6.6 24-1951:00 P.M. - Consideration of Presentation from California Department of Fish and Wildlife providing an overview of Clear Lake Hitch Summit meeting, explanation of the Relative Population Estimate, and related hitch topics
I took exception to this statement in the Memo for this item which reads
"To update the Board and the public, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Senior Environmental Scientist, Felipe La Luz, will be presenting on the Clear Lake Hitch, whose population is still threatened, regardless of 2023's observations."
How do we reconcile a statement saying 'regardless of 2023's observations?
Big Valley Rancheria reported over 29,000 RESCUES alone which is an astounding number in itself.
Yet this memo states straight out 'regardless' of?
2023's spawn was a year to make us all cheer for the hitch, for their unexpected resilience and for bringing to light that there are (wonderful) parts of their life history we've not been aware of as indicated by the high numbers we saw in 2023.
Those aren't numbers to be notated as 'regardless of.'
Especially in light of the fact that USGS reported SIX fish in their estimate in 2022.
A number that is shocking in itself and one that when the researcher who conducted the count was questioned about shook it off. That number was used to make policy off of, and if we're doing science, then we need to actually pay attention to the variability of the numbers which should make us question sampling methods among many other things.
No one is questioning our concern for the hitch, but as a scientist I am questioning numbers and methodology and the dismissiveness that seems to be a pattern from the agencies.
I took exception to this statement in the Memo for this item which reads
"To update the Board and the public, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) Senior Environmental Scientist, Felipe La Luz, will be presenting on the Clear Lake Hitch, whose population is still threatened, regardless of 2023's observations."
How do we reconcile a statement saying 'regardless of 2023's observations?
Big Valley Rancheria reported over 29,000 RESCUES alone which is an astounding number in itself.
Yet this memo states straight out 'regardless' of?
2023's spawn was a year to make us all cheer for the hitch, for their unexpected resilience and for bringing to light that there are (wonderful) parts of their life history we've not been aware of as indicated by the high numbers we saw in 2023.
Those aren't numbers to be notated as 'regardless of.'
Especially in light of the fact that USGS reported SIX fish in their estimate in 2022.
A number that is shocking in itself and one that when the researcher who conducted the count was questioned about shook it off. That number was used to make policy off of, and if we're doing science, then we need to actually pay attention to the variability of the numbers which should make us question sampling methods among many other things.
No one is questioning our concern for the hitch, but as a scientist I am questioning numbers and methodology and the dismissiveness that seems to be a pattern from the agencies.