Arm chair biologists

[troutologist]

This has been festering in my mind for a while. I prefer not to play into the infantile bickering as a rule but this topic is close to my heart.

 

Raise your hand if you are a biologist...

 

Having opinion regarding fisheries and fisheries management is great, your passion for the sport and interest to leave things better is a great step forward. Should you question decisions made by the Government agencies in managing a resource? Of course.

 

This is what grinds my gears, is the constant belittling of MNR bio's. Obviously like everyone they have made decisions based on the info they had at the time or pressure from above and turned out to be wrong. Thats the way science goes. Thalidamide was a great idea at the time too.

 

 

I've got a number of friends and collegues that work as biologists and technicians in various levels of Governemnt and in various areas of specialty. To a person they are dedicated, interested and care profoundly about the resources and the job. In most cases hunters and anglers too. Being a Gov't biologist is not the field to go into to make money. No one puts up with the revolving door of contracts and beauracracy because its a job. Everyone one I have met put up with this since its exactly what they want to do.

 

 

So next time you want to rag on the biologists, think about directing your ire to those in Toronto or Ottawa that make policy, dream up priorities, provide funding . Position on most if not all issues come from far above the field group. If you have any experience in Gov't you understand this. Not towing the line is a tough way to keep working and theres not an over abundance of jobs in the field.

 

 

As I've previously stated if you feel so strongly that the MNR biologists are doing a poor job. Go to school and get a biology degree, get a foot in the door at the MNR and work your way into a position to make a difference.

[Guest ThisPlaceSucks]

you always have a much more diplomatic way of saying things than myself jay.

the bio ragging that goes on here is counterproductive, and more often than not stems from ill advised or even ignorant places.

 

and like jay said, it's a bureaucrat in Toronto, or administrative "way ups" that are giving these agencies direction, not it's foot soldiers. i'm not saying to go out and hug a bio or anything but i would advise against being led away from important issues by prophets claiming to know what's good for our fisheries - all without having ever been educated on the subject.

Edited October 19, 2009 by Dr. Salvelinus

[Lake Ranger]

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I've been dealing with the MNR, MNE, and MOF in the Sudbury and North Bay Districts for the past year, and have nothing but praise for the biologists that I've been corresponding with. They have taken my concerns to heart and have proven to take action on things that they are responsible for, and have given me direction on who to approach if it was out of their jurisdiction to act upon the situation.

I am deeply concerned for some wetlands that are in jeopardy, a substantial portion of which has already been destroyed by development. These particular wetlands in the West Nipissing District happen to be the habitat for a number of Species at Risk in Ontario, including a number of migratory birds and endangered turtles. I hope that you find better support for what you do, as I totally respect your position and know that you must have a deep understanding, knowledge and passion for the work that you do.

[Dara]

I don't see a lot of ragging on biologists in here.

 

I do see a fair bit of ragging on the likes of which cancelled the spring bear hunt.

 

I think somebody is having a touchy moment

[pike slayer]

ya i agree with dara unless your trying to point out a certain person.

they seem to do their job fine and do well at it and some big chief somewhere makes the final choice. atleast thats the way i see it, but hey what do i know. i just go do my thing and i have trust in them to do their jobs and well. if not well then we dont have a great future.

[Dara]

ya i agree with dara unless your trying to point out a certain person.

they seem to do their job fine and do well at it and some big chief somewhere makes the final choice. atleast thats the way i see it, but hey what do i know. i just go do my thing and i have trust in them to do their jobs and well. if not well then we dont have a great future.

 

 

I can't see much future in fishing and hunting. Not enough tax dollars are spent on it and too many decisions are financially motivated rather than for protecting the resource.

 

Biologists having nothing to do with the financial end.

[Dutchy]

I can't see much future in fishing and hunting. Not enough tax dollars are spent on it and too many decisions are financially motivated rather than for protecting the resource.

 

Very true. I have a friend who works in Ottawa screening blood samples for rabies. They are really poorly funded by the government. Example, major microbiology conference in Quebec city, Ottawa would not send the head of the unit (Covers entire canada screening) to the conference due to lack of funds.

 

Truth be told, I am actually a biologist I run a research group at a University. Funding from the government even for us through the CIHR is in the toilet and only going lower. To do research in any environment costs ALOT of money. My major worry is the government has no clue how much is really needed to do a job properly like the MNR biologists need.

[Kinger]

I trust educated and dedicated scientists to do their job. i have nothing but respect for our biologists.

I think the problem comes from a different source, lets say...hmmm......red tape and political Bull.

 

For someone without a science degree to degrade the work of a real scientist is asinine.

[craigdritchie]

I don't see a lot of criticism leveled at biologists. I do, however, see a lot of criticism aimed at MNR bureaucrats and policy advisors. In many cases, that criticism is completely justified.

 

We often hear that MNR has a responsibility to protect our resources, but it also has an equal responsibility to the people of Ontario. My opinion is that MNR bureaucrats have consistently dropped the ball where serving public interest is concerned. The long-term result has been a steady decrease in license sales, and even less money for biologists and conservation officers to do their work. Fishing and hunting issues are now largely irrelevant to most people who live in Ontario. So, funding for them will only become harder to obtain in the future.

 

The only way MNR will ever have more money for resource projects will be if enough people feel it's important to fund them. Until the politicos in Queens Park understand this, and start actually marketing our outdoors, not much is going to change. I feel badly for the field staff (biologists and COs) who really do care, and who understand better than anyone that their biggest challenge is dealing with a complete lack of backbone and political will at Queen's Park.

[Musky or Specks]

Bios in the field?? LOL

[splashhopper]

Very true. I have a friend who works in Ottawa screening blood samples for rabies. They are really poorly funded by the government. Example, major microbiology conference in Quebec city, Ottawa would not send the head of the unit (Covers entire canada screening) to the conference due to lack of funds.

 

Truth be told, I am actually a biologist I run a research group at a University. Funding from the government even for us through the CIHR is in the toilet and only going lower. To do research in any environment costs ALOT of money. My major worry is the government has no clue how much is really needed to do a job properly like the MNR biologists need.

 

 

I can verify that Dutchy is a biologist....

 

just not sure if he is a good one though....

 

as he is always calling me donnnkey,,, as if i was one...

 

right SHREK !

[richyb]

Yep the MNR bios always make the right decisions. Its always a good move to stock lake trout and whitefish in Simcoe off the hawkestone dock durring smelt season. Seen guys goin with buckets of trout, Lovely !

[cram]

who is aiming criticism at MNR biologists? Are you referring to the maximum musky size thread?

[troutologist]

Maybe some clarification, this seemed to stem from the stocking thread perhaps driven by chronzy's attitude. It seems many are all too happy to side with a tv personality and diminish any efforts coming from biologists. Perhaps foolishly, this gets me ire as I have sat in the hot seat at been berated and watched other science types berated by those who are ill-informed on the realities of resource management.

 

Not intended as a shot or dig at any individual, not exonerating the MNR from any poor decisions. Maybe just because its on tv or on the internet doesn't mean its so...

Edited October 19, 2009 by troutologist

[kickingfrog]

Sorry guys. If you don't think the biologists or the work of the MNR and or COs are not slammed here on a semi-regular basis, you haven't been reading many of the posts. There is a dig a few posts above this one.

 

BTW, lack of funding leads to staff not being out "in the field".

[Musky or Specks]

Sorry guys. If you don't think the biologists or the work of the MNR and or COs are not slammed here on a semi-regular basis, you haven't been reading many of the posts. There is a dig a few posts above this one.

 

BTW, lack of funding leads to staff not being out "in the field".

 

I guess in a way but its more about priorities directed from above any field work done by bios is generally done on their own time and dime.

[aniceguy]

Its not the MNR bureaucrats and policy advisors that are causing the OMNR to get gutted at an exponential rate, nor is it the district managers area managers or regional biologists. I have met many many at all levels and for the most part they want whats best for the resource and are always trying to find common ground between the plethoria of stakeholders. Yes sometimes the decisions are assinine without merit or direction ( as I see it) but to another stakeholder its exactly what they want

 

OMNR policy advisors are generally unseasoned youth who try to run inbetween all the bullets from the various stakeholders and paid lobbists who are trying to garner some attention on thier " cause" from a minister. At least we arent the US where adhoc PA's can be hired for advise on specific topics

 

Budget requests this year were much higher then in past years, there is direction with it, but what do you do when you ask for 75 million and only get 50 and are told to get the job done.

 

If you really want to blame anyone its not the PA's rather its much higher in the totum pole right to the cabinet office, thats where the real money is divied up as a premier's agenda is unfolded. Want more money for OMNR go talk to the cabinet office and the premier its his directive that dictates what money is allocated and to who....

Edited October 20, 2009 by aniceguy

[Dara]

Its not the MNR bureaucrats and policy advisors that are causing the OMNR to get gutted at an exponential rate, nor is it the district managers area managers or regional biologists. I have met many many at all levels and for the most part they want whats best for the resource and are always trying to find common ground between the plethoria of stakeholders. Yes sometimes the decisions are assinine without merit or direction ( as I see it) but to another stakeholder its exactly what they want

 

OMNR policy advisors are generally unseasoned youth who try to run inbetween all the bullets from the various stakeholders and paid lobbists who are trying to garner some attention on thier " cause" from a minister. At least we arent the US where adhoc PA's can be hired for advise on specific topics

 

Budget requests this year were much higher then in past years, there is direction with it, but what do you do when you ask for 75 million and only get 50 and are told to get the job done.

 

If you really want to blame anyone its not the PA's rather its much higher in the totum pole right to the cabinet office, thats where the real money is divied up as a premier's agenda is unfolded. Want more money for OMNR go talk to the cabinet office and the premier its his directive that dictates what money is allocated and to who....

 

 

Yep, right, the money is all going to silly stuff like welfare, and education, and health care.

There is only so much to go around. We need to elect people that spend money on what we want...and don't raise taxes (HST hint hint) to do it.

Speaking of which, I wonder what they are going to spend that windfall on.

[John Bacon]

Yep the MNR bios always make the right decisions. Its always a good move to stock lake trout and whitefish in Simcoe off the hawkestone dock durring smelt season. Seen guys goin with buckets of trout, Lovely !

 

Are sure that it was a bioligist who was stocking the fish or a bioligist who the made the decision to stock in the that location or at that time?

[cram]

Maybe some clarification, this seemed to stem from the stocking thread perhaps driven by chronzy's attitude. It seems many are all too happy to side with a tv personality and diminish any efforts coming from biologists. Perhaps foolishly, this gets me ire as I have sat in the hot seat at been berated and watched other science types berated by those who are ill-informed on the realities of resource management.

 

Not intended as a shot or dig at any individual, not exonerating the MNR from any poor decisions. Maybe just because its on tv or on the internet doesn't mean its so...

 

I didn't see the stocking thread but i guarantee there are more folks on this site who think poorly of Chronzy than think poorly of biologists.

 

It goes both ways though - i remember the cormorant thread and a biologist on the site ridiculing a poster because he didn't have peer-reviewed published research to back up his opinions. I'm pretty sure the poster didn't even know what peer-reviewed published literature was....but the point that his opinion wasn't worth anything because he wasn't delivering it with a scientific foundation was probably perceived as pretty arrogant.

 

It goes both ways...but in general i bet you'd find most on this site think incredibly highly of you guys (and girls).

 

And just to reconfirm - Chronzy is a jackass. :-)

Edited October 20, 2009 by cram

[bigfish1965]

Bios have University Degrees in Biology. I do not. I therefore am not qualified to judge their actions.

They get crap for the Atlantic Salmon stuff...however a decision was made to spend more time and effort on native species. I don't really see a problem with it since our ultimate goal is to return the lakes and rivers to their pristine and natural state as much as we can.

 

I believe the bios have the best interests of the environment in mind. Our local bio (Ann Yagi) is awesome. She is a wealth of knowledge and always likes to hear from anglers since we get to see things she won't. Biologists are an integral and important part of the MNR.

Now some of the wildlife techs make me scratch my head...but i guess u can't have everything