[obol] Re: Wherefore art thou, oh albatross?

  • From: "Tom Crabtree" <tc@xxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: <joel.geier@xxxxxxxx>, "'Oregon Birders OnLine'" <obol@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Mon, 10 Feb 2014 13:55:09 -0800

Unfortunately Joel has confused some of the geography in his last post.  
Perhaps the batteries on his GPS device were running low.  The Benthic-Cascadia 
Unclaimed Zone (B-Cuz) is a wedge of ocean between the claimed boundaries of 
California and Oregon.  It no doubt will be claimed at some point by the Nation 
State of Jefferson, pot growing capital of the Universe.  I hear they will 
prepare their declaration of independence once their ambition returns, but 
right now they are busy looking for snacks.  

The area between Oregon and Washington is alternately known as.  Since it 
involves a dispute between two states it has been referred to the Western 
Hemisphere Oceanographic Coordinating Assembly to Resolve Sovereignty (WHO 
CARES)for resolution.  It will sort through the issues involving "territorial 
sea" [not to be confused with Great Big Sea] "coastal waters" [not to be 
confused with Muddy Waters]" "Ocean Stewardship Area" [not to be confused with 
Billy Ocean nor Patrick Steward[ship] and of course the previously mention EEZ, 
[not be confused with Jay-Z, Jay Leno or L. L. Cool J].   

-----Original Message-----
From: obol-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:obol-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of 
Joel Geier
Sent: Thursday, February 06, 2014 5:51 AM
To: Oregon Birders OnLine
Cc: Brandon Wagner
Subject: [obol] Re: Wherefore art thou, oh albatross?

Brandon & All,

First I should correct confusion regarding the geometry of the Benthic-Cascadia 
Unclaimed Zone (B-CUZ): Although there was a proposal to locate a circle within 
the B-CUZ, the B-CUZ itself is nominally wedge-shaped.

The B-CUZ Subcommittee on Geometry, Ethics, and General Fussiness disputes some 
details of the map that Mike Patterson has shown on his blog, but agrees with 
the general shape. The zone is bounded by a straight line to the south, and 
what nominally appears as a polyline to the north.

The dispute arises from the fractal nature of the Washington coast.
Unfortunately, the geographic databases used by common mapping applications 
tend to represent coastlines as grossly oversimplified polylines. Temporal 
changes in the coastline (such as headland erosion, coastal landslides, and 
seasonal beach sand migration) are also not represented.

The Subcommittee furthermore notes that there cannot be any unclaimed zone that 
is circular, based on the nearest-point-of-land rule. A claimed zone could be 
circular, for example, the EEZ around the highest point on the island nation of 
Kiribati, just before it disappears into the sea due to global climate change. 

Granted, this is all tangential to your passing mention of a circle, but 
there's a reason why we call them the Fussiness subcommittee.

Second, about reports made while your head is underwater: 

We will accept these for loons, alcids, grebes, and Humboldt Penguins.
By the way, we also accept payment using loonies (Canadian coins, not people 
who claim to have seen Ivory-billed Woodpeckers in their backyard).

However, our Subcommittee on Gadgetry and Technobabble considers GPS 
coordinates taken from cell phones in subaqueous situations to be unreliable, 
with the current technology.


Third, about using GPS coordinates for more conventional, subaerial
observations:

We note that current cellphone GPS technology tends to record the position of 
the observer, not that of the bird.

We'll be forming a new subcommittee to look into this issue, as soon as we can 
think of a suitably pompous name. We do have faith that the problem of getting 
exact bird coordinates will be solved by one of two emerging developments:

a) Robotic cell phones

After you snap a photo of a bird, your cell phone will leap out of your hands 
and crawl, hop, or swim to the bird that matches that image, and record the GPS 
coordinates. This is quite unlike the behavior of current cell phones, which 
sometimes leap out of your hands, but then just stop working (as my wife's did 
last week). 

Unfortunately, the robotic prototypes thus far are still too slow to catch up 
with birds before they fly into the next county. However, we hear that the 
Pentagon has $5 billion in its budget to continue research on this promising 
concept.

b) Physical Applets

Unlike software applets which have no mass, these will be actual, tiny, 
flight-capable devices that launch from your iPhone or iPod, and fly out to the 
location of a bird that you've just spotted. Only Apple mobile devices will 
have them, hence the capitalized name "Applet." 

Current prototypes are roughly the size and shape of a hoverfly.
Unfortunately, an engineer's decision to field-test them on Common Poorwills 
has resulted in a bit of a setback.

Happy birding,
Joel




OBOL archives: www.freelists.org/archive/obol Manage your account or 
unsubscribe: //www.freelists.org/list/obol
Contact moderators: obol-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx





OBOL archives: www.freelists.org/archive/obol
Manage your account or unsubscribe: //www.freelists.org/list/obol
Contact moderators: obol-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. obol
  3. Archive
  4. 02-2014