Sunday, March 18, 2012

2655.txt

date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:04:53 -0000
from: "Mcgarvie Michael Mr \(ACAD\) k364" <M.McgarvieatXYZxyz.ac.uk>
subject: FW: FW: Jones et al 1990 (FOI_07-09)
to: <P.JonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk>

Phil,


Dave Palmer has responded as below. We have received a request and the issue is whether we
deal with it under FOIA or the EIR mentioned below.


As this may be the beginning of a stream of these I wonder whether half an hour round a
table with you, Dave Palmer and myself might be useful and help us to focus what we should
do here? If you agree I will try and arrange this.


Thanks


Michael


___________________________________________________________________________________________

From: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB) l212
Sent: 27 February 2007 14:40
To: Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD) k364
Subject: FW: FW: Jones et al 1990 (FOI_07-09)


Michael,

Having looked at the site below (and found numerous other references to the requester
online), I can understand Phil's reluctance to respond. However, unless the request is
unclear, we have a valid request.

However, how we deal with it is another matter.


A number of issues present themselves


1. Do we 'hold' the data? - Is it UEA that actually holds this information? If it is on
disks in Phil's possession outside the UEA, there might be an argument - comes down to a
matter of control - if these were done as part of his work at UEA, the requester could
argue that UEA effectively is the 'holder' of the data...


2. EIR vs. FOI... this is technically, actually an EIR (Environmental Information
Regulations) request! There are some advantages to treating it as FOI as under EIR (eg.
there is no 'appropriate limit') BUT there are more advantages to treating it under EIR.
For example, we can extend response time to 40 working days, and, the only 'vexatious' test
is manifest unreasonableness and I think that this might be a possibility depending upon
the circumstances surrounding the acquisition of the information (see DEFRA site for this
issue at: [1]http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/opengov/eir/pdf/guidance-7.pdf)

(General EIR guidance at:
[2]http://www.defra.gov.uk/corporate/opengov/eir/guidance/index.htm)


I would suggest that we treat as EIR and go from there.... we will either have to reject it
completely as vexatious or answer it... there is NO appropriate limit under EIR but our
chances of calling it vexatious are higher and we have longer to respond. We can also
charge but there will be some work to pull that off (ie. create fee structure that we can
send to the requester)


Am happy to meet to discuss this further.... this is a complex request....


Cheers, Dave

___________________________________________________________________________________________

From: Phil Jones [mailto:p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk]
Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 10:25 AM
To: Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD) k364; david.palmeratXYZxyz.ac.uk
Subject: Re: FW: Jones et al 1990

MIchael, David,
I don't really see this as an FOI request. I am really loathed to
send them the data even if I could find it. The paper was published
in 1990 and the work done in 1989. The work was done years before
there was the FOI. The data used were from the Soviet Union, Australia
and China.
One of the reason's for not helping them is this link.
[3]http://www.climateaudit.org/
and then click on the story called 'Phil Jones and the Dutiful Comrades'
The story (for want of a better way of describing it) was written by the
person who has asked me for the data.
I would ask you to skim the story and read the tone of it and some
of the comments on the site. No matter what I do or say will make
one bit of difference to their attitudes. It will just waste my time. If
you want me to go through this pointless exercise then it is only me
who can do this and with a number of trips away, I don't have the time
before the last week of March.
As an aside - the data we have for Malye Karamkuly is almost
complete from about 1920 until 1988. This one happens to be
the first one in the list. The 1990 paper had co-authors from Russia,
China, Australia and the US. The Russian/Soviet data were received
from the Russian. He is now working in the USA.
Best Regards
Phil
At 08:44 23/02/2007, Mcgarvie Michael Mr \(ACAD\) k364 wrote:

Phil,

Dave Palmer has logged the recent email to you (copied to him) as another FOIA request. I
can see that we might be into a run of these given the website you directed us to last
week. I am sorry that my optimism that the previous request was a one-off has been
unfounded.

Under FOIA we have 28 days to respond - the same principles apply as with the previous
request (ie is data publicly available somewhere else; is the length of time to assemble
these specific data sets too costly etc). Dave will respond formally on behalf of the
University (and I guess that this may also end up posted on a website somewhere).

Let me now how you want to proceed here.

Best wishes

Michael


Michael McGarvie
Senior Faculty Manager
Faculty of Science
Room 0.22C
University of East Anglia
Norwich NR4 7TJ
tel: 01603 593229
fax: 01603 593045
[4]m.mcgarvieatXYZxyz.ac.uk

___________________________________________________________________________________________

From: Palmer Dave Mr (LIB) l212
Sent: 22 February 2007 20:45
To: Mcgarvie Michael Mr (ACAD) k364
Subject: FW: Jones et al 1990

Michael,
I will log this as another FOI request - different requester and different request I
think....
Back to Phil for more input?

Cheers, Dave
___________________________________________________________________________________________

From: Steve McIntyre [[5]mailto:stephen.mcintyreatXYZxyzronto.ca]
Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 5:15 PM
To: Jones Philip Prof (ENV) f028
Cc: David Palmer
Subject: Jones et al 1990
Dear Phil, a couple of years ago, I requested the identities and data for the Russian,
Chinese and Australian networks studied in Jones et al Nature 1990 on urbanization. At the
time, you said that it would be unduly burdensome to locate the information among your
diskettes as the study was then somewhat stale. However, I notice that Jones et al 1990
has been cited in IPCC AR4 (in the section where you were a Coordinating Lead Author) and
continues to be cited in the literature (e.g. Peterson 2003).

Accordingly, I re-iterate my request for the identification of the stations and the data
used for the following three Jones et al 1990 networks:

1. the west Russian network
2. the Chinese network
3. the Australian network

For each network, if a subset of the data of the data was used, e.g. 80 stations selected
from a larger dataset, I would appreciate all the data in the network, including the data
that was not selected.

In each case, please also provide the identification and data for the stations used in the
gridded network which was used as a comparandum in this study.

Thank you for your attention.

Steve McIntyre

Prof. Phil Jones
Climatic Research Unit Telephone +44 (0) 1603 592090
School of Environmental Sciences Fax +44 (0) 1603 507784
University of East Anglia
Norwich Email p.jonesatXYZxyz.ac.uk
NR4 7TJ
UK
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

No comments:

Post a Comment