[Geysers] OFVC Logbook -- Please Read

Tue Aug 10 20:30:33 PDT 2010

   A few thoughts on the subject of the log book and the highly endangered,
lesser striped geyser volunteer:

   First, part of the reason writing permission for the logbook got heavily
restricted in the '90s was that some really bad information was getting in
there, and yes, some of it came from us gazers.  Just this summer, I heard
times called over the radio that were off by hours because the geyser in
question had been in eruption long before it was noticed by the observer
calling it--and no, these were not "i.e." calls.  Not everyone has equal
knowledge and experience with the geysers, and, well, some people I just
can't explain, but the fact is, reliability, even among gazers, is _highly_
variable.  One highly desirable feature of a web-based, community-maintained
logbook would be the ability to vote up or down on the validity of a given
report.  I for one am not going to complain about variations of a minute or
two in the reported times of a geyser that erupts four times a day, but I
sure hope that some of those times I heard called didn't get into any
permanent record.

   Second, for whoever does embark on developing an open, web-based
reporting application, think very hard about security.  Sooner or later,
some bored, 4chan-lurking script kiddie _will_ come calling, so a means to
guard against and recover from vandalism will at some point be crucial.
Think about it _before_ every entry in the log gets changed to 60065 and
1337.

   Finally, I know no one wants to hear it, but I'm afraid I'd be very
surprised if the official logbook and hydrothermal observation volunteer
program as we knew them will be back any time soon, if ever.  Consider, to
the Park Service as an institution (not individuals in the Park Service),
what was their value?  I can only come up with two purposes:  First,
academic research.  Virtually all academic research on geysers in the last
20 years has focused on whether they can be used to predict natural
disasters such as earthquakes and volcanoes.  As unlikely as that is, that's
where the grant money has been.  As much as I'd like one, you don't get a
grant to see if you can predict Fan and Mortar or Giant more accurately.

   The other purpose has been to support prediction of the major large,
frequent geysers by the interpretive staff.  Previously, volunteer reports,
allowed geysers to be predicted even when staff were unavailable to make
observations, and the logbook record served to adjust predictions as
activity varied over time.

   Today, these needs are served, more or less, by the electronic monitors.
If the naturalists need to know when Grand erupted overnight, they download
the monitor.  If they need to know whether Grand has lengthened its interval
over the last month, they have a continuous electronic record to analyze.
Yes, predictions could be more accurate and updated more frequently if
experts were doing it, but ultimately, for the vast bulk of visitors just
passing through, it's not going to make a significant difference in their
experience, by which I mean one that would cause them to fill out an
official complaint or comment form.  On the other hand, each additional
official volunteer is one more representative of the NPS who might, on a bad
day, say or do something that did result in a complaint.  This is government
work.  Government likes arbitrary metrics, such as how many complaints were
filed against people reporting to a particular supervisor.  I'd be very
surprised if bureaucratic concerns like this didn't figure into the
reluctance of Park Service managers to take on what members of this list see
as "free" labor.

   As for observations of non-predicted features, from the perspective of
the immediate goals of the Park Service, does it really matter when, or even
whether Churn, West Triplet, Gemini, Spa, Solitary, Model, Uncertain, or
Grotto Fountain erupted?  Not really--it pretty much only matters to the
kinds of people who subscribe to this list:  geyser enthusiasts, tour
guides, historians, and various combinations thereof.

   One other thing--It seems to me that although we don't have a robust,
open, web-based logbook yet, we do have in this listserv the means to share
any and all information we want to.  I for one have about four years of
Geyser listserv messages in this gmail account, and when I want to remind
myself what the Giant Group has done lately, I just do a quick keyword
search, and there are all the relevant messages.  I know this list is
archived, both by the maintainers and by some subscribers, so any
information sent here _is_ a matter of record.  It's not perfect, but it's
better than losing perfectly good information.  It's up to the moderators,
of course, but it seems to me that if you have a vacation's worth of
observations of the kinds of geysers that don't pass muster for the logbook,
and you want the information recorded _somewhere_, type them up and send
them in.  Even an isolated series of eruptions of Solitary at least provides
some historical information.  Get a dozen or two such clusters of intervals
by different observers scattered over a summer, and you can start thinking
seriously about whether it constitutes a statistically meaningful sample as
well.

David Schwarz

-----Original Message-----

> From: Ken Reeves <kreeves5 at cox.net>
> To: Geyser Observation Reports <geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu>
> Sent: Fri, Aug 6, 2010 7:40 am
> Subject: Re: [Geysers] OFVC Logbook -- Please Read
>
> Dave,
>
> Can you please provide what should or should not be turned in, how we get
> it into the logbook, which geysers should we turn in, etc. especially for
> those of us who are fairly new or don't get up there very frequently.
>
> A few years ago, I turned in my observations of some of the lesser geysers,
> I believe it was Solitaire Geyser, but was told by the ranger at the visitor
> center, that "we do not record data for that geyser", and it kind of left me
> with a bad taste on spending the time to gather the data.
>
> Thanks
>
> Ken Reeves
>
> David Monteith wrote:
> > .... To be successful,
> > geyser gazers need to share information. The logbook provides a
> > centralized place for us to put that information. I'm being very
> > selfish here. I want to know what is going on. The logbook provides
> > the details that don't get onto the list serve. I doesn't matter if the
> > NPS wants the information or scientists of park visitors. What matters
> > is that we, the geyser gazer community, want the information. So please
> > take the time to get your data into the logbook. Your efforts will be
> > greatly appreciated.
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Geysers mailing list
> Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu
> https://lists.wallawalla.edu/mailman/listinfo/geyse
>
> _______________________________________________
> Geysers mailing list
> Geysers at lists.wallawalla.edu
> 
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: </geyser-list/attachments/20100810/6802089f/attachment.html>