Reply to comment
Lack of Surprise at The Camera Study Results!
April 3, 2007 by Anonymous, 2 years 33 weeks ago
Comment id: 20114
Reply
About us
Science Blog was started in August 2002. It lives, breathes and eats press releases from research organizations around the globe. Most of what you read here are press releases from the outfits named in the stories themselves. Got a news story you think belongs here? Let's talk. The other half of the equation is blog posts from readers like you. So if you have an interest in science, please register and join others like you in an ongoing, vibrant dialog about what makes the world tick. Meantime, please take a minute to read our Privacy Policy and Site Disclaimer.Recommended
Andrew Sullivan Dan Sullivan Doug Arellanes Emmanuelle Richard Faith Sullivan Fred Bortz Heather Havrilesky Henry Copeland Kate Sullivan Ken Layne lagreenbean.com LAist.com Maggie Sullivan Matt Welch NewYorkology Opinion L.A. Ron Kaye Slashdot Steve Elzer & Family TheNewsroom.org Thor Garcia Tony Pierce Wonkette OlderThanks CNET for naming Science Blog one of your Blog 100!
It seems completely self-evident that these results confirm:
1) There are more camera triggering exposures of humans using ATVs than on foot, or of animals, or of animals and humans not on ATVs put together. Simply put, ATVs enable users to cover much more ground, thus gathering more exposures.
2) Large carnivores are more active on the trails and roads when there are not humans around. Seems they don't want to get run over by those noisy, smelly, fast moving things either.
3) The biggest "overlap" of human/large mammal use is when the humans first enter the wilderness areas in numbers during the morning.
4) There is a definite correlation between human use and lessened animal activity.
While it is certainly useful to have actual numbers to affirm observations that have been common to all who use/live on this "blue marble", why is it newsworthy? I ask: Did someone get paid for these pithy observations? Can any of the rest of the planets population get grants or employment for studies of how such amazingly obvious phenomenon have yet to be recorded so that academia can understand what anyone watching squirrels in their backyards already knows?