Eric Borneman coral controversy

[tims]

As a scientist, a couple of things jump out at me about this situation.


All I'm saying is that the way things went seemed to not match the permit application, the original intentions stated. As someone who has both written and reviewed grant applications and renewals and I can tell you that the permit application looks like an attempt to coat-tail a for-profit venture on an academic premise.

i agree with you on reading the permit. ( since i do order mice from jackson labs.


question on the super unknown letter eric sent and pro has..
if it clears everything up. then why not post it? if this is a leter that was sent to NOAA then it will come out sooner or later.

 

[sihaya]

One possible problem with the certified letter is that it may contain a lot of statements/information that are off-point to what the letter is supposed to be about (i.e. a formal update on the status of the corals). This *might* be why the FOIA office is having problems getting it to me. But I'm pretty sure I can still get it... or at least the parts of it that are relevant to the corals and project.

 

[andybeats]

As a scientist, a couple of things jump out at me about this situation.

Look at the original permit application. The original intent was to identify a coral "model species" for research.

A model species in research is a representative species chosen for ease of care, short reproductive cycles, easily identified phenotype-linked genotypes, etc. So for mammalian research, the mouse is the model species because it's easily cared for, has a 3week gestation period (pregnancy time) and short lifespan, so multigenerational genetic studies can be done in a reasonable amount of time. For simple eukaryotes the model is C. elegans a simple worm. Or the fruitfly, the zebrafish for fish, etc.

So identifying and beginning a new model system for corals is a big deal, scientifically. Coming up with a system and exploiting it successfully and having it adopted by other scientists is a huge undertaking, almost a career in itself.

Ok, so great.

What the hell does this have to do with the project in Florida?

If I had to guess, I would think that it wasn't to identify a single "model species" as stated in the first couple paragraphs of the permit, because if you read further you see mentioned representative species from various geographic locales. I think the vested intent of the permit application was to start up a repository-type operation like this, with the gold-standards for coral species instead of mice:

http://jaxmice.jax.org/list/rax6.html

My link is an example - a quasi-scientific but for-profit operation with mice for sale. A researcher opens the catalog, "oh i need a mouse with defect x, or with x coat color, there it is #4521! I'll take a dozen yes overnight please". So the intent in the permit seems to be along those lines, but for corals. Having restricted species/strains would be huge in terms of scientific legitimacy.

All I'm saying is that the way things went seemed to not match the permit application, the original intentions stated. As someone who has both written and reviewed grant applications and renewals and I can tell you that the permit application looks like an attempt to coat-tail a for-profit venture on an academic premise.

holy crap!! thank you for bringing an actual discussion abou these documents back to this thread!! everyone says its a witch hunt, and they points their torches back!

for all those that think its pointless to discuss broken info... if all the info was there, there wouldnt be a disscusion, something would either be done or not done. if all the info was available, some one would be in trouble, because whether it was all eric, or the sanctuary, or noaa, some wrong was done, i think everyone can at least agree on that point?

 

[andybeats]

One possible problem with the certified letter is that it may contain a lot of statements/information that are off-point to what the letter is supposed to be about (i.e. a formal update on the status of the corals). This *might* be why the FOIA office is having problems getting it to me. But I'm pretty sure I can still get it... or at least the parts of it that are relevant to the corals and project.

i dont see why you need to get it anymore, chuck has it, and i believe him, he just needs to post it, all he has to do is use a little white out and cover the names that are in danger, at least that would clear eric right? :wink:

 

[sihaya]

Yeah, but, I have a sneaky feeling he would probably have to white-out more than just names. Billy Causey alludes to the fact that there's more in the letter than is of any concern to him or the FKNMS. That makes me think it's a little more complicated than just censoring names...

 

[Anonymous]

This thread would be about 25% of this size, if only someone who said something on page 3, and briefly on the top of page 4 would have kept up what they said they were going to do.

 

[Anonymous]

to what end, exactly ?

To know what happened to *hundreds* of pounds of protected Florida corals which were taken by a respected hobby expert for a "research project" that suddenly and mysteriously ended without any notification to the hobby community.

and you consider spamming hobby bulletin boards the best, most effective, reasonable way to achieve this?

why have you not posted on coral-list ?

and once again-i question the relevance to the hobby community at large, re: the requirement to notify someone

 

[sihaya]

Vitz-

This thread would be about 25% of this size, if only someone who said something on page 3, and briefly on the top of page 4 would have kept up what they said they were going to do.

I think I'm going to give the above another shot.

 

[MrAnderson]

My surprise is that the permit application passsed muster at NOAA.

The promissorial checks it wrote are just way too big for almost any individual or organization to cash. If I'm reading his intentions correctly, he wanted to set up something akin to the ATCC, or Jackson Labs, a repository that stores the genetic gold-standard of each species/strain, bacteria for the former, mice for the latter, all available for a price.

it's not a bad idea mind you, it's just that the scale of the endeavor is ridiculous. the permit application should've been answered with "lol" instead of being approved.

 

[sihaya]

My surprise is that the permit application passsed muster at NOAA.

Would it help to point out that the permit application came AFTER many corals were already in possession?

 

[MrAnderson]

lol

 

[Liquid4ce]

I know you Sara and I don't believe for one second caring about corals is your motivation. You enjoy stirring up trouble and the attention it creates. That is why you went after Jerel/Bomber/Spanky a year and a half ago. That is why you went after Eric and Kim for the salt study. And, that is exactly why you are doing this now.

I've followed Sara's reef forum "career" at some at her various stops, by stops I mean... places she's no longer welcome to visit, :lol: which is an ever growing list. Since her track record is proven, why not just kill the cancer before it spreads... Give her the boot.

Apparently Sara you think people don't have memories... But I recall your actions much the way Steven does. In fact, I recall a point when you were quite smitten with EB to put it mildly... So your motivation? ...hell hath no fury :twisted:

woohoo post 2!

 

[MrAnderson]

sara = sihaya?

is she hot? that data is crucial to decision-making in this scenario... for me at least, anyhow.

 

[sihaya]

sara = sihaya?

is she hot? that data is crucial to decision-making in this scenario... for me at least, anyhow.

LMAO... if you want those documents, I'm afraid you'll have to email me: [email protected]

 

[65]

As a former law student myself, I can't let this one slide:

it's "albeit," not "I'll be it," and "although" is better every time.

I don't make editorial comments often, but that err was grossly negligent.

 

[Liquid4ce]

sara = sihaya?

is she hot? that data is crucial to decision-making in this scenario... for me at least, anyhow.

LMAO... if you want those documents, I'm afraid you'll have to email me: [email protected]

I've seen them... not hot :roll:

 

[Liquid4ce]

As a former law student myself, I can't let this one slide:

it's "albeit," not "I'll be it," and "although" is better every time.

I don't make editorial comments often, but that err was grossly negligent.

as was phantam... but who's counting :lol:

 

[Anonymous]

Let's all please focus on issues pertinent to the discussion, rather than gossip and personal attacks about the people doing the discussing.

Geez, some people...

 

[sihaya]

---

 

[Anonymous]

I've seen them... not hot :roll:

Geez, you are trying to make this about sex, and it really isn't. I mean, I know RDO is like that, but can't one thread be about corals, reefs, and our hobby? Sexism is so immature.