A conference on Saturday.

Yes. I went to a conference in Sacramento today from around 9-3. It lasted longer, but the folks I went with fortunately wanted to go home before the last session.

It was the Planning and Conservation League's (PCL) annual symposium (Greening California's Landscape). I went because I want to expose myslf to other sorts of jobs that people do in the field of conservation, as well as learn some about how the ESA (Endangered Species Act) is affected by climate change, as well as the (possibly) pending water bill and the effect it may have on the delta.

The delta session was pretty interesting. Senator Lois Wolk spoke, as well as a rep from the PCL (who was super young btw), and some guy from the Metropolitan Water District of Souther California, which apparently is a wholesaler to cities such as LA and San Diego. Apparently cities such as LA, and wholesalers such as this guy who spoke, have sort of a portfolio of water sources...the Owens Valley, the bay/delta area (via the California aqueduct), desalinaton (!) and the Colorado River. The more they can diversify their portfolio, the more they can guarantee that they will have a steady supply coming from somewhere or another. Even though the water bond states that they won't get any more water from the bay/delta (they'd be guaranteed what they are already getting I think), it's better than nothing, and it's a guarantee. So they are for the water bond, which may or may not construct some sort of canal around the delta (protecting the ecosystem (?)) to deliver water south.

Lois Wolk was avidly against the water bill, because there is no enforcement and apparently the delta communities get hosed. I'm not sure how they get hosed, but I was surprised that they didn't talk about whether it was a good idea or not for people to even continue farming in this area since the levy system is such a disaster, as is the ecology of the area (for which the ESA is used to sue and make sure that the water flows for the native species), the chemical buildup from agriculture and the peaty soils is alarming and poisonous to people and wildlife alike, and the general subsidence of the islands that were created when delta land was reclaimed in the early part of the last century, causing major flooding potential. That was a super long sentence.

I was a little disappointed that the speakers didn't really know the ecology and biology of the delta. I was also interested in what one person said about the biological opinions being only about the pumping of water (here's the FWS website, I need to look this stuff over). There have been lawsuits to stop pumping (which sends water down south to the San Joaquin Valley for agriculture and the cities down south) because of the endangered delta smelt. Everyone is suing everyone else and it's a huge disaster and the delta smelt are practically already extinct.  Now the farming interests are asking for a National Academy of Science panel to convene before the end of March to go over the science of how pumping affects the delta smelt. I'll tell you: they get sucked into the pumps and they die. But apparently, this is controversial, because even though they've had to stop the pumps during low flow times to protect the smelt, the smelt is still declining (I spoke with the guy who does the sampling and they found 4 this year. FOUR!!).  So just because the smelt aren't coming back means we should just pump away.

Obviously this is a complicated issue, and other measures need to be taken for the smelt to come back (such as introducing more natural variability cycles in the delta in salinity and flows), but for God's sake. The pumping isn't helping at all.

Jim Hobbs, who refers to himself as the grim reaper for native species, because he pretty much only gets called to work on species that are in dire situations (seems a little similar to my study species), was talking about the fact that it's almost inevitable that we will lose the natives...the Sacramento perch are already gone, replaced by "invited guest" species such as the striped bass that provide a fishery. There is an extinct chub already, and the delta smelt are circling the drain. So do we just adopt the introduced fishes as our "flagship species"? Just embrace the change? Yay striped bass because they are yummy and the perch are gone anyway? Yay threadfin shad because they are good enough baitfish and are hardier than the delta smelt and the longfin smelt? I don't know.

For some more background on the Sacramento-San Joaquin bay/delta ecosystem, check out the UC Davis Center for Watershed Science website: http://watershed.ucdavis.edu/research/delta.html

It makes me think about the similarities between conservation and conservatism.  Conservatives want things to be like "they remember it back in the day", so they are conserving what they like. In many ways, conservation workers are doing the same. It's just an interesting way to think about it...aesthetics. Perhaps I want things to be like they were when I was a kid, and the next generation will want what they  had as kids, and we're still moving the baseline forward but reaching back out of some nostalgic lust.  I don't know.

I've also been thinking about the public perception of science as either some sort of religion and fact (think of Joe Plumber talking about this being "scientific" or that being "based on scientific research") or as just more political machinations (think of the tea party perception of global climate scientists).  It just seems to me that the general public doesn't really understand what science is. And what science isn't.  I'll get into that later. But I'll repeat one of my favorite lines: Science isn't a democracy.  All ideas don't get to be represented (sorry intelligent designers); only the good ones get to be taught in the classroom.

OK, going to Ironworks tomorrow to climb routes. I went to Oakland on Monday and Thursday to train with Shannon, which was good. We did some workout on Thursday (well I sort of did it) that hurt my shoulders a bit...so I took it easier. I think I'd rather work on core and abs instead.  Fortunately we got a crossfit instructor to help explain some of the exercises to us. He seems to really know his shit, which is very cool. And he's interested in teaching us (even though that's his second job). James is convinced he's flirting with us.  Whatever the case, we're learning, and that's pretty cool.

psyched on life

Maybe it's because there are more daylight hours, or it's not raining, or I've been getting excellent training sessions in the Oakland gym with some fabulous people... Or possibly it's because I'm looking forward to a climbing trip, or have been hanging out a lot more with friends...

Could it be because I've been motivated more at work, and I'm actually collecting data on my third chapter? 

Why not because I'm off of Facebook, or I'm blogging again? Baking a ton, and cooking a lot of veggies too?

Whatever the reason, I'm pretty psyched right now.  Motivated to do things, getting out of the house a lot.  I remember what this is like. This is good.

I'm adding a blog to the blog list...

Parasite of the day!!!

A nice piece on why FB isn't real

My friend Lyn sent me this article, and once I got past the stuff about the history of friendship and on to the op-ed about how Facebook devalues friendships, I was into it. It put a lot of the things that I'd been thinking in to words.

I had another friend tell me that I'd regret leaving Facebook, and that he thought it was a "rash" decision. It wasn't. I'd been thinking about it for a while, actually. The weird privacy settings, the fact that you have to "reject" people who you don't want to be friends with, or just accept everyone, or defriend people...whatever.  It bothers me. It's like being in a crowded room with a lot of people you'd just rather avoid. I'm not the kind of person who wants to have superficial contact with a lot of people. I'd rather have meaningful contact with a few people. My friend Jeff says that it keeps marginal friendships alive. There isn't a single person on Facebook who I want to keep in touch with who's phone number or email address I don't have. And this is because I've put a lot of effort into the relationships I have in my life. Real friendships take effort. Facebook doesn't.

Not to mention the ads that are on there and the fact that "we are conducting market research on ourselves."

It's interesting to think that deciding NOT to be on Facebook is the outlier position, when only a year or two ago the exception was to be on a social networking site.

And about finding people, I suppose people could google me and come up with a way to get in touch if they really wanted to. Rather than seeing my name somewhere on someone's wall and friend requesting me without any note or anything at all.  I got friend requests from people I'd never met before.  I guess it's cool that maybe you could meet someone new on Facebook, but it's just too easy to let your tally of friends rack up with people you'll never see again, or even talk to again.

Anyway, here is a link to the piece.

I found these paragraphs particularly interesting:

"The most disturbing thing about Facebook is the extent to which people are willing—are eager—to conduct their private lives in public...Are we really so hungry for validation? So desperate to prove we have friends?


But surely Facebook has its benefits. Long-lost friends can reconnect, far-flung ones can stay in touch. I wonder, though. Having recently moved across the country, I thought that Facebook would help me feel connected to the friends I'd left behind. But now I find the opposite is true. Reading about the mundane details of their lives, a steady stream of trivia and ephemera, leaves me feeling both empty and unpleasantly full, as if I had just binged on junk food, and precisely because it reminds me of the real sustenance, the real knowledge, we exchange by e-mail or phone or face-to-face. And the whole theatrical quality of the business, the sense that my friends are doing their best to impersonate themselves, only makes it worse. The person I read about, I cannot help feeling, is not quite the person I know."

So that's a little more on the Facebook decision for now.  It's definitely not a big deal, I mean who cares if I'm on it or off of it. Plus, why couldn't I just keep my account and not use it? To answer that question, it's too distracting to have an account and not use it. Maybe I'll go back on at some point. It's just that I've been thinking about Facebook more critically, and in a broader context, and what is this blog for if not to put random thoughts down?

This is a fucking no-brainer

Men are less sensitive than women, and they feel less guilt.  Aren't we lucky to be women?

Here's the link.

More on altruism/cooperation

I read this overview of a paper that suggests that cooperation, altruism and symbiosis are more common than biologists originally thought (and across taxa and time). Dawkin's Selfish Gene made group selection a joke, but the pendulum seems to be swinging the other way with evidence of self-sacrifice (at least in terms of direct reproduction for some individuals) for the overall health of a group, or the ability to survive in tough niches.  Inevitably, the pendulum always settles in the middle though. Some examples of selfishness and cheating exist, as well as examples of altruism and group selection. And of course, organisms can shift over time to one side or the other. Such is life.

Check it out.

In other news, it's raining. Still. The fish are going to be happy, as are the fishermen and the farmers and everyone else who fights over water in the bay/delta area. On the other hand, with no water shortage it will be difficult to pass any kind of reform in delta management policies. Unless of course there are levy failures...which in my opinion would be pretty exciting! I'd love to be there when one of the levies breaks and water fills in submerged islands. Crazy!

One of my goals has been to learn more about the bay/delta ecosystem and the crisis it is facing. It's a complex issue, with many stakeholders that are bitterly opposed to each other. UC Davis is one of the centers for the issues, which is awfully convenient. At some point I'll try to put a post together with an overview of the topic.

Lemon inspiration

I decided to make this, because I liked the technique of slicing the yeasted dough and putting it into the loaf pan before baking.  Looks lovely, will probably taste it tomorrow.