Do you think Government money should be spent studying the mating habits of fish?

Question

We went to one of our kid's fraternity induction.
The speaker was a Prof. who studied the mating habits of a certain kind of fish.
He travelled ALL OVER THE WORLD studying this fish in a bunch of different rivers - ALL ON YOUR TAX DOLLAR and took a dozen students with him.

His conslusion - after years of study - fish of the same size on this species like to mate together.
They do not mate with smaller or larger fish than them. They try to find the same size.
THAT's IT! And YOU paid for that earth shattering / life changing ...drivel.

As I state in my longer posts - my typing sucks so forgive my mistakes. I should proof the questions and never do!

THIS HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE USA. Why couldn't the people in other countries send him their findings? Why did he take 2 years and a dozen federally funded trips (all over the globe) to say fish mate with fish of the same size?

Answer 1

It's called "pork". I don't like it, either. In 2006, there were 11 appropriations bills that constitute the discretionary portion of the federal budget. In these bills were 9,963 projects (pork) costing taxpayers $29 billion. Some notable projects:
-$1,300,000 for berry research in Alaska
-$2,300,000 for the International Fertilizer Development Center (like Congress needs to study how to produce crap)
-$500,000 for construction of the Sparta Teapot Museum in Sparta, North Carolina.
-$250,000 for the National Cattle Congress (NCC) in Waterloo, Iowa
These items are inserted into bills in committee and are seldom voted on. This is democracy at work...

What I find interesting, though, is that in 1993, the last year Democrats controlled the House, there were 1,712 items determined to be pork in the budget totaling $6.6 billion. The number of projects increased by 940 percent between 1996 and 2006. Remember who controlled Congress during that period? Those "fiscal-conservative" Republicans.

I'm not saying that Democrats are more "fiscally-responsible", but they never claimed to be...

This is yet another reason for the line-item veto and a fiscally responsible President.

Answer 2

The late Senator William Proxmire used to bestowe a Golden Fleece Award for this type of spending.

Check out www.taxpayer.net/awards/goldenfleece/about.htm, some of them are a hoot.

In answer to your direct question, yes I do think money should be spend studying mating habits of fish. There is cry that our oceans are being over fished in many areas and understanding mating habits certain species of fish might help us understand what to do about increasing the fish population. Especially with more and more people eating fish.

This particular study sounds like a crock. What's needed is a more through review of these grant applications before they are funded. I worked for a University that had a team (18 people) who did nothing but fill out grant applications, spinning the proposal to improve it's chances of being funded because they knew what the grant reviewers were looking for.

Grants seemed to be funded based on how good the proposal was presented not on how much good would come from the research.

Answer 3

Well, I guess it matters if you're a fish.

I'd like to know what university and what professor, so I could read his research and judge it for myself. Was it wholly federally funded, or did he receive any funds from private donors?

You never know when some kind of knowledge will come in handy. Another poster mentioned the fishing industry. It might be good to know, if this fish is good eating and we want them multiply as fast as possible. We'd then know to put fish of similar size together, instead of with larger or smaller fish, to increase our yield.

And, how do you measure the worth that those students are getting in experience? They are learning how to conduct research in the field. That kind of experience is invaluable. Those students may go onto do all sorts of "earth shatttering/life changing" things.

Our tax dollars go to all kinds of sources. We can't all agree with all of them. For instance, my tax dollars have gone to fund a war which I believe we should not have entered into. I'm more ticked off about that than the guy and his fish.

Answer 4

I think it is ridiculous to fund this type of thing. I also though have a problem with funding oil companies research. Alot of tax payer money is wasted that could go to better things. I could care less about the mating habits of fish, but I do care when the local schools do not have adequate supplies.

Answer 5

I think is a stupid way to spend the money. That is the problem with too much spending, you never know how is it going to be spend and I like government smaller. I think the misuse of our taxes is an insult to our forefathers who fought so hard for appropiate taxation. The professor didn't need to spend the money of the tax payers, he just needed a little common sense to know that fishes don't like to mate with somebody bigger or smaller. I could've told him that!

Answer 6

I don't think that was all he has concluded. Better spent on that behalf than financing more police to conclude in the Governments attempt to be in Power over the people as the loop hole shows. They surely finace some CIA Acts. They finace Spy Tactics on you and I.

Spend it on Science, Math and History Why don't they.

And it's not your tax dollar either. Thats Hype!! BS. It's Credit and Investments Money. Your dollars are paying the wages of them, and becomming invesments in OIL STOCK!

Answer 7

yup, worth it I think

the Prof and the students both are learning and thinking.
they know things that you and don't about those fish

it could have implications for humans, curing disease, understanding our true natures, etc.

I don't earn enough to pay taxes so maybe it colors my opinion.

The students probably had to pay most of their own way.

What was the grant like 100K maybe, 300,000,000 people here in the US, it didn't cost you much, do the math if you care, or give em a grant to figure it out is you cant.

Answer 8

Yes the government has an interest in fuding pure sciences. Fish mating practices have a massive impact on our food supply.

Answer 9

There are opportunities at my school to do this all the time. It is a joke. My roommate went on a 3 week study trip to Jamaica and spent 2 of those weeks on the beach. "Absorbing the culture" is what the beach bum Prof. called it. Less then 1 week of study because of travel days. ALL EXPENSES PAID by the college courtesy of the Government!

Answer 10

If it were a study on commercial fish or an endangered species then i would say it's ok.