This to me sums up the current situation perfectly and totally agree with the reply.
Post from theWUF Director known on this forum as New Kid???
Quote
"Finally I think we can nail your problem SF: you don't actually understand that 480 (the 2010 rod catch) is actually a smaller number than 850 (this years rod catch only as far as Aug 19th) presumably you have the same problem with the 5 year averages..... 687 (2010) while for 2015 it will likely be c 1000.
For a smaller number (of salmon in 2010) to be a bigger number in the next generation, (2015) then some multiplication must have taken place otherwise the numbers would be the same.
What evidence can anyone produce to show one number is bigger than another?"NK
For a smaller number (of salmon in 2010) to be a bigger number in the next generation, (2015) then some multiplication must have taken place otherwise the numbers would be the same.
What evidence can anyone produce to show one number is bigger than another?"NK
- REPLY; by SF
"Ah New Kid, you reveal your true nature yet again 
ah we agree, but you do not show how or where this happened, maybe its better sea survival as its a similar story on the Hants Avon, Ribble, Eden, Severn etc?
There is no doubt that one figure is bigger than another, similarly the SRT spend in 2010 was £30,000 and WUF's spend was £1,134,250 I believe. Another example of one number being bigger than another.
Yes I can see that the rod catch in 2010, despite all the work done by the Wye and Usk Foundation since 1996 was only 480.
So as evidence you present the fact that in 14 years you managed to get the rod catch up to 480 but in 5 years you managed to get it over a thousand? Frankly I don't even believe that, because as usual you bring no evidence to bear that the any improvements are due to WUF's habitat work.
1. Surely you have catchment wide redd counts from 2010 to show how there were more fish than the rod catch suggests?
2. Surely you have electrofishing numbers, catchment wide to show an improved fry recruitment in 2011 and a similar parr survival in 2012 and 2013?
3. Surely you have smolt counts from 2012, 2013 & 2014 showing a higher survival of smolt migrating?
Frankly without out those its just wishful thinking."
Quote:
| For a smaller number (of salmon in 2010) to be a bigger number in the next generation, (2015) then some multiplication must have taken place otherwise the numbers would be the same. |
Quote:
| What evidence can anyone produce to show one number is bigger than another? NK |
Yes I can see that the rod catch in 2010, despite all the work done by the Wye and Usk Foundation since 1996 was only 480.
So as evidence you present the fact that in 14 years you managed to get the rod catch up to 480 but in 5 years you managed to get it over a thousand? Frankly I don't even believe that, because as usual you bring no evidence to bear that the any improvements are due to WUF's habitat work.
1. Surely you have catchment wide redd counts from 2010 to show how there were more fish than the rod catch suggests?
2. Surely you have electrofishing numbers, catchment wide to show an improved fry recruitment in 2011 and a similar parr survival in 2012 and 2013?
3. Surely you have smolt counts from 2012, 2013 & 2014 showing a higher survival of smolt migrating?
Frankly without out those its just wishful thinking."
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: only a member of this blog may post a comment.