I've read the Jim Bain thread, the various opinions and your response. If living in Singapore has any advantages, one may be in knowing none of the people (and few of the organizations and issues) involved. From afar let me offer my thoughts:

1. Bob promised everyone on the Board anonymity when they signed up. No one should be forced to reveal who they are, where they work or how to contact them.

2. Your posts on treaty rights, fish survival/ returns and related issues are the best on the Board. They read as being very well informed, unbiased and, until the recent Cowlitz post, had the effect of defusing, not heightening, tension.

3. Like me, many Board members have come to accept a post from Salmo g as being authoritative. That you are held in such high esteem is a function both of the clarity and level of detail in your posts, and the lack of clarity/ overly emotional tone of some who disagree with you.

So while you may not have aspired to this position, you are one of the (very few) 'gurus' on the Board.

4. Because your views are accepted as gospel by so many, these same people hold you to a higher (perhaps unfair) standard than that of the average Board poster. Therefore, I hope you can understand the sense of hurt (even betrayal) if in your 'real life' you turn out to be someone with a professional stake (or even an official policy perspective to uphold)in the issues being debated.

I work in the investments business. WHO writes something is often just as important as WHAT they write. For example, if I'm reading an analyst's report that says 'Buy Amazon.com' I want to know if the author has a personal stake in Amazon's fortunes (e.g. works at one of Amazon's investment banks). US securities laws require this disclosure in most cases.

5. Now there's a big difference between posting as Salmo g and an analyst writing a company report. The analyst makes his living writing these reports. You are contributing your views on a voluntary, private basis. You are fully entitled to your privacy (as per point 1).

But I think that the other side of this discussion has a valid point, too, in requesting that a contributor who could be perceived to have a conflict of interest state in general terms what the nature of the conflict might be. For example, if someone's user profile reads "I am an employee of major power/ timber/ agribusiness company" or "Native American subsistence fisherman" then people reading the posts can do so with an increase awareness of the individual's possible biases.(No, I'm not contradicting point 1 above. I'm saying this information would be USEFUL and appreciated, NOT that you 'must' supply it.)

7. Irrespective of how much (if any) information you decide to share (or errors you wish to correct), please keep contributing to this Board. The Board would lose one of its clearest thinkers and most reasoned expert voices if you were say 'Adios' for good. But more importantly, your opinion counts, and by contributing you are helping the causes and creatures you clearly hold dear.

With respect,

Brad West

Thank You Snagly;
Thank You Salmo G;

I appreciate your well reasoned opinions and comments. I look forwrd to your future posts. I would hope to contribute 1% of what you do Salmo G.

Jeff

SalmoG I don't care who you are or what you do for a living,you are a fisherman and you're views and opions are just that...you'res
Weather we agree or disagree is not the issue here ,I for one welcome you're input in discussions on this board,I have learned much from you...Thanks
You are always wecome at my campfire
Osprey

------------------
Row Quietly and fish a Cataraft }<<(('>----<'))>>{
Release all Wild Fish

Thanks, guys. This positive feedback is appreciated.

It is my opinion that the only value of an internet website lies in its content. Bob has created a valuable site here by the content he created. He included a bulletin board forum so that the site's value could be further enhanced by the contributions of others. And add value we do. It's apparent that many anglers check this site time and again because as a dynamic site, the content and value is constantly changing. It's a good deal for all of us. And Bob seems always to be booked.

I read and post here because, first, I'm an angler. Second, I'm interested in the ecology and conservation of the world I live in, including the fish. I wish only to share my interests with those of you who also have this common interest. I'm not pushing any specific way of thinking. My posts are never intended to support any person or agency, and I try not to bash any - even if that is a little hard sometimes. I figure you will use the information I contribute as the sentient people you are, to either ignore, or confirm, refine, or modify your own opinions. I write here to satisfy my self, not some Big Brother. We all know where we can find more of that than we're really interested in.

Sometimes it's not all that easy to take compliments. Today I'm quite happy to believe I've got friends on this BB.

Sincerely,

Salmo g.

Snagly,
That is my point exactly. I along with I think everyone on this board have appreciated the post that *****EDITED BY BOB******* has made. But as a spokesperson on the Cowlitz relicensing process I felt that he stepped way out of bounds posting anything. Without re-reading the entire thread I do not believe that I ever negatively posted anything that ******EDITED BY BOB******** had said. I just feel that if you are going to have a very official position on a very sensitive subject that, if left to go the way that NMFS, Tacoma and WDFW have tentavively agreed upon...in 15 years you will see the end of the Cowlitz...if not sooner. Then in the arena of fairness and for all to better understand a sensitive issue at least acknowledge some affiliation. I know that most of you that post here are Oly Pen fisherman and therefore maybe not aware of the allocation problems that NMFS has allowed on the Columbia. I spoke at great length with RT about this, if you want more info regarding that email him. If you want more detailed information regarding the Cowlitz restoration email or phone me. Remember when numbers are used regarding fish it is absolutely vital that you know who are using the numbers because they will be skewed in favor of their position.

OK, enough from me for now...had a great couple of days catching Kings!

I am still having Fun, though the political arena isn't the easiest to have fun in.

Jim

JIM >>>>> I ASKED YOU NOT TO GIVE OUT HIS NAME, FINAL WARNING! Bob

[This message has been edited by Bob (edited 08-09-2000).]

Hey Jim, Who is this fella you talk about? And why do you have an agenda against him? Just curious.

[This message has been edited by Bob (edited 08-09-2000).]

I'm kind of torn on this one.... I can see the importance of keeping our personal info offline. Besides some of the other dangers of posting names and numbers mentioned, there's also professional computer hackers. They can take a name and email address and do really scary things with it, including spending your money. Its never a good idea to give your personal info in cyberspace. On the other hand, I see how Jim could feel that IF Salmo is the dreaded NMFS bigwig, there is a ethics issue here. I have read Salmos posts both here and on VFS and never have sensed an agenda... of course I wasn't wondering IF he was working for the NMFS either... Tough call here. I would view his posts differently if he was, and probably will because we dont really know. I hope there is a way to resolve this without losing Salmo from the board... either way, if he's just a fisherman, or working for NMFS, I want to hear what he has to say, I'd just look at it differently depending on which he was. I think I said that right??? anyway, Good Luck.

Parts of SG's Cowlitz post do read like NMFS propaganda. In particular, the statement "they continue to get better at collecting downstream migrants (the most important part of restoration)" reflects NMFS's reliance on transporting smolts in trucks and barges rather than improving the migration habitat of the river. Also, as SG himself has pointed out on other issues, using one years returns as proof of a recovery trend may elicit warm-and-fuzzy feelings but isn't necessarily accurate. Tweaking the status quo doesn't really change anything. Just look at the Snake River.

Still, questionable though SG's motives may be in this case, I don't think that one person has the right to decide to broadcast SG's name and employer over the internet just because he was fired up about the Cowlitz meeting. Given the privacy issues already mentioned, that was a big step and should have been thought through a bit more. Add to that the (still)unsubstantiated accusations of attempting to create confusion by posting conflicting posts and Jim's post begins to appear pretty paranoid. So, Jim, while I compliment your ability to detect BS, I think you should have let yourself cool off before writing that post.

Aren't we all big boys and girls here? Are we not able to think for ourselves? Then even IF Salmo works for the NMFS, why is it inappropriate for him to express his personal views on fish recovery here? I really don't care if he works for the NMFS or is a Roto-Rooter man, he has every right to express his views on this BB, without someone posting his personal info on the Web. Don't like his view? Then how about posting a rebuttal, and leaving it at that. Naming names, addresses, employers, etc is a bush-league tactic. If your rebuttal has any merit, it can be made without attempting to discredit Salmo himself.

Geez, like a guy can't voice an opinion without everyone believing it. Listen to both sides and make your OWN mind up. I see no reason why Salmo's job has ANYTHING to do with which side you choose. I happen to believe that the Cowlitz should remain the hatchery-supplemented guide haven that it is. That's MY opinion, and Salmo stated his . What our jobs are is really a non-issue. If we can't post our opinion without being chastised by the rest of the BB, then this board has too many baby-sitters. (I think Bob does a pretty good job of that). Post on, Salmo g., I always enjoy your posts whether I agree with them or not.


Fish on.....

it is my personal view that even if salmo g is who some persons think he is, that his personal and PRIVATE thoughts may be 180 degrees different than the official government stance on the fisheries issues. and if loud mouth bain is correct in his views he may have exposed salmo g to the enemies of our views perhaps to remove him from his post, and replace him with somebody with a more inline party view. have more to say but lunsh is over

Opinions are like sphincters. Everyone has one. To each his own. God forbid that a guy post an opinion. Next thing you know the commy's will be hauling us out to a pasture and whacking us, for voicing an opinion.

Jim, I have take the side of Salmo G. If there is a difference of opinion, post a rebuttal, and let all of the folks on the board use their noggin to cypher it for themselves.

Salmo's posts' seem to be very well though out, and I personally enjoy them. Only an opinion. There isn't any reason to drag someone through the mud, and "expose" them for a difference in opinion. There are a lot of freaks and geeks out there that would love to ruin someones life by getting personal information. Every one of us has an opinion that we are entitled to, and guess what? They may even be contradictary to those of the people that provide us with our incomes.

Thanks for stepping in and cleaning up the witch hunt Daddy Bob. You are the Big One.

R.E.M. wrote a good song called Wendell G--(Salmo g)long ago-I think on "Fables of the Reconstruction, ??? Ya not that it has anything to do with fishing, but what the hay. Many of the posts are fishless subjects. G--I appreciate many of your posts.

Coho