2012 conventions 2012 election 2013 session 2013 special election arts arts and culture author ballot measures bomb books budget bullying business charlie hales children clackamas climate change coal courts crime culture culture club democrats drugs economy education environment family film fluoride food gay rights guns handguns health health care health insurance high school history housing immigration international internet kitzhaber law legislature lgbt literary arts living marijuana medicine mental health military minor parties mohamed mohamud movies music native americans news newspaper obama olympics oregon our town parenting pers photography police politcs politics port portland portland business journal portland mayor president prevention public safety religion republicans rnc romney rural salem sam adams sandy hook schools science shooting sports suicide supreme court taxes television terrorism theater third parties timber payments transportation union university of oregon violence washington water wildfire women

Anyone can access this article online and see in table one that the article is not comparing fish from the same years or sometimes even the same area of the river (take a close look at table 1).

Also, these tags are HUGE compared to the size of the fish that they are inserted into. I would imagine many fish died from the tag itself.

Finally, this article never mentions the adults that do or do not return. Hmmmm, I'd have to chalk this one up to poor self promotion on the part of a certain author (who owns the company that does this research).

posted 4 years, 7 months ago
view in context