USGS study draft plan

[JW1970]

I have asked tough questions, and I have received very direct responses that leave very little question about...

Well, the information you've shared publicly has been entirely indirect, speculative and left no answers, facts or foundation for proof of your accusations. Thus far, it's all heresy. So, I imagine you work for Fox News or something.

Until you're going to open the envelope AKSkim has requested, why don't you just come back when you actually have a factual case to share. You clearly aren't really using this discussion for your research, but rather to just spread accusations and speculation.

It is sad how dismissive you are about something so important.

I guess I just know there are bigger fish to fry and would rather focus my energies elsewhere. I'm sorry I'm not a supporter of your little inquisition, which isn't going to have any positive impact on the fact that again there's 255cfs at Hale Eddy today.

[Fly Tier]

Huh?
Who is the "as well"? And why on earth would you think I worked for the DRBC? What gave you that impression?

I see they have now made you their official Monkey

Larry,

Are you also hired by the DRBC as well?

Sincerely,

Dennis Watson

[rford]

duh duh duh duh duh

[Big_Spinner]

Hi D Watson,

I have not received an email or phone call from you, nor has the DRF.

All you have to do is ask responsible questions and I will , as I have always tried to do, give you answers.

I can save you some time:

I have no contract, nor have I been paid by the DRBC or DEC. The work I have done for them has been on a voluntary basis. I learned how to run the OASIS model and the USGS DSS model and have been making runs for anyone who has asked. My initial interest was to verify the OASIS and DSS runs that were produced by DRBC and DEC!! I primarily now work just with the DSS model as others have taken over the OASIS modeling.

Some of the DSS runs I have run for DRBC and DEC have been duplicated by the USGS folks to verify accuracy and my abilities to correctly run the software.

IF you have any experience with excel, I would be happy to show you how to make DSS runs yourself, so that you can verify any and all results. I would in fact appreciate the duplication. The DSS runs as an EXCEL spreadsheet and data is simply pasted into it and you press the run button. IT is incredibly boring work.

Here is a typical run:

Decide what you would like to test and compare. Let's say, we want to see the difference between releasing 200 cfs and 400 cfs from Cannonsville on the West Branch from June 1st to September 30th. All other conditions remain the same.

Enter the proper numbers into the OASIS model (10 - 30 minutes) and let it run for 10 minutes and it will produce a data file both in table and graphic format. The OASIS model runs through 73 years of data and does it one day at a time. All of the variables are updated and then the next day is run, etc, etc, etc. Some of the interesting outputs for the scenario mentioned above would be

To see what the FLOW at Hale eddy would be from the change we made.

To see what the level of Cannonsville Reservoir would be from the change we made.

To see if there is any change in other reservoir levels as a result of what we did.

To see if the salt line changes down in the bay.

To see how many "drought days" the change creates.

You get the idea, there are any number of outputs you can look at or even build your own!!

OKAY, so now you have the OASIS output for your one change.

The next step is to take the OASIS output for the 200 cfs run and enter it into the USGS DSS model. (10 minutes)

The next step is to take the OASIS output for the 400 cfs run and enter it into the USGS DSS model. (10 minutes)

Now you press the USGS run button and wait for 12 - 40 minutes, depending on the speed of your computer, and voila, you get a habitat output based on 10 years of record. (DSS can only run 10 years at a time)

You can now compare the CHANGE in habitat for many species between the two runs.

What is the change in adult trout habitat on 11 different sections of rivers?

What is the change in spawning habitat?

What is the change in shad habitat?

OKAY, now you have an idea what you want to do.

Now lets run it again for 10 more years and 10 more, etc.

OKAY, now lets say that you like what the 400 cfs does for the river and you think everyone can live with the results. NOW, lets run it again with a different temperature constraint. And do them all again for 68 degrees instead of 72 degrees.

OKAY, now lets say that maybe we can get 500 cfs on the West Branch from, so we go back to the top and run it all again.

OKAY, now maybe we want to see what happens if we change Pepacton releases or Neversink releases or, well if you are still with me here, you get the idea.

IF you go to the Conservation Coalitions website: The Coalition's Delaware River Adaptive Release Policy you can see the results of some of those runs. Over the last two years the Conservation Coalition did the boring grunt work of many hundreds of iterations of OASIS and DSS data to determine how to best utilize available resources. CP2 was the result of that work.

Incidently, the OASIS model is available by license from the DRBC to anyone who wants to cough up a few hundred dollars. THE USGS model will shortly be available for free from USGS. Check to see if it has been added to their library.

Hope this answers all your questions and that I can get another volunteer to help run the DSS. IT is a powerful tool that can help make informed decisions about the Delaware System. IT does not answer the question "What is Best?", but it does allow the users to see what the changes do and allows for the user to then make informed decisions.

By the way, just those couple of simple runs shown above can take you away from an afternoon of fishing.

Let me know how else I can be of assistance.

Jim

[Future Fanatic]

My Response: Funny you should mention those groups, I have contacted many of these groups in the past 3 business days plus additional contacts in each. (Department Of Interior at the Office of Secretary Level, Department of Interior, U.S.G.S., F.U.D.R., D.R.B.C. and a few un-associated fly fisherman). The contacts know who they are and I appreciate their insight. I have asked tough questions, and I have received very direct responses that leave very little question about the state of inter-locking relationships.


It is sad how dismissive you are about something so important.

So what say you now?

Does Jim's response cast doubt over ANYTHING that your "contacts" might say? It's unfortunate that we do not know who said what. Of course, transparency in that regard, is too much to ask, yes?

[MACFLY]

Hi D Watson,

I have not received an email or phone call from you, nor has the DRF.

All you have to do is ask responsible questions and I will , as I have always tried to do, give you answers.

I can save you some time:

I have no contract, nor have I been paid the DRBC or DEC. The work I have done for them has been on a voluntary basis. I learned how to run the OASIS model and the USGS DSS model and have been making runs for anyone who has asked. My initial interest was to verify the OASIS and DSS runs that were produced by DRBC and DEC!! I primarily now work just with the DSS model as others have taken over the OASIS modeling.

Some of the DSS runs I have run for DRBC and DEC have been duplicated by the USGS folks to verify accuracy and my abilities to correctly run the software.

IF you have any experience with excel, I would be happy to show you how to make DSS runs yourself, so that you can verify any and all results. I would in fact appreciate the duplication. The DSS runs as an EXCEL spreadsheet and data is simply pasted into it and you press the run button. IT is incredibly boring work.

Here is a typical run:

Decide what you would like to test and compare. Lets say, we want to see the difference between releasing 200 cfs and 400 cfs from Cannonsville on the West Branch from June 1st to September 30th. All other conditions remain the same.

Enter the proper numbers into the OASIS model (10 - 30 minutes) and let it run for 10 minutes and it will produce a data file both in table and graphic format. The OASIS model runs through 73 years of data and does it one day at a time. All of the variables are updated and then the next day is run, etc, etc, etc. Some of the interesting outputs for the scenario mentioned above would be

To see what the FLOW at Hale eddy would be from the change we made.

To see what the level of Cannonsville Reservoir would be from the change we made.

To see if there is any change in other reservoir levels as a result of what we did.

To see if the salt line changes down in the bay.

To see how many "drought days" the change creates.

You get the idea, there are any number of outputs you can look at or even build your own!!

OKAY, so now you have the OASIS output for your one change.

The next step is to take the OASIS output for the 200 cfs run and enter it into the USGS DSS model. (10 minutes)

The next step is to take the OASIS output for the 400 cfs run and enter it into the USGS DSS model. (10 minutes)

Now you press the USGS run button and wait for 12 - 40 minutes, depending on the speed of your computer, and voila, you get a habitat output based on the 10 years of record.

You can now compare the CHANGE in habitat for many species between the two runs.

What is the change in adult trout habitat on 11 different sections of rivers.

What is the change in spawning habitat?

What is the change in shad habitat?

OKAY, now you have an idea what you want to do.

Now lets run it again for 10 more years and ten more, etc.

OKAY, now lets say that you like what the 400 cfs does for the river and you think everyone can live with the results. NOW, lets run it again with a different temperature constraint. And do them all again for 68 degrees instead of 72 degrees.

OKAY, now lets say that maybe we can get 500 cfs on the West Branch from, so we go back to the top and run it all again.

OKAY, now maybe we want to see what happens if we change Pepacton releases or Neversink releases or, well if you are still with me here, you get the idea.

IF you go to the Conservation Coalitions website: The Coalition's Delaware River Adaptive Release Policy you can see the results of some of those runs. Over the last two years the Conservation Coalition did the boring grunt work of many hundreds of iterations of OASIS and DSS data to determine how to best utilize available resources. CP2 was the result of that work.

Incidently, the OASIS model is available by license from the DRBC to anyone who wants to cough up a few hundred dollars. THE USGS model will shortly be available for free from USGS. Check to see if it has been added to their library.

Hope this answers all your questions and that I can get another volunteer to help run the DSS. IT is a powerful tool that can help make informed decisions about the Delaware System. IT does not answer the question "What is Best?", but it does allow the users to see what the changes do and allows for the user to then make informed decisions.

By the way, just those couple of simple runs shown above can take you away from an afternoon of fishing.

Let me know how else I can be of assistance.

Jim

DDwatson I have no idea how Big Spinner manages to reply in as friendly a manner to you when your previous posts warrant no such response. How about you take a lesson. It has been suggested that you could simply ask the people directly before going chernobyl on this board. As Mr sutherland said in a movie a long time ago "negative vibes man..negative vibes".

[dcabarle]

So what say you now?

Does Jim's response cast doubt over ANYTHING that your "contacts" might say? It's unfortunate that we do not know who said what. Of course, transparency in that regard, is too much to ask, yes?

I beleive Dennis is entitled to his thoughts, but I'm not so sure I agree with his thought process. I think I would have done things a little different myself.

For instance; after contacting the DRBC, NASA, FUDR, ACLU, NAACP, NHRA, USGS, NYDEC, NJDMV, and a few other non-associated organizations such as Jim Jones (It's just juice, trust me), I believe I would have afforded myself the opportunity to contact the DRF and possibly TU, just to see what they had to say, before rushing to the judgement that all non-believers are going to hell.

Now if Dennis mentioned that he did contact TU and someone from the DRF, then made the decision to support someone else, I could respect that. Listening to a 1 sided story and basing your support on that side without even giving the opposition the same opportunity to answer the same questions, in my opinion is not my idea of due diligence.

Could you imagine Dennis as a judge in a courtroom... The prosecutor gets up and explains his case (Let's take the Duke Case for example)... Then when the defense stands up to offer a defense statement, he puts on a set of headphones and starts playing the air guitar to his favorite Clapton tune. The song is over and the defense says, "Your honor, it's clear there is no evidence to support the States case". The judge says, "Yep, you're right... it's clear to me that they're all guilty... Putem away for life."

Oooph... That's rough.

[ddawatson]

Jim,

Thank you for the response. It is both enlightening and encouraging. I will call you later this week to talk further and hopefully gain more insight. Unfortunately, I have been out of town on business the past 4 days in TN and have not the time or focus to respond.


Sincerely,

Dennis Watson

[MACFLY]

Jim,

Thank you for the response. It is both enlightening and encouraging. I will call you later this week to talk further and hopefully gain more insight. Unfortunately, I have been out of town on business the past 4 days in TN and have not the time or focus to respond.


Sincerely,

Dennis Watson

Sugar and Spice and all things nice.....now see that wasnt so hard was it.

[Future Fanatic]

Jim,

Thank you for the response. It is both enlightening and encouraging. I will call you later this week to talk further and hopefully gain more insight. Unfortunately, I have been out of town on business the past 4 days in TN and have not the time or focus to respond.


Sincerely,

Dennis Watson

So how'd the phone conversation go? Did it change your opinion of the people who told you all about Jim's nefarious collusion with the DRBC? Let's see, it was one, some or all of the following that told you this, yes? (I bet you I could guess which )

I have contacted many of these groups in the past 3 business days plus additional contacts in each. (Department Of Interior at the Office of Secretary Level, Department of Interior, U.S.G.S., F.U.D.R., D.R.B.C. and a few un-associated fly fisherman). The contacts know who they are and I appreciate their insight. I have asked tough questions, and I have received very direct responses that leave very little question about the state of inter-locking relationships.

The "contacts" know who they are, but is there any chance that we could know who told you the things "that leave very little question about the state of inter-locking relationships". Given, of course, that Jim cleared up that their information was untruthful at least and more likely slanderous in nature. For the sake of transparencey, I think we should all know who would spread theses types of accusations around. It would give us all better insight as to who to believe has the best interests of the system in mind and not just an ax to grind.

[brachycentrus]

So how'd the phone conversation go? Did it change your opinion of the people who told you all about Jim's nefarious collusion with the DRBC? Let's see, it was one, some or all of the following that told you this, yes? (I bet you I could guess which )



The "contacts" know who they are, but is there any chance that we could know who told you the things "that leave very little question about the state of inter-locking relationships". Given, of course, that Jim cleared up that their information was untruthful at least and more likely slanderous in nature. For the sake of transparencey, I think we should all know who would spread theses types of accusations around. It would give us all better insight as to who to believe has the best interests of the system in mind and not just an ax to grind.

You mean like Jim intentionally posting pics on this site of stream clearing next to the DRC campground, and blaming Al Caucci when he knew full well it wasnt Al's properrty?
Give it up Llama lover !! One sentence deleted. Personal attack - Pete

[Future Fanatic]

You mean like Jim intentionally posting pics on this site of stream clearing next to the DRC campground, and blaming Al Caucci when he knew full well it wasnt Al's properrty?
Give it up Llama lover !! ************

And you are STILL one quality individual.

BUT, to answer your question, Jim posted them, yes. We ALL knew it was JIM. HE took responsiblity for his post.

THESE TURDS seem to have said it in some sort of secret behind the scenes way. They are obviously not the sort of people who would go public with their allegations, OR step up and say they might be wrong. See the difference?

Any idea how the lawsuit is going against the neighbor who did that clearing of the stream? (That was just for fun)