, and have exceptional problem solving abilities. Superior communication skills are essential. Closing date: 02/15/2008 – Positions will begin May or Sept 2008. Contact: Send a CV, letter of interest, and unofficial summary of grades to Steven Cooke, Biology Department, Carleton University, 1125 Colonel By Dr., Ottawa, ON Canada K1S 5B6. Email: Steven_Cooke@carleton.ca Phone: (613) 867-6711. Website: www.carleton.ca/fecpl

Position Title: Ph.D. Assistantship in Trophic Ecology Agency/Location: West Virginia University, Division of Forestry and Natural Resources/Morgantown, West Virginia Responsibilities: This NOAA funded study seeks to examine fatty acids as the novel natural tags as surrogates for diet composition of the Chesapeake Bay striped bass, focusing specifically on the key species such as Atlantic menhaden, bay anchovy, blue crab and spot. Multi-collaborative field and laboratory feeding experiments along with chemical analyses will be conducted to compare the putative trophic linkages with traditional gut analyses. The research provides an excellent opportunity to work with West Virginia University and NOAA scientists with broad experiences. Qualifications: M.S. in chemistry, aquatic ecology, fisheries, or related field. We require a minimum 3.0 GPA and strong GRE scores (generally > 50th percentile on verbal and quantitative). Interest in biochemistry and ability to work as part of a multidisciplinary team. Salary: $15,450 increasing to $18,000 in August 2008 with annual increases. Full tuition waiver and student health benefits. Closing Date: 4/1/2008. We hope to start the candidate by January 2008, but a May 2008 date could be negotiated. Contact: Interested candidates should contact Dr. Kyle Hartman (Phone: 304-293-2941 ext. 2494; email: Kyle.Hartman@mail.wvu.edu or Dr. Ashok Deshpande (Phone: 732-872-3043; email: Ashok.Deshpande@noaa.gov

Position Title: PhD Assistantship in riverscape conservation ecology Location: Missouri Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, Department of Fisheries and Wildlife Sciences, University of Missouri, Columbia Responsibilities: Develop geospatial methods for assessing effects of conservation programs, administered by the USDA, on riverine fish at broad geographic scales. Project involves developing and testing scientifically-grounded conceptual models linking relations among ecological traits of riverine fishes, environmental stressors, and conservation practices throughout the Missouri River Basin. Qualifications: MS in aquatic ecology, fisheries, or related field. 3.0 GPA; upper 50th percentile GRE scores. Interest in assessing effects of conservation practices on environmental stressors and riverine fish. Requires strong quantitative, computing and writing skills. GIS experience highly desired. Ability to work as part of a multidisciplinary team. Salary: $18,000 with annual increases, plus tuition waiver and health insurance subsidy. Closing Date: Until filled Contact: Dr. Scott Sowa, 4200 New Haven Road, University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri 65201, (573)-441-2791, sowasp@missouri.edu. Departmental application materials at: http://www.snr.missouri.edu/fw/

Ron, you're right in a way. Studies do often reach contradictory conclusions and we shouldn't shut down our minds just because scientists tell us something. But, science is based on data, not on newspaper articles. Scientists take extreme efforts to collect accurate data and we're missing out on a tremendous resource if we fail to take their efforts seriously. The proper criticism of most science should be focused on the conclusions drawn from data. Conclusions based on scientific data may contradict intution for several reasons: 1. A study may actually be wrong because of flawed methods or a poor design. Much more rarely a scientist will actually lie. When the lies happens, you generally read about it in the news and that's the end of the scientist's career. These are not common problems for studies that enter peer reviewed literature. Reports by state agencies and consulting firms struggle with these issues more. 2. A study may infer too much from the data it has collected. Over-reaching conclusions are a big temptation. Cory's data, for instance, only measures recovery rate. It says nothing directly about survival. If more data came along and showed that recovery times had no relationship to survival or health of caught and released fish, we would probably set aside Cory's data at that point. In the interim, it is more than reasonable to assume there is a relationship between recovery time and mortality and to strive to reduce handling time based on his findings. 3. A study may show an effect that is later found out to be strongly affected by other variables. Once a piece of information is uncovered, other studies generally refine our understandings of how that information can be applied. Cory and Steve have a long list of covariates they can now research that address the effects of hook size or species or whatever they feel is important to test. 4. Science often contradicts individual experiences because science often focuses on overall patterns rather than individual anecdotes. There's a big difference between the exception to the rule and the general rule. Anecdotes of how a fish survived in a puddle of water may be well outside the norm. I believe you when you say they survived that way (but I don't necessarily believe they were healthy after that experience). I would hope you wouldn't offer your bluegill in the tirewell experience as a best method for handling fish. Science is replicated to show what happens over many cases. It is ironic (infuriating even) that by trying to be careful and thorough and replicate a study, in the eyes of some this actually degrades the results. The cliche about "Lies, damn lies and statistics." is an incredible lie itself. Not everyone has to be a statistician, but for the people who do study those things are well equipped to spot lies or "damn lies" in statistical reports. A misapplied statistical test will get a study tossed out of a journal faster than almost anything else. Bag limits. If you catch and release 5 tarpon in a day but indirectly kill 3 of them because of long handling times, the tarpon population is better off if you just have a 1 fish take limit (after landing 1 fish, you're done fishing for tarpon that day).

Fish of all species? Really? Are you saying you think the effect of all that extra nutrient on that stream is positive?

The number of fish caught isn't important until you know how long it took you to catch them. So the relevant number is your catch rate, the CPUE (catch per unit effort). The real sample size issues revolve around the number of trips an individual angler takes and the number of anglers that report their data. Another important thing about this kind of analysis is that the trips you DON'T catch fish are just as important, possibly even MORE important than the trips that DO catch fish. We write off bad trips and try to forget them. For statistical analysis, having some bad trips in the data set provides the basis for comparison. If you catch 50 trophy fish on every trip, you'll never learn anything from your data because apparently everything you do is great. You have to fail once in a while to learn anything. Then that's one type of information that got left behind in your particular data set. You might have good informatoin for the location and size of trophy fish, but if the IDNR wants to know the potential of your streams for 5 years from now (which is actually some pretty important information), they'll have to look elsewhere. I think the location of trophy fish relative to bridges IS interesting. I assume you're inferring that the big fish set up ranges away from places they're likely to encounter humans/anglers. If you can accurately collect that data, go for it.

Student Observers Needed for Spring Phenological Study Overview We are seeking students to participate as phenological observers in a National Science Foundation funded project being conducted in northern Wisconsin for approximately four weeks during spring 2008. Selected individuals will work as part of a four-person observation team. Starting and ending times will vary a few days depending on spring weather conditions, but most likely commence during the last week of April and extend to the last week of May. Phenology is the study of periodic plant and animal life cycle events that are influenced by environmental changes, especially seasonal variations in temperature and precipitation driven by weather and climate. Wide ranges of phenomena are included, from first openings of leaf and flower buds, to insect hatchings and return of birds. Each one gives a ready measure of the environment as viewed by the associated organism. Thus, timings of phenological events are ideal indicators of the impact of local and global changes in weather and climate on the Earth's biosphere. Qualifications Team members must be able to work with minimal supervision in a variety of outdoor conditions. They must also show attention to detail and be able to make accurate observations as well as systematically record them. Orientation Before starting, team members will receive a full orientation to phenology as well as the specific protocols and procedures to be used during the field work. On-going support will also be provided. Lodging Team members will be housed at the Kemp Natural Resource Station (KNRS) in Woodruff, WI. The station has comfortable rooms, showers, and kitchen facilities, as well as wireless Internet connectivity. See http:// www.kemp.wisc.edu for more details about this facility. Work and Schedule Team members will generally go into the field every other day, so work days will alternate with days off during the four-week period. This schedule may change for short periods if necessary due to severe or unusual weather. On work days the team will be transported to the field site and spend approximately eight hours recording the phenological state of tagged trees along marked transects. Cold lunches, beverages, and water will be carried in each work day. Benefits Team member’s reasonable transportation costs to and from their home institutions to UW-Milwaukee (UWM) will be covered. All transportation to and from UWM to KNRS and to and from KNRS to the field site, food, and lodging expenses during the four-week period will be provided. In addition, team members will each receive a $2000 stipend. Contact Information If you would like more information or wish to be considered as a phenological observer, please contact Prof. Mark D. Schwartz, Dept. of Geography, UWM at (414) 229-3740 or mds@uwm.edu

That's what I had assumed, Steve. The IEPA numbers for the Salt Fork are a great education in how a river cleans itself. The Saline Branch receives treated waste from Urbana (up to and above 2 ppm total phosphorus). That stream has a closed canopy and a high gradient so most of that nutrient ends up getting dumped into the Salt Fork where the Saline Branch enters it at St. Joseph. Over several river miles below St. Joseph, the nutrients from the waste plant are gradually absorbed into the ecosystem. By the time the Salt Fork reaches Homer Lake (a 15 minute drive west of Urbana), it's quite clean for a river in this area. Then it meets the green water here and the numbers go back up again. Don't let anyone fool you. Sewage treatment plants have done much to improve water quality in the US, but they haven't solved all the problems that are out there. Many of the smaller plants struggle to function properly and the large plants are massive sources of soluble P and N that dwarf anything else on the river during stable flows. And I can tell you, having been involved in that research, that the IEPA is on the verge of accepting 0.075 ppm as a phosphorus standard for the state (and that won't even be enforced in most places). Experiments we did showed that concentration of phosphorus produces the peak levels of attached algae growth in streams. How about them apples?

JB had a similar comment and I more or less agree. A field beater has a lot of advantages over taking a nice car into the boonies. BUT... ...a Yakima roof rack (about $350) looks pretty sporty, even on a mustang. You can throw just about any small boat up there and that gives you a world of options that a pontoon cannot. In less than 2 years I've had my kayak on lakes, large rivers, creeks, the Gulf of Mexico (it was awesome in the bays AND I used it for surfing there...whoo hooo!!). Something like that or Steve's kevlar canoe (26 pounds total weight!!) is adapable enough to be incredibly useful in a lot of contexts for a very long time.

Brenden, I don't have any tendonitis at the moment, but I am interested in your original question about log data. The data you collect from your trips could include a lot of things. The problems you're going to have are standardization and quantification. Anything you can standardize and quantify can be analyzed, depending on what you choose to record in your data. Data has to be collected the same way every time to be useful, and it gets more useful when exact amounts of something are known (i.e. it's more useful to know how many fish you caught rather than if you just caught fish and it's more useful to know what sizes of fish were caught than just how many were caught). The key is that to find the effect of one thing, you need to be able to hold all the other variables constant OR have a gigantic pile of data you can sift to find empirical relationships. You've already a highly accomplished angler. I doubt you're going to refine your approach much more than you already have (althogh some improvement is always possible). The key benefit of your log is that someone else (the IDNR) would be interested to find out where you have success and how that matches up with their efforts to manage certain rivers. For instance, Sugar Creek has just had a trophy regulation put on it. Is it actually producing results? Careful, quantified, standardized feedback like that is pretty darn useful. Secondarily, a well designed study might directly compare one lure to another one...and someone willing to keep detailed results might be a useful to a lure manufacturing company. And third...it would be pretty darn interesting to be able to sift through data to find out things like "How long does it take to maximize catch rates on a new body of water." Or "Does the size of fish caught vary with the amount of river distance I cover." Or...you fill in the blank. Personally, I think having numbers and species of fish, sizes of fish, time spent fishing, lure used (including color and size), temperature, discharge volume (Q) at time of fishing, water clarity and time of day would be awfully darn interesting information to keep.

I'm not sure what it's from, Nick. I plan to find out. The color is algae, yes...an odd algae I haven't seen before. I think it might be a sewage treatment outfall from a small town...and it appears the treatment isn't working very well.

MS Assistantship in Invasion Ecology A graduate student position is available to study the ecology of invasive species in the Department of Zoology at Oklahoma State University. The student will participate in laboratory and field studies that are designed to assess the impacts of zebra mussel on reservoirs in Kansas and Oklahoma. The student will be supported through a combination of teaching and research assistantships (~$16,000/yr plus tuition waiver). To learn more about the Zoology Department and our graduate program visit http://zoology.okstate.edu/. To apply, please email a letter of interest (including GRE scores and GPA) and a resume to Dr. Andy Dzialowski at andy.dzialowski@okstate.edu. The position is available beginning either in January or Summer 2008.

The scenery is getting better and better as we get into fall. Here's one shot of an idyllic shoreline...oh...but what's that green area there behind the rocks? Yikes!

Mike C., that's a great post.

Just got this from Trent:

Mike G, what goal are you articulating here? Better what? Commitment to what?