Posted by:
Jeff Schofield
at Mon Feb 16 23:59:49 2009 [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by Jeff Schofield ]
Biologists do know alot about the animals they study and the habitat they are found. But more than that we are given the responsibility to manage what you have argued to be unmanagable. It is one thing to know something, its something totally different to DO something about it...to attempt to "hit a moving target" in management is very difficult. Its unfortunate that most times monies are only available to study when critters are either endangered or cuddly, but thats life and it helps pay the bills.
We use fancy formulas as shortcuts because we have to go to budget meetings, be on land development councils, represent the state in court cases, do actual lab work and all that other useless biologist stuff and not chase snakes down holes all day(laughing). The statistics we get from radio telemetry/mark recapture studies are useful, and large statistics are more important than individual behavior. You yourself have argued about "snake personalities", so I will ask you what would be a better tool for management--higher quality observations on fewer individuals or lower quality observations on more individuals? Be careful how you answer it, you cant have it both ways.
[ Hide Replies ]
|
What is Biology to you Frank? - Jeff Schofield, Mon Feb 16 23:59:49 2009