Yea Sky, you probably work for wireless industry doing studies that conclude it doesn't, while other studies from outside the wireless industry say it does. What was that about radar detectors and police , and Leukemia in kids from prolonged electromagnetic radiation exposure from power lines? Ah, It's hard to remember those have been out so long. There are many studies showing the link with cellphones and the microwave/electromagnetic radiation they give off. That's good enough evidence for me, and the outcome of the findings has no effect on my job, other than telling me to use the cell's less. But if you work for the wireless industry, the outcomes certainly can effect your livelyhood from people's airtime. It kinda goes along the same mentality with the fish. We have all these studies out showing the correlation of dams vs salmon/stelelhead declines, yet people argue their validity saying its gotta be all these other reasons(especially the people directly affected by dam removal). I can understand trying to protect your jobs, but give me a brake. It's plain common sense that dams have caused the declines and have modified all other effects along the way. They reduce smolt numbers directly in the turbines at 10-30% per dam, they slow the water down enough so that the current hardly carries them out to the ocean(fish go to ocean with head pointed up stream)which in turn makes other things a larger factor such as temperature and predation.
I mean what is with people? Sure, say you want to "explore other ways than dam removal", or make the argument that " economically we can't afford to remove them", But don't make the argument that dams aren't the main reason behind decimated wild runs. If you do you should be forced to take a course in fisheries biology (and pass it). :p