Transcript from 2.28 NEFF Chat session.

[dcabarle]

All,

This may be tough to follow. If you have any questions, please feel free to ask one of the parties invovled.

The photo that follows is just a pic I took while outside earlier this evening.


<HR>

[NJFred] 7:01 am: OK so here is my question on the 600CFS deal... What happens
in an average year which turns dry in july August and september and they need to
release 1000 cfs plus for Montague... and they have been releasing 600 in may and
june and july... is there enough water if if the resevior stops spilling like usual at end
of April.
[NJFred] 7:01 am: It is this sort of situation, having done some back of the
envelopes... I seriously wonder if there really is enough water in Cannonsville give it's
rather small size.
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: fred you have to factor avg inflows
[NJFred] 7:01 am: Yes I know about the average inflow piece... I did this when I ran
the numbers.... Think what happend the year they drained Cannonsville
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: That was a drought year.
[NJFred] 7:01 am: OK but what about an average year
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: hi guys, finally managed to get in, nit sure how though
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: what about and average year?
[NJFred] 7:01 am: Average year is average precip over the water shed
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: THERES MORE THAN ENOUGH WATER when you go on your
trip to the drc sit down with al and jeff they will show you the nuumbers
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: They simply used the avg historical flow data

[NJFred] 7:01 am: Ok will do but I want to see the numbers not just averaged across
the year cause the system is never average... I what to see the plann across 20
historical years and see what happens
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: last year i agree, but what about a drought year, where do
you get the water?
[NJFred] 7:01 am: I'll bet they ran those numbers.. .someone should of
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Jim, FUDR's plan makes consessions for drought years.
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: it has been run Fred, what do you want to knoiw
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: fred your a numbers person and probably understand them better
than most
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: Jim fudr makes concession for drought years
[NJFred] 7:01 am: Want to know if 600 cfs is enough in a year that has an average
year but a dry late summer/fall where they need to push 1000CFS plus having
dumped 300 and then 600 CFS on prior months
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: the FUDR numbers use on average 30 billion ( i think that
was the number) more gallons of water
[NJFred] 7:01 am: push it to 1000 CFS cause Montague minimums
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Jim According to what?
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Why do you continuosly make these statements

[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: thats another problem with the DRBC comparison.
[NJFred] 7:01 am: Can't just average the years together... must run plan against
each and all of the last twenty years. The average does not exist
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: the OASIS model run that used the FUDR numbers and
changed nothing else, it was reported at the public hearing for the new plan
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: thats right fred, that is why there is plent yof water to do it
all and other years not.
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: this past year we could have had 800 on the WB 200 on the
EB and 100 on the NS

[NJFred] 7:01 am: Yes... jim I would believe that the actual flows whould need to
vary up and down somewhat depending on the year.
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: no wait, i think at the meeting it was only reported up to a
release of 300 during the summer
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Jim, if you ran the oasis using FUDR's numbers the way the
DRBC did for their document, you ran incorrect numbers
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: fred! you got it!!!
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: that is what i have been saying all along

[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: no, we did not do anything that drbc did.
[NJFred] 7:01 am: So... the models say that in some years the 600/300 CFS plan
will not work?
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: if you are saying that fudr has provisions for drought, then
we have no arguement, except that 600 may not be best for the fishery.
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: correct Fred
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Jim, YES WE DO
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: You should know that
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: in some years there is not enought water to run fudr numbers
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: in drought years?
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: in some years there is enough to run more than they suggest.
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: Jim maybe a 1200 is best for the fishery?We all know theres not
enough water for that
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Jim, can you read my typing?
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Joe, ask jim if he sees what I am typing or if he is just ignoring
me
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: last year there was enough to do 800 WB 200 EB and 100
NS
[JOE.T] 7:01 am: Jim can you see what larry is typing?
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: Not true Fred, there may be enough for 200 in some years,
it may be too much for juvenile fish though, that is some of the stuff we should get
from the USGS study
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: Larry, I see you, what did I ignore
[NJFred] 7:01 am: So 600 CFS maybe too much for Juvenile fish?
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: oh, imissed you one thing about one question at a time
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: it is possible Fred, I do not know, does anybody? Maybe
Bob B. the usgs study should give us some answers
[NJFred] 7:01 am: hmmm ... always thought that 600 or so was about right.. no
evidence though
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: right, larry may be able to shed light on 600 evidence

[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: i saw everything i think, i did miss your suggestion about
one question at a time
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Jim, Did you see that I type earlier, FUDR has concessions to
their plan for drought
[NJFred] 7:01 am: Larry how do you define a drought year when the concessions
kick in?
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: Yes, and i responded by saying that we then ahve no
arguement, except that when and if 600 is best
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Fred, I can not define a drought year. The drought curves must
be studied scientifically, and not negotiated
[dcabarle] 7:01 am: how do you negotiate a drought?
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: that is what the new flow plan intends to do
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: Tehn once that is figured out, the 600 would change as the water
disappeared.
[dcabarle] 7:01 am: I'm being facetious
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: The new plan negotiates 1 drought day.
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: what is one day of drought anyway?>
[dcabarle] 7:01 am: 1 day of drought is a joke.
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: i think that the new plan will evaluate weekly, and adjust
releases accordingly
[dcabarle] 7:01 am: gives the governor something to talk about.
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: no its not a joke dennis,. its in their new draft
[Fly Tier] 7:01 am: something like they will give up one day of theiur negotiated
drought
[dcabarle] 7:01 am: being facetious, larry.
[NJFred] 7:01 am: So the 600 is more or less a target then for aveverage and high
water availability years?
[Big_Spinner] 7:01 am: so, if there is lots of water, releases will be high
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: as long as conditions remain high, so will the releases
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: as things start to dry up, the release will be reduced.
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: this also eliminates yo-yo
[NJFred] 7:02 am: Yes the yo-yo stuff is really bad
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: the new/existing plan helps to reduce yo-yo to some degree
[NJFred] 7:02 am: How will we get the powers to be to actually implement the new
guidelines ? They don't do very well with the current ones?

[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: by having everyone sit at the table now and negotiate a new
plan
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: that process is ongoing
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: negotiate based on what?
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: all available information
[NJFred] 7:02 am: I'm talking about the opening and shuttin of the relsease valve...
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: cant get a word in edge wise.
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: that is why Dr Bob B can keep FUDR stuff on the table too
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: adios guys, enjoy your night
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: sorry larry, i will be quiet
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: Jim, Bob is there for the fishery.
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: he is very passionate about trout
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: yes, good
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: He will do whats in the fisheries best interest. Not FUDR's,
DRF's, DEP's etc....
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: even better
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: If the water is there he will know how to appropriate it correctly
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: We think it is there
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: the problem is that he needs to prove it
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: DRBC doesnt think so
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: Absolutly
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: although, if it is proved, Do you really think they will go along with
it?
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: i do
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: it cannot harm their needs
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: We know that.
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: then we have no arguement
[NJFred] 7:02 am: OK guys..gotta run... thanks for the info and discussion. DC
hope we can do this again. Bye
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: I personally think there is just to many negotiated numbers
based upon nothing subastantial
[Fly Tier] 7:02 am: We should continue this at another earlier time. Im shot!
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: so how do we change it
[Big_Spinner] 7:02 am: great questions

 

[Big_Spinner]

It was fun and informative.

We should do this more often. Although we probably need some protocol going into it. Especailly if we get more people. It can be hard to follow along, especially if you have to look at the keys to type!!!

One quick correction. I said that the FUDR 600 plan uses on average 30 billion more galons of water in a year. That was not right. 30 billion gallons was the maximum amount of extra water used in any given year.

Jim

 

[dcabarle]

Sorry I couldn't chat a little more last night, I was watching a movie with my wife.

I read the transcript though, and it looks like some good clean discussion went on.

Maybe we can have something every night?

• Monday - River Conservation
• Tuesday - Fly Tying
• Wed - General Talk
• Thursday - ...
• Fri - ...
• Sat - Sun - Whatever......

What do you think

 

[JOE.T]

Dennis

There has to be some provision for smoking breaks.Also 10.30 is to late to start.

Also you edited out some great "fishing talk" between Njfred and myself? There was no insults or vulgarity what gives?

Thanks
Joe

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi Dennis,

I was a bit surprised that you posted the text of the conversation last night.

I think that we should know in advance if you are going to post the info.

It can be difficult to get heard and understood in the chatting forum.

It was great and I will do it again, but I think you should let us know in advance if you are going to post it.

Anybody else have any thoughts on this?

Jim

 

[dcabarle]

Joe,

I agree, 10:30 is a late to start. I did try to edit out most of the small talk (hi everyone | anyone here? | Can you see what I'm typing | ... that type of stuff) as well as your conversation with Fred. The only reason I did that was because I didn't think anyone would have been interested. If anyone is interested, I'll attach the entire discussion.

Other than that, I posted the unedited Delware discussion so that the people who couldn't make it would at least be able to see what occured.

Also, there is a problem with the chat time. For some reason it always says 7:01 or 7:02. The discussion about the Delaware River started at approximately 10:30 and lasted about 30 minutes or so.

Dennis

There has to be some provision for smoking breaks.Also 10.30 is to late to start.

Also you edited out some great "fishing talk" between Njfred and myself? There was no insults or vulgarity what gives?

Thanks
Joe

 

[dcabarle]

Jim,

You're not the only one who expressed some concern about this. I'm not sure what the problem is. It was a public chat, not a private conversation. If you call a TV station and ask them to provide a transcript of any show or news, they will mail it to you, same with a radio station. You might have to pay for it, but it's available.

Everyone must understand that this is a public forum with a public chat. Although I don't allow certain things (vulgarity, name calling....), I would think that a public conversation is public and should be available to anyone.

Any more objections or recommendations?

Hi Dennis,

I was a bit surprised that you posted the text of the conversation last night.

I think that we should know in advance if you are going to post the info.

It can be difficult to get heard and understood in the chatting forum.

It was great and I will do it again, but I think you should let us know in advance if you are going to post it.

Anybody else have any thoughts on this?

Jim

 

[JOE.T]

Dennis

I was only kiddin about the editing of the fishing talk.

I agree with Jim.Its is public, however its not organized and may be very hard to follow the essence of whats being said in that format.

Just my .02

JOE

 

[Fly Tier]

I certainly agree with Jim and Joe.

There is no organization with the chatter going on and so much can be taken out of context if one post doesnt get in before another. It can change the entire meaning of the conversation.

I was not aware that it was being recorded, and neither was anyone else. Regardless of a public forum You obviously thought this out and planned that you would record it and post it ahead of time. You should have let us know ahead of time.

I certainly will not be joining any chat in the future. No biggie.

If you make a call from a public pay phone and someone records it without your knowledge and then edits it the way they see fit, then publishes it, is that right?

 

[dcabarle]

I received a phone call this morning after posting this transcript, telling me how wrong it was and well, I didn't want to hear it, so I hung up on the person after about 20 seconds because I thought they were being ridiculous.

I was just responding to Fly Tiers post above because I thought some of the suggestions he made were silly. While responding, something clicked. Now although I doubt there was anything in that conversation that nobody (other than the attendies) was suppose to see, I did not take into consideration that had other people been in the chat room, some things may not have been said.

So now, I'm going to offer everyone invovled an apology. It was poor judgement on my behalf, and I'm sorry.

I honestly thought I was doing those who could not attend a favor by posting the transcript. In the future, I will either let people know that their conversations will be available for all to see, or simply wont post a conversation unless I have everyone's consent.

I hope all of you accept my apology regarding this. Since the transcript was viewed so many times, I'm not sure if it's even worth taking it down at this point.

 

[Big_Spinner]

Hi Dennis,

Not to worry. I was just surprised, not alarmed or annoyed.

I think in the future I would have everyone decide ahead of time whether to post or not.

I agree that we could have informative discussions that would be worth saving.

It is a great format, don't worry too much about it.

Jim

 

[NJFred]

Heck... Some of us were typing at warp speed (me). We all learned. Not bad for a first go. Maybe next time a moderator will help. Was good though.