text:
At the onset of this post, let me firmly state that I love taxonomy. I even attended taxonomy classes at university. Biogeography, speciation, splitting, lumping, all that jazz really sets my boat afloat (well, the lumping not so much). I also love bird identification. And I believe there's a place for taxonomy, and there's a place for bird identification. And since April this year, I strongly believe that these places should be mutually exclusive:
But … let me quickly take a deep breath here …
Let me explain.
I've been birding for 30 years now, and for the last 20 year, I've mostly birded in the same geographic regions. This means I know my birds quite well. I also know the field guides I use very well, and I know where to find which bird species in the book. More importantly, I know which groups/families occur in these regions, which ones resemble each other, and where to find them in my books even in cases where similar groups are found in different segments of my field guide because they are not closely related to each other. You see, the species in my field guides, as in the vast majority of field guides everywhere, are in taxonomic order.
I never gave this last aspect much thought, and I never felt it had any impact whatsoever on my ability to identify birds. Then came April, and with it my first ever trip to South-East Asia.
The fact that this was my first visit to this very diverse and exciting region meant that I basically knew nothing about its birds, which – I felt – turned me into a complete novice to birds and birding:
I did not know a single species during the first few days and had to look up every single bird I saw in my field guides. I knew nothing about their vocalizations. I knew nothing about the vast majority of bird families occurring in the region. Heck, I didn't know that these bird families even existed in the first place, as they have no representative in my neck of the globe. I had no idea about the taxonomic order of families occurring in South-East Asia. I was completely reliant on my field guides, they were the masters and I was their hostage and slave.
All I knew was how to walk around, find birds and get them into my binocular view. The rest, I felt and hoped, was the job of my field guide: allow me to make a definite identification of what I was seeing out in the field as quickly as possible and with the least mistakes possible. This, I thought, was the process field guides were designed for, their raison d'etre: to allow the identification of birds one sees outside in the field.
Oh boy, was I mistaken. And boy, did I make mistakes.
Is this a Greater Green Leafbird in leaves or is this a leaf in Greater Green Leafbirds? You see, that's what you need field guides for. It does not matter much in such a situation whether the Leafbird is more closely related to a Flowerpecker than the leaves are to a Leafbird.
Working with field guides and without background knowledge was a horrible experience. I suffered, I lost birding time, and I made the most stupid mistakes imaginable. Not the kind of mistakes one makes when trying to differentiate between Willow and Alder Flycatcher or Acrocephalus-warblers purely on the basis of visual field marks. No, we are talking about truly embarrassing stuff.
And I soon found out that the main source of these mistakes was … well, my inexperience in that particular region, of course, but beyond that … the taxonomic order of species within my field guides! Yes, not the content of the guides themselves, simply the order in which the species are arranged within the book made my life so much harder there than it could have been.
Why? Well, for the following reasons:
If you see an unknown bird in the field, you will quickly flip through your guide until you find a bird that is a reasonable fit. Once you have found such a "reasonable fit", you will likely not flip through the entire remainder of your field guide to make sure there isn't a similar species in an entirely unrelated group. No, you're out in the field where time spent not looking at the field but at a book will mean potential lifers could sneak by you undetected! If much later you realize that there are other similar species, just not on the same page but somewhere else in your field guide, it is likely much too late to get back onto the bird and verify which one it really was you were seeing. This was probably the most severe and most common mistake.
Okay, the point above sounds a bit abstract but actually happened to me. I was seeing all sorts of small to very small songbirds with yellow bellies and a greenish back in the dense foliage of Indonesia's trees. It was difficult to get good looks at them and they therefore consumed a good portion of my birding time. Soon I learned that all the birds I was seeing were either some female-type Sunbirds or a species called Common Iora. After a while I had seen all the female-type sunbird species there were in the area and plenty of Ioras and stopped looking at small yellow birds in dense foliage. There just didn't seem to be a potential for additional lifers anymore. Until I accidentally stumbled upon the Golden-bellied Gerygone one evening while browsing through my field guide. I was shocked! "In failure lies opportunity", and luckily I noticed this while still being in Indonesia. In the next couple of days, I specifically searched for this species and lo and behold: It turned out I had been seeing and (mostly) hearing the Gerygone for more than 10 days already, and commonly so, but never noticed it as I thought all birds of this general kind were either female sunbirds or Ioras.
This is not a Common Iora. This is not an Olive-backed, or Plain, or Plain-throated, or Purpel-throated Sunbird. This is Gerygone, Golden-bellied Gerygone !
Let's say you've gotten to the point where you know an unidentified species you are looking at is from a certain group – say – a tailorbird. The bird is moving fast in dense vegetation and you know there are several species of tailorbird in your area, but you just don't know on which features to focus. No problem, you think, as you just have to open the page with tailorbirds in your guide and have a quick glance at the plate, then get another quick view of the bird to verify the crucial field marks. But where within your field guide are the tailorbirds? You open it anywhere and find that you are at the Munias. Now, do you flip forward from here or backward? You jump backwards and land at the larks. Same question: where do you go from here? Eventually you consult the index, go to the relevant page, check the plate and … the bird is gone. Ciao, lifer! This situation is plain torture – hear me? – torture when you have walked through a silent forest for an hour with scarcely a bird and suddenly find yourself within a big, moving mixed-species flock of 10+ species, half of which you've never seen before. Time is of the essence, and the taxonomic order in field guides is the worst time-suck after Facebook.
Even if you've learned the general order of families in your field guide by heart, you're not safe. Taxonomy is changing fast, and no matter where you bird, you'll want to use at least two field guides. Well, good luck because the books were likely published in different years when a different taxonomic order was considered the norm, and thus the order of families will vary considerably between the different books. So it is not enough to memorize the general taxonomic order of things, you have to memorize it for every single book you are using!
Due to the frequent changes in bird taxonomy and the ever-changing and differing common (English) names of species, birds may vanish if you are using different references, like two or three different guides or online resources like xeno-canto. An example: you are seeing a nice blue bird on Java and easily identify it as a Sunda Blue Robin Cinclidium diana with you field guide. Now you want to know its song and go to xeno-canto. Typing in "Sunda Blue Robin" will get you no results. Then you try the genus Cinclidium and get … no results. Then you start browsing and surfing and squeezing the web until you find out that the Sunda Blue Robin of your field guide is also known by the common name "Sunda Robin" (without the "blue"), and that it was recently moved to another genus, Myiomela. Again, this means you are losing time when you try to cross-reference an identification. At home this isn't much of a problem. But if this time-loss happens in the field because you can't find one species you've identified with field guide A in field guide B even by using B's index, let alone by flipping through the pages because the families are in a completely different order, you're … you know … not as happy a birder as you'd like to be in Indonesia.
Scarlet-headed Flowerpeckers offer much-needed eye candy when you are mostly busy sorting out the Ioras from the Gerygones or the Leafbirds from the leaves.
These are just a few of the reasons why I think sorting bird species according to their genetic relationship in a field guide (essentially a tool for identifying birds in the field) is so fundamentally flawed that it hurts. Not only does it hurt the brain's common-sense areas, it also hurts the birding by making it much harder than it ought to be.
I am fully aware that others may have an entirely different opinion, and I'd love to hear and hotly debate it in the comments section.
Fire away merrily.
I'm a newer birder so might just have less to say on this. I see all your points though! My only beef is that the guides that are out there organized in a way not based on taxonomic order are often of terrible quality. I've found guides organized by the bird's color, but the range maps, info, and use of one horrible quality photo has made me want to scream.
There's the Crossley Guide for the eastern US which veers off from being strictly taxonomic, and I really enjoy it. He still kept to the groups but put birds that looked similar next to each other for easier comparison (I think this is a good idea when you start learning the gestalt of the groups), and it does work.
Crossley, along with some other prominent birders and authors, presented a suggested species order for the ABA area here – http://www.aba.org/birding/v41n6p44.pdf
Crossley pretty much used that order in his guide. I believe most of the same people wrote a similar article for Palearctic birds, but I haven't read it.
I support this. Like Jochen, I like taxonomy. The prospect that falcons are more closely related to parrots and passerines than they are to hawks is fascinating. But does that mean they should be moved in field guides? I don't think so.
But a different scheme wouldn't be perfect. In Jochen's situation, I don't know if all of those "small to very small songbirds with yellow bellies and a greenish back" could be put together in a field guide since it seems many of them are female sunbirds. It sounds like that field guide needs a "similar species" section in the species accounts.
Taxonomic order is at least a broadly-agreed standard shared between different fieldguides; so if you're going to get rid of it you need to be sure that you can think of something better.
I went on a family holiday to Australia as a child and in the days before the internet the only field guide I could get in time was one where the birds were arranged by habitat. And you could see why someone thought it made sense, but it was completely maddening. Not least because birds aren;t quite that reliable.
Some slight tweaking of the order so that, for example, the swifts and swallows are together, and move the birds of prey out from the middle of the waterbirds: yeah, sure, I think that makes sense. But that's only going to go a small way towards solving the greeny-yellow bird problem unless you actually split up closely related groups of birds and arrange them by colour?—?which would drive me nuts, personally.
The longer term solution is electronic field guides which can be searched by colour, by family, by habitat, by size… the best you could do with a paper guide is probably multiple indexes and a key of the kind you get in flower guides, although TBH I'm not sure it would be worth the extra pages.
Argh, typos.
Interesting post Jochen. My first thought was simply that you didn't put in enough work in before your trip. If you do that then you always risk sliding back to rank beginner status. Birders who are used to being at the top of their game back home often have egos which rebel against this. The response is often: 'it must be someone else's fault that I suck in the field'. Perhaps rather than looking to dish out blame its time to find a bit of humility and resolve to put in some time researching a region long before actually getting on a plane. Pre-internet this research was hard work- books were rare, audio impossible but now its so easy. For me researching before a trip is the start of the fun. I still hire guides at times though- you can pore over books and audio files for years but still learn more in 5 minutes with a local expert.
The one redeeming point of this article is the angle that for beginners taxo structure of field guides can feel impenetrable to begin with. I get the point but I do wonder what the alternative might be? In the UK publishers have experimented with field guides using non-taxonomic structures and I have to say they are mostly useless. Size, colour and shape are so variable between ages, genders and individuals of a species that picking one of those as the basis is hopeless. Habitat guides seem like a good idea to non birders but in reality most birds don't stick to one habitat so thats usually a waste of time too. Taxonomy is actually a good structure- 9 times out of 10 the species you will confuse are close relatives. Yes taxonomy changes but for the most part we're just talking little splits and lumps. Its not like parrots and albatross get assigned and removed from passerines every 5 years.
This comes down to what a field guide is for. Is it to hold the hand of rank beginners making their first baby steps in bird ID, a book they don't open until the bird is on their lap? Or is to be a radically condensed portable summary of the best information on species of a region for use by both beginners and experts before during and after birding?
Which field guide? Craig Robson's? That is an intimidating book. My first trip to SE Asia I mostly used a small photographic field guide and searched for the missing species in Google images. Birding in new places requires a whole new skillset, especially taking quick notes and sketches. After living there for a while, I was very glad after I became familiar with the Robson's. Seems like your frustrations come from not taking the time to study. I agree with Duncan, and would go farther in saying that we're not birders if we don't get the natural history perspective that taxonomy brings and can appreciate the underlying (and surprisingly vast) differences in similar looking birds. But still, great article, fun read and a welcome new perspective, and i envy you as a border exploring new lands. P.s., field guides that are ordered by color are well meaning but crappy. P.s.s. your conundrum should be solved by insets in guides that compare similar species.
Why not have some field guides that do follow taxonomic sequences, and others that don't? Why insist that ALL field guides must adhere to one standard or another?
Oh wait, that's the situation we have now. I guess I don't understand what this entire post is complaining about.
Me, I much prefer taxonomically arranged guides, for the reasons given by Duncan above. It wasn't until I started thinking taxonomically that I really began to *learn* about birds. Otherwise, in my opinion you are merely as blind as the ancient Greeks when it comes to understanding what it is you're seeing the field.
Besides, taxonomy won't be as fluid forever as it is now.
The fluidity of taxonomy is only one of the reasons to use a different standard for ordering. To me, it's not the main reason. What is the purpose of field guides? To identify birds. Thus, the ordering of species in a field guide should be the one most conducive to identification. A strict taxonomic ordering, I think we can all agree, is NOT the best for ID purposes. I realize that there may not ever be a consensus on what actually is the most ID-friendly ordering scheme. But I think we can find something better than the taxonomic sequence. The Crossley, et al proposal is a good first step. (And I don't think that anyone would propose using color or habitat as the main ordering criteria. At least, I hope not.)
I will grant that most birders learn taxonomy through field guides. But, and I may be giving more credit than deserved, I think birders will still learn taxonomy even if their field guides aren't arranged that way. Other books and resources will still use taxonomy as their basis. And field guides could easily include taxonomic notes within family text (if present), or even a visual taxonomic index. That would only take a couple pages.
Oh wow, 11 comments!
@Lindsey: the fact that you are a newer birder – as you state – actually means that you have a lot more to say about this than most of the more experienced birders! Thanks so much for your input!
@Grant: thanks for the link. I wasn't aware of this interesting article. Yes, finding the ideal "identification order" would be a long and gruesome process that would probably take 2 or 3 generations of field guides. But I think it is possible to find the most useful arrangement. There won't be the perfect one, but the most useful one. And frankly, yes I can accept separating the males from the females if it aids in identification. Take the ducks for example. It would certainly help to have the drakes and females on separate plates. Of course, you could include miniature images of the respective mate at the plates, so that a person would know that the drake Mallard has a brown female because there'd be a tiny picture of a brown female next to it. Just an outline to point to the female plate.
Why not!? I am being deliberately provocative here but really: do with the birds whatever you will, so long as it improves the usefulness of the field guide.
@Duncan: The problem is that you can't expect to find anything anywhere in a field guide because taxonomy is changing so fast. Sparrows at the back? The (excellent!) Borneo guide by Susan Myers has them in front of the pipits between the flowerpeckers and the starlings in the middle of the passerines.
That's one of my key issues with the taxonomic order: it will be different in each field guide you use. Furthermore, there will always be unknown/new bird families if you visit a new region. You will need to learn by heart the order of bird families in each and every book. You're not done once you've learned the current accepted taxonomic order.
@Mark: you are of course right in your first paragraph, but I wasn't really dishing out blame. I plainly stated that the source of my mistakes was first and foremost my inexperience in the region. And my ego has no problem with being a beginner in a new region. I'd much rather be a beginner in a new regions dripping with lifers than to not be in that region at all! 🙂
Regarding the amount of time for research before the trip: this was a business trip at rather short notice, and time was limited. Furthermore, I concur with your assessment that 5 minutes out in the field are worth more than hours at home. Therefore, I think a field guide should allow an observer to identify birds even without too much research in advance. If I have to learn by heart all the pitfalls and challenges and confusion species before venturing out into the field, then I don't need a field guide anymore (yes, exaggerated, but a valid point, no?).
I agree that field guides who sort species according to habitat, general colour etc are mostly useless. I also agree that in 9 out of 10 cases, the confusion species will be closely related anyway. My point is that the 10th case, the 1 in 10 where it doesn't work, should be re-arranged. And it makes more sense to e.g. put the female daggling ducks on one plate and the males on another (as mentioned above). When it comes to field identification, males and females, or immatures and adults, with clearly different plumage could be treated like "different species" within the guide by separating them and arranging them on different plates with different confusion species. Again, very likely these plates would contain closely related species anyway, but it could be more useful than having the different ages and genders on the same plate.
Taxonomy is changing very profoundly, and we are definitely not just looking at splits. The order in which the families are arranged is completely, and let me emphasize the "completely", different if you are using different field guides. I have given the example of the sparrows in my response to Duncan.
So, what is a field guide for? I think a field guide should be for identifying birds as effectively as possible out in the field, and this pertains to beginners and experts alike. And I maintain that I don't think the taxonomic order achieves this goal. It definitely is a good and useful starting point, but we need to take it much further.
@Mike: yes, sorting species by colour is possibly even more horrible than by taxonomy. Possibly. 😉
You make a very interesting statement:
"…obscure rather than illuminate the relationships between them all."
Is it really the function of a field guide to illuminate the RELATIONSHIPS between species? Wouldn't that be better illuminated in an article or a separate book? I think a field guide is a tool for field identification. Yes, it is true that birders should have a thorough understanding of systematics. However, the first step to comprehend anything about birds is to know which one you're looking at. If the comprehension of systematics is given priority over allowing easy field identification, I fear nothing is gained.
@David: I was on Borneo and West Java, and thus outside Robson's area. I used McKinnon & Phillipps' "Field Guide to the Birds of Borneo, Sumatra, Java and Bali" and the excellent "Birds of Borneo"
by Susan Myers.
I am very much with you and Duncan that, as you state "we're not birders if we don't get the natural history perspective that taxonomy brings and can appreciate the underlying (and surprisingly vast) differences in similar looking birds."
I fully subscribe to that, and learning about taxonomic relationships, and drawing connections to biogeography is something I am enthusiastic about. I just don't think that a field guide is the place to do that – a field guide is for field identification, in my opinion.
@Corey: hey, what are you doing!? Are you trying to demonstrate that my three-page post could have been conveniently summarized in 3 sentences!? 🙂 🙂
But that is definitely a very fine example to demonstrate my point! Cheers!
@Eric: Well, we don't have some field guides that do follow taxonomic sequences, and others that don't everywhere. That may be the case for North America, but not for large parts of the world. for most parts, there are exclusively field guides in varying, differing, taxonomic order.
This entire post is complaining about the fact that the taxonomic order is often in the way of effective field identification.
An example (beyond parrots and falcons):
Why is it that on Java, there are two songbird species that live in the dense undergrowth of forests, have a grey face, streaked underparts and russet brown upperparts, and one is depicted on plate 68 in the field guide, together with related species that don't look anything like it, and the other one is on plate 74 of the field guide, together with its closest relatives that don't look anything like it, and there isn't even a mentioning anywhere that these two could be confused.
Here's the situation:
I see a small brown bird in a bush with a grey face and striped underparts, but I can't see the underparts all that clearly. I look it up in my guide and the first plate on which I find a good fit is No. 68. The species depicted on the plate looks very, very much like the one I am seeing, so I am satisfied and convinced of a thorough and critical identification and move on to the next bird of the flock.
Days later, I accidentally find -while browsing through my book- that on plate 74 there is a very similar species and that I should have tried to get a better look at the belly region to differentiate the two. Well, I haven't as I didn't know that was important, and therefore I do not know which species I saw out in the field.
What have I learned about the birds of Java?
Are you really trying to convince me that learning one evening at my hotel that there are two unrelated species of brown-backed, speckle-bellied, grey-faced warblers on Java was more important than knowing which of the two I saw in the forest?
Shouldn't we place identification before interpretation?
And yes, it is true that taxonomy won't be as fluid as it is now – but now is the time I want to identify birds with a field guide.
@Grant #2: YES, thumbs up, thanks for your great comment!
Thanks for the considered reply Jochen. Apologies if my comment was overly harsh- on re-reading you did make your motives clearer than I gave credit.
Personally I enjoy the taxonomic structure, and I'd heartily support a publisher with the guts to go where the facts take them in this regard. I'd love to see the falcons and parrots as neighbours (I've had a hunch about that one ever since as a kid seeing an escaped budgie in Scotland getting mobbed by starlings as if it were a predator). Bring it on!
@Mark: I didn't think your comment was overly harsh. I think it was a very balanced and well-written comment that I enjoyed replying to!
As much as you'd love to see the falcons next to the parrots, I'd love
to see the Ioras, Gerygones and female Sunbirds on the same plate in my field guide.
I think the discovery of the close relationship between parrots and falcons was incredible, one of the recent highlights of the taxonomic debate. I'd love to see it mentioned in a field guide. Just not in the "identification" section…
Like some others I don't think Taxonomy should be completely abandoned. But I do think that we need to pay more attention to the text portion of guides and not only the plates. I found, when traveling, that once I did that I eliminated many errors I was making. Habitat preferences, behaviour and SIMILAR species sections were critical.
But what I really want to know is, is that a Wookie in the background of your photo of the Greater Green Leafbird? Where exactly were you birding?
I share your sentiments. Taxonomy gives us a good starting point as to how to order things; they have to have some order, not just random placement.
And while it is interesting to discover that convergent evolution has obscured distant relationships a la Falcons, the raison d'etre of a field guide is to refer to it when needed. Having memorized more or less where birds are located in a book, if the order keeps changing then one might as well commit the whole thing to memory and negate the need for the field guide – a counter productive effect.
As far as I am concerned, the constant re-ordering is an annoyance and as stated by you counter productive.
On another note, and quality filed guide should have 'similar species' as many do, and I for one would like to see more make use of ID tick marks as in the Peterson Guides.
I believe dropping the use of taxonomic order as the standard in field guides would cause chaos among birders with whom it is a common and at least basically unchanging structure. But I would echo and emphasize what the last couple commenters have brought up and suggest that it would have most easily solved Jochen's problem with the SE Asia guide and the confusing species he saw: All field guides MUST have a thorough SIMILAR SPECIES blurb for each species, including the female. While not placing the similar species on the same plate, it would still point you quickly to any similar birds that need to be distinguished in the field (if hopefully the Similar Species notes include the plate/page number of the referenced species). Angehr's Birds of Panama does an excellent job of this. (I agree that ID tick marks would also be very helpful.)
I humbly submit that guides should be sorted according to whether a bird is "cool", "weird looking", or "some kind of sparrow".
Seriously tho, I find that modern tools that let you search for birds in a space with lots of parameters like range, habitat, size, shape and coloration are allowing me to spend less time flipping around in a book of any kind. Using a database certainly solves the problem of what arbitrary ordering to use.
@Clare: shhhhhhh! Quiet there! I knew I wasn't going to fool you, but please, don't tell the others! You know I am in this year list thing with Corey, and … well … you see I did NOT go to Indonesia, I went to British Columbia instead. But the number of species I saw there was too low to beat Corey this year, so I fabricated a trip to the tropics and chose Indonesia. Now, that picture: it was taken in the mountains east of Vancouver and it shows clear proof of Bigfoot and the New World's first ever Greater Green Leafbird. Now I am in this dilemma: do I acknowledge the hoax and lose my birder reputation or do I publish the picture of bigfoot for worldwide fame and fortunes?
What would you do!?
@Arie: thanks for the great comment!
@Mary Ann G: yes, a thorough "similar species" section is possibly a very good solution and definitely a necessity regardless of how one sorts the species into a field guide.
You say that dropping taxonomic order would cause chaos. Well, this is true so long as there is a stable taxonomic order. however, at the rate taxonomy is changing now, it is my impression that always using the newest taxonomic order in field guides is causing even more chaos. In some field gudes, the pipits/wagtails are one of the first passerine families, in some they are near the end , in some they are in the middle of the passerines. It can't get much more chaotic than this!
@ X: You know, if I was a publisher I'd get in contact with you. Hmmmm, yes, maybe electronic field guides would be nice to have: you see a brown bird in Indonesia with stripes on the breast in a forest and type in "brown" "Indonesia" "stripes on breast" and "forest" and … bam … the ID tool creates a "plate" with all possible species matching your parameters.
I'd go for the fame and fortune, and your own reality TV show on the Discovery Channel "Bigfoot and Birds" and if you can squeeze mermaids in there somewhere as well you've got it made!
Overall, I am firmly in the "taxonomic order, yes" camp on this.
The first question is, What is the alternative? For good reason, birder here have debunked the color and habitat schemes. They are hopeless. I can't think of any other scheme that wouldn't be completely arbitrary and unwieldy.
The real debate is between "strict taxonomic" order and "modified taxonomic" order, which is what most field guides have used going back to Peterson. That's where we put similarly "built" birds together, like leaving falcons and vultures with diurnal raptors, and reshuffle certain species to be closer to visually similar ones (all brown thrushes, for example).
Personally — though maybe not if I were a beginner — I slightly favor strict taxonomic. Yes, taxonomic relations are fluid, but then books can change over time to keep up. I think there's a scientific and pedagogical truthfulness about taxonomic order that's intrinsically good, and as I think someone else said, learning taxonomy is really part and parcel of learning identification. The first experienced birders look for is usually taxonomic-level: Is it a heron or a pigeon, a duck or a goose?
Questions about add-ons (inserting similar species on a page, for example) are really irrelevant to the question at hand. We all hope a field guide has all the right things, but order is order, and in my book, taxonomy rules!
This post is very old, but I changed my mind and I think you're right. I was swayed by the emotional upset over taxonomy–sorry. I'm interested in bringing in complete beginners, and I'm realizing how all our conventional birding tools–especially the Sibley book, the Cornell Lab, and Audubon's online bird guide–are great for people already in the field but totally useless to total, complete beginners who don't even know silhouettes. Even seasoned birders need a hand in strange places. I would like to lessen the dilemma somehow, especially by field guides devoting a small section to taxonomic relationships (which will be outdated in a month) and otherwise being ultra user-friendly, grouping similar-looking birds like falcons and hawks. And, experts also need their tools–it makes sense for the US to have an advanced Sibley's guide as well as a line-up of easy to use guides.
© 2013 10,000 Birds. All words, images, and opinions are the property of their respective authors unless stated otherwise.


text:
Colfax Real EstateCommunities within Colfax
The town of Colfax is nestled in the foothills of the Sierra Nevada. Located in western Placer County along Interstate 80, this low key but lively town was put on the map due its integral location along the Union Pacific railroad. The city of Colfax incorporated in 1910, making it one of the smallest actual cities in California.
Steeped in history, Colfax is home to a thriving community, harmoniously comprised of both longtime locals and Bay Area transplants. Residents born and raised in this mountain oasis find it hard to leave while those looking to escape city life discover peaceful living and small town charm.
An hour each way to Lake Tahoe and Sacramento, Colfax is idyllically located near world-class recreation and beauty, as well as urban amenities. Scenic Highway 174, which links the area to Nevada City and Grass Valley, accesses several wineries, farms, and Rollins Lake, a haven for boaters, campers, and swimmers.
The historic downtown recently underwent a revitalization project, highlighting the already burgeoning art and dining scene. A number of street fairs and festivals, as well as the wildly popular Fourth of July Celebration and Annual Railroad Days, boost the community camaraderie while cultivating local businesses.
Homes and neighborhoods range in style, from small developments and Victorian gems, to country cabins and luxury homes on expansive lots. Families moving to the area will not only find a myriad of home options, but also an excellent school system.
Search for Homes in Colfax, CAView all Colfax listings
Real Estate
Commute to Work
No properties currently
No properties currently
No properties currently

subset: commoncrawl


text: Endoscopic Evaluation Endoscopic Retrograde Cholangio-Pancreatography (ERCP) is a procedure where a camera (endoscope) is inserted into the mouth and passed into the stomach and into the small intestine. From the intestine the drainage systems of the liver and pancreas can be accessed. ERCP can help with diagnosis of causes of liver disease and help with treatment of obstruction of the bile ducts. Samples can be taken from the bile ducts, and when necessary, stents can be placed in the drainage system of the liver. Plastic stents, which are removable, or permanent metal stents, can be placed into the bile ducts to relieve obstruction. Endoluminal Stenting Plastic and metal stents can be placed in the esophagus, stomach and small intestine, usually for palliative treatment of malignant tumors. Endoscopic Ultrasound Endoscopic Ultrasound (EUS) is a technique using an ultrasound probe that is placed at the end of an endoscope. The endoscope is passed into the esophagus, stomach and small intestine. The ultrasound probe is then used to obtain high resolution pictures of the neighboring organs. Biopsies can be obtained, samples can be collected, and potentially, medications can be directly injected into these neighboring organs. This is an important technology for diagnosis and treatment of cancers of the esophagus, stomach, pancreas and liver.


text:
The Civilian Conservation Corps in New Hampshire (Part 3)
(Digital Images. Photographs Privately Held By Cynthia Shenette; Text Copyright (c) 2013 Cynthia Shenette) After a brief blogging hiatus I'm back posting photos from my dad's photo album from the CCCs. To recap, my dad, Henry Shenette, served in the CCCs from April 1934 until September 1935 in Campton and Thornton, NH. He belonged to Camp 1181 and was part of the crew that worked on the dam in Campton. You can see a contemporary photo of the dam here.
If your ancestor served in the CCCs or worked on the Campton dam I'd love to hear from you!
Other Posts You Might Like:
Celebrating Spring - Wordless Wednesday
A Window in Time, April 11, 1940
Shore Leave - Wordless Wednesday
U.S. Naval School, Newport, RI - Military Monday
Posted by Cynthia Shenette at 11:51 AM
No comments:
Links to this post
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)


text:
|Ann Arbor, Mich.
|High School:
|Ann Arbor Pioneer
|House Affiliation:
Junior • 2011 • Stats
Played in 14 games ... Recorded a defensive save against New Hampshire (Oct. 30) ... Made a defensive save at Quinnipiac (Sept. 18).
Sophomore • 2010
Did not play due to injury.
Freshman • 2009
Played in 16 of Harvard's 17 games, starting nine ... Made defensive save in second half of Harvard's overtime win against Brown ... Started in collegiate debut at Holy Cross (Sept. 5).
Before Harvard
Letterd three years in field hockey and two years in soccer at Ann Arbor Pioneer High School … Named captain of field hockey team senior year ... Named field hockey defensive MVP junior and senior year … A first team All-State selection senior year ... High school team won state championship in all three of her years … A National Futures Championship selection from 2006-09 ... Member of the National Honor Society.
Enjoys playing the guitar and piano, ultimate frisbee and sand volleyball … Older brothers, Paul and Pat, played lacrosse at Bucknell University … Paul also played professional lacrosse for the Chicago Machine ... Father played football at Eastern Michigan University and briefly in the NFL with the Miami Dolphins.


text:
Playwork L3 Cert. (Distance Learning) at National Extension College *Fees Payable*
Course description
NEC's suite of playwork qualifications provide in-depth information about the role of the level 3 playworker. This home study course in playwork is mainly knowledge-based with a limited amount of practical application in a work setting required. It covers all the areas you need to learn about to be competent and confident working in a playwork setting, including health and safety, relationships in the play environment and young people's self-directed play. The qualification will give learners the skills, knowledge and understanding required for playworkers at Level 3 based on the National Occupational Standards.
Course content
Award in Playwork units
- Understand playwork principles
- Understand children and young people's self-directed play
- Understand how to safeguard the wellbeing of children and young people's play
Certificate in Playwork units
- Understand the organisational framework for play
- Understand how to support positive outcomes for children and young people
- Understand relationships in the play environment
- Understand health, safety and security in the play environment
- Understand how to plan for and support children and young people's self-directed play
- Engage in personal development in health, social care of children and young people's settings
Entry requirements
There are no formal entry requirements but you will need to be at least 18 years of age and working or volunteering in a play environment. You will also need to be competent in using the internet and working with electronic documents.
This course is delivered online and assessment will consist of a portfolio of evidence in different formats such as learning plans, written tasks and discussions and direct observation.
Financial information
It's your choice: pay in full and discount your course fees, or spread the cost with our finance offer. To pay in instalments, you will need to enrol by telephone.
Representative example:
Amount of credit:
Monthly payment:
Duration of agreement:
Total repayable:
Rate of interest:
0% APR representative.
6 months
NEC acts as a credit intermediary and only offers credit through Pay4Later with Omni Capital finance. Finance is offered subject to age and status. Other options available, please contact us for details or to enrol.
NEC will register you for this qualification with the Council for Awards in Care, Health and Education (CACHE).The £95 registration fee is not included in your course fee and will need to be paid in addition at the time of enrolment.
Further information
To achieve the Certificate in Playwork you'll need to complete the three units making up the Award in Playwork and the six that make up the Certificate: nine units totalling 32 credits. See the Topics section for the full list.
You'll work through this course using the NEC Laser: an online learning system that makes completing your course – submitting your work, doing activities and getting feedback – straightforward and enjoyable. The system is easy to use and all the work you complete is recorded in your learner profile, forming an online portfolio.
As this course is delivered online, you will need a computer with an internet connection, word processing software, Flash Player and Acrobat Reader. You will need to be confident using the internet, sending and receiving emails with attachments and producing basic documents using a word processor. We also recommend that you use Skype, and that you have a webcam for this course.
As well as leading to a qualification in its own right, this course forms part of the Diploma in Playwork (QCF) and carries 32 credits towards the higher-level qualifications.
This course requires you to have a regular work placement in a playwork setting. Your setting must be able to arrange one or more sessions of practical assessments. You will need to gather evidence from your setting such as accident reports, health and safety procedures, feedback on child behaviour. Your face-to-face assessor will require you to talk about your experiences at your setting.
You will need to give details of the workplace setting when you enrol, and your manager will need to confirm some information.
To gain this qualification you will need to register with CACHE. We will take care of this process, but you will need to pay an additional registration fee which is not included in the price of your course.
If you are based overseas it is essential that you contact our course advice team before enrolling on this course.
How to apply
If you want to apply for this course, you will need to contact National Extension College *Fees Payable* directly.


text:
Recent Posts
Support This Blog
Researching and writing these posts take a considerable effort in time and energy. If you enjoy them please consider supporting this blog via these two options:
Swag Bucks is a paid to search engine. I have tried several and it's the best one out there. It costs you no money to sign up and you will earn "Swag Bucks" that can be used to buy a wide variety of rewards, including cash. Join here.
Tom Wood's Liberty Classroom: Learn the history and economics they didn't teach you via videos course and asking questions of the experts. Annual subscription required. I highly recommend Wood's work. Join here.
Thanks for your support!
Monthly Archives: April 2011
Our Natural Rights
Posted on April 26, 2011 by k466
Rights are one of those terms that have been so abused that it is generally meaningless without qualification(s). Many people- politicians included- are quite fond of arbitrarily designating something as a right1. Unfortunately, this tends to be based on whimsy … Continue reading →
Posted in Government, Liberty | Tagged anachro-capitalism, anarchism, anarchy, compossibly, constitution, declaration of independence, freedom, government, james sodowsky, john locke, libertarianism, liberty, misesorg, morality, murray rothbard, natural law, natural rights, negative rights, non-aggression principle, politics, positive rights, Rand paul, rights, social contract, state, statism, striking at the root, Thomas Jefferson, utopia, utopian meter, voluntaryism, what is a right | 1 Comment


text:
Men's Road Clothing
Is your style all-out and race-ready? If so, our SL collection is just as obsessive as you are. Prefer challenging yourself to long, epic days in the saddle? Well, that would be a perfect match for our RBX collection of cycling jerseys and bib shorts. No matter how you ride, we have the road bike clothing to complement your needs. Whether it's a fit geared for comfort or fabrics and cuts to make you faster, our apparel enhances your passions.
Hide Filters
Sort by


text:
Custom 12" X 18" Yard Signs SKU# CS_CYS_12_18
Do you offer custom sizes and shapes?Yes, although we offer 8 different yard sign sizes on our website, we can also create custom sizes. For a custom size, simply call our sales team at 1-877-508-4569 and a representative will help place your order. We can print signs as large as 48" x 96".
We can also create yard signs in custom shapes. Many of our customers design creative shapes to display their messages. For example, a directional sign can be cut in the shape of an arrow or a real estate sign can be made in the shape of a house. Please note that only simple shapes are recommended.
How do I know what size to make the font?The font size on the final product depends on the font size and yard sign size you choose. To get an idea of how large the text on your sign will be, note that the final text size will be proportional to its size as it appears on your browser. For example, if you are creating a sign that is 24" tall and the text on your browser appears to cover about half of that height, then the text on the actual yard sign will be about 12" tall.
What material are the yard signs made out of?Almost all yard signs are made of the same material, corrugated plastic. Our signs are made of 4 mm corrugated plastic, which is also the industry standard for yard sign thickness.
What colors do you have available?Unlike some of our competitors, we can print signs in thousands of different colors. If you are creating a sign using our design studio, you can choose between the 31 preset colors available or click the "more" button to choose a different color. If an exact color match is required, please call our sales line at 1-877-508-4569.
Will the final product look exactly like the design preview displayed on my computer screen?In general, the final product will look identical or nearly identical to the preview you see in the design studio or the art file you send us. However, due to differing computer screen calibrations, we cannot guarantee an exact match. We also cannot enhance low-resolution images or artwork sent to us, so a low-quality image or artwork will likely result in a blurred final product. Please ensure that any artwork or images sent to us are sufficiently large for the size of yard sign you are choosing. Also, if an exact color match is required, please call our sales line at 1-877-508-4569.
If I am designing a double-sided directional sign, how do I make sure that the arrows are pointed in the same direction?For a double-sided directional sign, place the arrow in opposite directions. For example, if the arrow is pointing left on the front side of the sign, make sure it is pointing to the right on the back side of the sign. This will ensure that, no matter what side of the sign someone is looking at, the arrow is pointing in the intended direction. Obviously, this does not apply to arrows facing up or down.
How durable are the signs?Almost all yard signs are made of the same material, corrugated plastic. Our signs are made of 4 mm corrugated plastic, which is also the industry standard for yard sign thickness. Yard signs are typically used for one-time events like a holiday sale or open house, but with proper care and storage, they can be used many times and last up to three years. Avoiding bad weather will increase their longevity.
Does my order include wire stands?Wire stands can be added on Step 2 of the order page.
Do the signs come with holes so I can hang them or attach them? If not, will you drill holes for me?Unfortunately, we cannot drill holes in your yard sign for you.
Do you have a product guarantee?Our warranty guarantees a full refund, replacement, or store credit for any yard sign(s) that are defective upon arrival or that break within 90 days of receipt.
What kind of image should I use for a photograph?If you would like to use a photographic image, you should upload the highest quality image available under 10 MB in size.
What kind of image should I use for a logo or clipart?If you would like a logo or other professionally designed artwork printed on your signs, please provide a vector-based EPS file. If vector art is not available, please provide the highest quality image available under 10 MB.
Where can I get a high quality image for my sign?If you are designing a sign for your company, always check with your internal graphic design department to see if they have already created images and/or artwork for use. If you need vector art or a high quality photo, there are many resources available. Our design studio contains thousands of high-quality clip art. You can also browse stock art and photo web sites, many of which are free. Additionally, you can use search engines to look for images and artwork, but remember to only choose high-quality images.
Do you offer imaging or graphic design services?For any graphics services, please call our sales line.
What if my image was created using design software, such as for a logo?The best option, especially for large signs, is a vector-based EPS file. Other file formats could work as well, but to ensure a crisp final product, a high-resolution image is required.
What if I'm attempting to find images on the internet?There are many stock art and image databases online, some of which are free. If you are using Google or another search engine, make sure to filter by image size and try to find a large, high-quality image that is appropriate for your needs.
How do you determine pricing for sign orders?The price you see is based on the size and quantity of yard signs selected. We do not base prices on the number of colors on your sign, so design away!
Do you offer bulk pricing?Yes, the more signs you order, the lower the price per sign. Bulk pricing is already factored into the price you see at checkout.
Step 1 Choose Your Yard Signs Size
Step 2 Customize Your Yard Signs
Step 3 Display Options
Step 4 Choose Your Production & Delivery Time
Shipping Country
Delivery Zip Code/Postal Code
Estimated Delivery Date*
Need it sooner? Rush Production, Rush Shipping Available.
Total Quantity: 0 Pieces | Unit Price: $0.00
Please Note: The cut off time for Rush Production Order is 10AM CST
Any Questions? 1-855-711-4467


text:
Forum rules | FAQ | Technical help | Announcements | New members start here
LvsChant, Archer, those are great!These are two of the many Beer Labels I produced for a friend. He loved reading about the paranormal, so all of his brew names revolved around this particular interest. I did the two shown as well as "Nessie Scottish Ale", "Sasquatch Bock", and "Phantomweizen".
Those labels are awesome... especially the Roswell Brewing Company... loved it.
Those look great.How do people stick labels on their homebrew. Removing the original labels is a pain.There has to be a glue out there that comes off easier.
Wow Nico, Don't know how I missed these for the last 8 months. More amazing work. You never cease to amaze me.
Really liking the artworkWhat software do you use for drawingaman
I second that sentiment!


text:
Lisa Suter, M.D.
Lisa Gale Suter, M.D. is an Assistant Professor of Medicine in the Section of Rheumatology, Department of Internal Medicine at Yale University School of Medicine, board certified in both Internal Medicine and Rheumatology. She currently also serves as the Associate Director of the Quality Measurement Program at CORE. After completing her medical degree and rheumatology fellowship at Yale University and her post-graduate training in internal medicine at Yale-New Haven Hospital, she trained as a health services researcher through the Robert Wood Johnson Clinical Scholars Program. She then joined the Yale faculty and was the recipient of both a National Institutes of Health (NIH/NIAMS) K23 Mentored Career Development Award and Arthritis Foundation Arthritis Investigator Award. In addition to her work in quality measurement at CORE, Dr. Suter continues to study technology assessment and technology adoption in musculoskeletal and inflammatory diseases. Her recent work includes cost-effectiveness analyses of MRI in the management of rheumatoid arthritis and innovative prostheses in total joint arthroplasty.


text:
About Bryan
Obviously, if it weren't for Twitter, this idiot wouldn't have been able to do this. So why arrest him? The simple answer is to simply blame Twitter and ban it like the Turks did. That ALWAYS works!
President Obama's approval rating is at 42% and Snowden's at 57%. In the United States extremely bipartisan political climate, that is hugely interesting.
-- and rather than considering this a public interest issue, the FBI has classified it as "commercial use" because (the FBI claims, bizarrely) "it seeks information to further the commercial trade, profit interests of the requester."
So why didn't this Ray Rogers take the stand to testify about his signatures on the copyright assignments? As a matter of fact why would Ray Rogers sign copyright assignments when he didn't work for AF Holdings?
Ray Rogers is the assignor, or representative of the assignor, who sold the copyright to AF Holdings. In all of the coverage, I have never seen where anyone disputed that Ray Rogers actually did sign the assignment of the copyright, just that no one ever signed it as the assignee from AF Holdings in his or her real name (Alan Cooper, Salt March, etc.)
"The more you tighten your grip, Tarkin, the more star systems will slip through your fingers."
―Princess Leia to Grand Moff Tarkin
We are not aware of a policy reason to prohibit companies from fully protecting their intellectual property in North Korea...
Well, perhaps because it's entirely pointless and a complete waste of time, effort and money?
It really helps if you actually READ Wikipedia if you are going to reference it. Wikipedia references Clinton v. City of New York in which the Supreme Court struck down the line item veto for violating bicameralism. While I don't agree with the decision, it is the law of the land and the line item veto is dead. So, therefore if the amendment had passed, Obama either signs or defunds the DoD.
Punishment that fits the crime. Make her pay for reprinting the Yearbook, give her a wrist slap and let her live on.
Rapper addresses haters, makes grandiose claims, plays up street cred with criminal references. Positively unremarkable, except that multiple students reported this status update to school administration.
Yeah, except he's not a rapper. Just a run of the mill thug and criminal. That many of his peers reported this and also knew him well should tell you what you need to know. But no; once again you stoop to defend human garbage like this.
hey mike tl;dr
can those of us that dont have an hour to read this get a very brief summary?
"The question is, how much is the fine for a non-judge person being in contempt of court?"
$25, just like the sign in the courtroom says.
Not sure what criminal act got you found guilty, but that doesn't mean you didn't get a good judge.
Warrantless spying by the government that violates an individual's security. You really consider that a benefit? I hope you have no skeletons in your closet.
Some District Court judges are NOT going to like this. Mr. Steele, may I introduce you to Rule 11?
This is like a movie you have to see in a theatre that serves beer as well.
Sadly, case law has already determined that PG's Copyright Policy would vest rights with the Board and not the teachers. Even with the Teacher's Copyright Exception (which may or may not exist, see, http://jolt.richmond.edu/v18i1/article4.pdf; http://nysstlc.syr.edu/Law_Resources/Law_Library/Copyright/WorkforHire/WorkforHire.aspx ), having such a policy defining "work for hire" and vesting copyright with the Board, would be effective against that teachers, though not the students.
Where your contractual argument goes off the rails is a lack of understanding of MD law regarding teachers. The actual Teacher's Contract that the teacher signs is written by the State Bd of Ed, not the local board. There is a negotiated agreement between the local boards and the local union, but that applies to, and is only enforceable by, the local union. The teacher is a third party beneficiary, and not an actual party to the contract (has your head exploded yet?). It is a byzantine system, and while there could be a provision in there in which the Board would agree to not take the copyright, I have seen most of these agreements, and they don't touch upon copyright at all.
That being said, if the work is created outside of work, or would not be something the teacher would normally be expected to create to do the job, then it will most likely not be a work for hire, policy or no policy.
Lastly, the union could NEVER get the copyright, nor are they interested in it. The unions do not employ the teacher and therefore can't get the copyright.
Frankly, I think it is a butt stupid idea on the Board's part, but. This sort of policy will halt the type of innovation that PG is thinking it will capture. I am pretty sure the Board won't get this ( http://9to5forums.com/discussion/6036/quick-key-grading-app-uses-iphones-camera-to-skip-the-scantron ) out of PG county teachers, with the climate and culture therein. I guarantee the Board won't if it implements its policy.
While I agree, it is an attempted money grab by the Board, it is self-defeating since it prevents there from being any "money" to grab. It is like taxing at 100%. . . no one is going to try to earn any income since it is all taken. Let's keep the focus on the bad actor here, and not try to bring in non-actors such as the union, into the argument.
Long term, the rebel is going to win every time. . .
"Will someone explain why an attack by foreigners result in surveillance of you own citizens to defeat the terrorist threat?"
But. . . but. . . TERRORISM!
Couldn't resist the softball.
I love reading Techdirt, and I agree with 90% of the articles here. However, I have noticed a disturbing trend lately. Many of the comments are being reported, not because of ad hominem attacks or other such good reasons, but simply because those reporting the comments disagree. It seems to be happening more and more, and frankly, those who are reporting attempted arguments by those they disagree with, simply because they disagree are sinking to the same level as the regular trolls. Please, stop it.
If you think the comment is stupid, say why. But don't report it. Keep the discussion going. The only way to sharpen the arguments is to actually have to make and explain them. Agree to disagree, please. Free speech and all that. Thank you!
Now, back to our regularly scheduled commenting. . .
"You're the placekickers of "complex entertainment spectacles."
This REALLY makes me think of Lucy holding the football for Charlie Brown. . .
I gotta respond to this:
"Yeah, it's totally disgusting. The feds are telling the guy that he has to sue the company he was doing business with, and not the feds. That is horrible, making the site owner actually responsible for their customer's satisfaction."
I would agree with this if the site owner hadn't had its ability to satisfy the customer completely blocked by the DOJ.
"Sorry Mike, but the feds are right on this one. The only reason the feds seized the assets is because of the behavior of the company, which was flagrant and fairly well public. Any normal citizen doing due dilligence before selecting Mega as a storage medium would have been able to determine their notoriety and their "profile" online as a great place to put your infringing material. A quick search of google would turn up any number of questionable links."
A quick search of any storage locker would turn up any number of questionable links. Your point is? While Kim Dotcom was flagrant and public, that doesn't mean that the Feds get to go in and destroy the ability of ALL legitimate users to access their legitimate data. The Feds could have used the same logic to seize all of the Carpathia servers, not just Megauploads. After all, Carpathia's servers were being used to store infringing material, were they not? Remember, Carpathia owns the servers, not Megaupload. The Carpathia servers are the actual property being used to commit the crime. Why stop there?
Let's take this to a real world example. I rent a storage unit in a sketchy part of town (the rent is cheap). There are gang tags everywhere. I put my things in my rented unit. The storage facility has also rented to gangmembers who happen to use their storage units for less than legal activities. The Feds raid the storage facility, and seize everything. The reasoning for this is that the storage facility is making profits off of the illegal activity of the gangmembers. My things are seized as well. The Feds won't give me my things back arguing that my things are still in the storage facility that has been seized, and therefore it is not their problem. Oh, and the last bit of information? The town is Hong Kong, and US Federal law does not apply there, but the payment processor is US based. Does this sound familiar? Obviously, it isn't a perfect analogy, but it is pretty close. The storage facility did its job and kept my items safe. I just can't retrieve them because they are "seized" by the US. I don't seem to have much beef with the storage facility.
"That this guy still chose to use Mega, and Mega exclusively for content that he truly valued, with no other backup or support in place, is a head shaker."
I can't disagree with this statement, but hindsight is 20/20. Most people don't develop a comprehensive back up plan until they have lost important data.
"His issue is with Mega, and not with the feds."
His issue is is with the Feds.


text:
We're in a crazy period. Home values have been rising and "flipping" is starting up again in places like Miami and Las Vegas, today the stock market is going through the roof, setting a new record. The jobs report tells us that jobs are being created at a very slow pace and that new unemployment claims are down.
At the same time, the new jobs don't pay as well as the jobs they are replacing and the income gap is wider than ever.
Is it time for a revolution?
Views: 1026
Well, that's weird, because I have clarified myself several times, and yet you keep coming back to points like how horrible it is to use AKs for hunting. I have specifically said several times that that is not what we are debating here, yet you keep coming back to that. If that is the debate you want to have, that's fine, but that is a completely different subject than we started on. The ONLY reason I addressed the hunting issue is that YOU brought it up.
But, as I mentioned in reply to the other post (so we could get away from this long thread that makes us keep paging back to get to a reply button), you apparently don't know what the 2A is for, why it was put in place, or why we need it today. Without that understanding, it's perfectly understandable to not see the point in people owning high capacity magazines and "assault weapon" (well, as long as you ignore the whole point of a "free society" anyway).
The only reason I bring up cars is exactly the point you are making - the only difference is that guns actually fall into that same category. You are talking about punishing millions of people for the acts of a few. You think that's perfectly acceptable, I don't. That is where our attitudes separate. I'm perfectly happy to have a rational debate about it, but I won't do it with someone who nitpicks and takes things out of context. If you hadn't noticed, that is when I stop debating religiots. If that's all you want to do on your side of the subject, that's fine, but it's not a debate and I just won't do it. If you actually want to look at the facts, I'm all for a lively debate. But if you just want to come into a discussion with a closed mind and just take things I say out of context and dismiss everything else I say (especially when I clarify myself), I'm just not interested in dealing with it.
Isn't that exactly what frustrates us both about religitards? When they do exactly what you're doing to me and then insist that they aren't doing it "just to win", but it's obvious that is the only thing they are actually doing?
TE: "I have specifically said several times that that is not what we are debating here" - and you can say it a dozen more, but it won't change anything - my original contention was that no one needs assault rifles and StreetSweepers for hunting, which could quite likely explain why I keep coming back to it, despite your smoke-and-mirrors effort to conflate those kinds of weapons with cars.
I'm perfectly aware of the purpose of the second amendment, the maintenance of a militia, but why don't you give me yours, just so I'll see how closely we agree.
"RE: 'You specifically said that you thought that the 2A addressed weapons for hunting and self-protection.' - no, I didn't"
Your specific quote:
1. What do you think the 2A (2nd amendment) is for?
...the subject will be addressed in question #2.
2. Do you see any value at all in keeping the 2A?
... The only thing I've been saying all along, is that there are some weapons we don't need to possess for hunting or self preservation."
So, who is seeing white rabbits? Why would you possibly bring up hunting and self defense when talking about the second amendment if this isn't what you think it's addressing? or are you saying that we should be fucked out of out basic civil rights because you don't think they are valued for a completely none related purpose? Or are you just trying to obfuscate the issue as you keep trying to claim I am doing, even though I directly address your accusations and you completely ignore my responses (probably because you know they render your arguments completely moot).
Again, until you are actually willing to hold a rational debate where you don't ignore statements and take others out of context, I think I'll move on. I'm really surprised that you are willing to use the same tactics that we both loathe in religious debates. I was hoping for so much more.
RE: "Why would you possibly bring up hunting and self defense when talking about the second amendment if this isn't what you think it's addressing?"
I think you are getting more and more confused as this continues. You are the one who first brought up 2A, all I ever did is disagree with your original assertion that assault rifles and StreetSweepers were needed for hunting and self protection.
Until you are able to clear up your own confusion, I agree that moving on might well be your best option.
Also, to address your second post - the "difference" you state is, again, pointless. So what if a weapon is capable of holding 30 rnds? (most hold 10, by the way, because 30 round mags are heavy)How does that make that weapon any more "dangerous"? My Savage hold 3 rounds (plus 1 in the pipe).
So your argument is that we should ban weapons simply because they are capable of holding more rounds than you think is necessary? And a weapon isn't useful for hunting because it's magazine holds 3 rounds more than the "average"? By the way, I have a .22 rifle that has 25 round mags. I can't buy mags with any other capacity. And, yes, I use it for rabbit hunting. Does that make me a mass murderer, simply because my .22 has too high of a capacity for your comfort? Does that mean that my .22 will worm it's way out of my gun safe and fly down to a school and start shooting kids by itself?
Let's look at the mass shootings over the last decade - how many of them were done using high capacity magazines that could have been prevented if we just limited the size of the mags that the shooter could have gotten. I'll let you do the math on this one...
You specifically stated, Keith, "If people want to stress out because I own a gun for hunting / self-protection, that's their problem," and I responded that some weapons were unnecessary for either - that statement is not fallacious. You're the one envisioning .22's worming their way out of gun safes and flying. I usually expect better conversation from you than that.
RE: "But, if you insist on knowing, no, I don't hunt deer with an AK." - I didn't even ask, much less insist on knowing - this really isn't like you, have a bad day or something?
When I hunted, I preferred a bow, no barrel, no chamber, no magazine.
I suspect, upon further review of the stats, you'll discover that far more gun deaths are due to criminals, than car deaths, and until we can solve the social and economic problems that create criminals, that will continue to be the case.
@Unseen, RE: "even if AK-47's and their ilk were to disappear overnight, the effect on gun crime would be minimal since most gun crimes are perpetrated using handguns or shotguns" - I don't disagree, but in that situation, I'm betting I'm a better shot than my opponent, and I fired "Expert" in the Army - it's the weapons that really don't even need to be aimed, that concern me most.
I did say that, but I also said that the 2nd amendment wasn't about hunting or self protection. I'm not trying to take things out of context, my statement about the .22 flying out of the gun safe, is that everyone seems to want to talk about how the specific configuration of the weapon is the problem. My point is that just because the gun has a pistol grip or a higher capacity mag than people "feel comfortable" with, that does not miraculously turn it into "the problem" and taking guns away from law abiding citizens is not the solution.
As for the hunting remark, you did say that people don't hunt with AKs (or something to that effect) and I was just saying that some people DO actually hunt with AKs and other "assault style" weapons. AKs are perfectly acceptable as deer rifles, although the "true" AK (7.62) is too small of a round to hunt anything much bigger than that.
Let's take your statement "...far more gun deaths are due to criminals..." - so, extending this logically, you are advocating disarmament of ALL guns from ALL citizens (since at least 95% of these crimes are committed with handguns). Your argument is either we should completely dismiss the 2nd amendment, because you can't use this argument to ONLY attack the "assault weapons" that are NOT used in these crimes.
But I find it interesting that you are still sidestepping the question of banning cars. I know you aren't going to claim that there are no deaths, injuries and property damage causing by cars, so why are you completely ignoring the question of banning cars? Is it simply because it belies the argument against guns? Banning "assault weapons" because of gun related crimes is like banning minivans because of all the car accidents in the country. The argument is a non sequitur.
As for your comment "...until we can solve the social and economic problems that create criminals..." - that is EXACTLY my point! The problem is the environment that creates criminals, not the tools that they use. We are wasting time trying to blame and control a tool rather than actually addressing the root problem.
Okay, that's funny because you were just accusing ME of bringing up hunting, which goes to show that you aren't being consistent.
As for no one "needs" guns for hunting, the point is completely immaterial. You don't "need" a bow to hunt, either. Wouldn't it be more of a "sport" if you hunted deer and elk with a knife?
And the hunting argument is absolutely and completely beside the point anyway. it is not a valid argument to justify banning the ownership of them and it has nothing at all, what-so-ever, with the 2A. If you don't want to use a rifle to hunt then more power to you, but that doesn't give you the right to ban me from being able to own one.
You specifically said that you thought that the 2A addressed weapons for hunting and self-protection. If you wan to change your story now, that's fine, but you should probably get your story straight.
I have said several times that the 2A is to maintain a well armed militia to defend against threats to the Republic, both foreign and domestic. That includes an authoritarian and/or totalitarian government. If you read the writings of our founders, it is very clear that they meant this particular amendment to be the teeth that supports the rest of the constitution, and with what our government has been doing, it just shows how brilliant those men really were.
I also disagree with your assertion that accidental deaths are far less concerning than purposeful deaths. I don't see how someone can put so much passion into fighting to prevent murders and yet say that accidental deaths are meaningless. I guess it's just a matter of perspective. I personally think that ALL deaths are tragic and we should be focusing on things that cause more preventable deaths rather than focusing on something that will make little to no differences.
RE: "You specifically said that you thought that the 2A addressed weapons for hunting and self-protection." - no, I didn't. I initially stated that assault rifles and StreetSweepers had no value for the average man on the street - you came back with them being necessary for hunting and self-protection. I then argued that they had no value in hunting and believed it to be totally unsportsmanlike to use them for such. Maybe you should go back and re-read the posts, to get it straight.
I would never have said that the purpose of 2A was hunting, it would be absurd to create an amendment to the Constitution that had such a narrow effect - the amendments were much more far-reaching than that, which is one of the reasons they have withstood the test of time.
As far as going up against am "authoritarian and/or totalitarian government," you wouldn't stand a chance - you and anyone else would be mowed down, and those who did it would believe they were doing their patriotic duty. There are far too many mechanisms in place to prevent an armed revolution, for any such undertaking to be successful, hence once again, no need for assault rifles or StreetSweepers.
I agree that, "ALL deaths are tragic," and consequently need to build safer cars, determine safer speed limits and enforce them, build safer highways and road crossings, and better educate pedestrians.
Can you design a safer assault rifle? One that won't kill anyone but bad guys?
I thought not --
Revolution can be done effectively with or without gunfire, but the end result might not be at all what you wanted either way. I think it's more lasting and more successful without. Revolution is like spinning the wheel and hoping you win. I fear too many powerful players involved with their own agenda. Beware the two faced "leaders" who promise one thing for support and deliver something quite different.
It can be done without bloodshed, it just requires people to focus on the right thing (I know, that's almost impossible). If we, as a whole, stopped supporting Big Business and force our representatives to actually keep proper checks and balances in the system, we could accomplish a lot. If people stopped pumping money into Big Bank, and started using credit unions, that would send a big signal. If we kicked politicians out that did things like voted to discontinue Glass-Steagall (which was put in place specifically to keep the crash from happening after the Savings & Loan crash), we could get our system back into a reasonable state. But people are way too dis-interested in how bad our government is screwing us over until it's too late and they all look back and say "How could OTHER people let that happen?" Or they are completely focusing on things like forcing fairy tales into our school system.
RE: "If we kicked politicians out" - problem with that, is that it's damn hard to kick a politician out of office, except for not electing him/her next term, and a lot of un-undoable damage can be done in a single term.
Then too, we have the American memory to deal with - politicians can pull all of the crap they like, then mellow out at the onset of an election year, and by November, he public will have forgotten or minimized all of the things they previously did. Just prior to the opening of the G. Bush Library (and I didn't even know the idiot could read), pundits were saying that maybe Little George W wasn't as bad a President as everyone thought - they're right, he was worse - but they're counting on fading memory.


text:
The other evening I was photographing for the amazing Charlotte Kruk. I have been photographing her work on and off for years now. She is an amazing artist and a friend. She is getting ready for a year long installation and had to photograph some of her older pieces. We were shooting two "sets" and she had the full on hair, makeup and model thing going on. It makes for a zoo of a shoot, super exciting and everyone running around focused.
The work of Jaime Guerrero
Just finishing post production on the awesome work of Treg Silkwood
Am just putting the finishing touches on the images from my recent session with Treg Silkwood. These pieces are amazing in the level of craftsmanship and detail.
Recent Shoot
It has been a busy winter with travel and work. I recently shot the amazing pieces of Larry Cazes. These small glass spheres are like tiny self contained universes, very exciting art to work with.
Keay3.net features the photographic work of Keay Edwards. Here is a video piece that was a collaboration between Keay Edwards Photography and Hands on Studios (Kyle Chesser)


text:
The frame is a fairly typical moulded and painted papier-mache on wood frame, common in the latter part of the 19th Century. The moulding appears to have worn or broken off on the two lower corners, revealing the plain wooden base underneath, again not unusual for a frame of that age and quality.
Joan was able to remove the picture from the frame, but at 16" x 20" (400 x 500mm) it was too large to fit on her scanner so she photographed it. She also noticed an unusual feature of the photograph:
I was surprised when I took the picture out of the frame; it appeared to have a charcoal overlay on all of the dark surfaces. (When my finger tips brushed the edge of the picture, there was a dark residue and the picture actually felt like charcoal.) Was this charcoal overlay a style? If so, about when was this popular? There is a halo effect around [the head], but that is created primarily by how the "charcoal" was applied.The portrait is of a style quite commonly produced in the late 19th and early 20th Century. I believe it was originally a photographic portrait, almost certainly with a camera which used glass plate negatives (probably 4" x 6"), but then enlarged roughly by a factor of four to produce the print which you now have in your possession.
One of the side effects of such enlargements from smaller negatives is that any blemishes or imperfections in the original, including a lack of contrast between light and dark shades, would be enlarged and/or enhanced in appearance. As a result, such enlargements were often retouched or embellished in a variety of ways. In some cases the customer might even have requested, for example, a special colouring of the portrait, whatever the quality of the black & white or sepia version.
These effects were achieved using pencil, charcoal, pastels, water colours or oil paints, and I've discussed a number of examples of retouched or otherwise modified portraits previously on Photo-Sleuth:
- Collodion positives: Early coloured portraits in Derby
- Gilding the lily: Hand colouring of carte de visite portraits
- A coloured portrait by Lawrence Brothers of Cape Town: A carte de visite finished in oils
- The Man with Piercing Blue Eyes: Retouching of early albumen prints
- Annie Orchard's crowning glory: A coloured opalotype from Derby
- "Portraits enlarged up to life size": Enlargement, framing and colouring from cabinet-sized glass plate negatives
- Hand coloured enlargements of a Yorkshire sailor and his wife: Enlargements finished in oils
- Crimson curtains and carpets of burgundy: Photographic portraits finished in oils
- A family tintype portrait from the 1890s: Retouching of cheap tintypes
- Jerome - "Studios Everywhere": Postcard portraits finished in water colour
Sometimes the retouching was so extensive that little was left of the original photograph. Usually the medium used for the retouching would later be "fixed," but in this case that does not seem to have happened, perhaps because it was to be mounted immediately under glass. Besides, they wouldn't have had access to the wide variety of fixatives that are available today.
As far as a date is concerned, it is difficult to be very precise, but I estimate from the style of portrait and the man's clothing that it was taken in the mid- to late 1880s or early 1890s. Part of the reason for my uncertainty is that this particular style of enlargement/retouching with charcoal was a good deal more common in North America (particularly the United States) than in England.


text:
How to Use
the Readings
Inquiry Question
Reading 1: Prudence Crandall and the Canterbury Female Boarding School
In the fall of 1831, the residents of Canterbury, Connecticut, approached 27-year-old Prudence Crandall about opening a private school for young women in their community. Crandall accepted the invitation and paid $500 as a down payment to purchase the recently vacated Paine mansion located on the town's green. Having been educated at the Friends' Boarding School in Providence, Rhode Island, and having taught at local district schools, Crandall came to the position with a fine reputation as a teacher. The Crandall family, Quakers from Rhode Island, moved to south Canterbury when Prudence was young.
The Canterbury Female Boarding School enjoyed the complete support of the community and was soon a success. Subjects taught included reading, writing, arithmetic, English grammar, geography, history, chemistry, astronomy, and moral philosophy. Basic tuition and room and board cost $25 per quarter. Students paid extra fees for instruction in drawing, painting, music, and French. With student tuition, Crandall was able to pay off the $1500 mortgage within a year.
At the time Crandall opened her school in Connecticut, white and African-American children received a free elementary education at the district schools. No further public or private education was made available to black children. Crandall became aware of the injustices to African Americans in Connecticut and elsewhere through her housekeeper Marcia Davis, and Marcia's friend Sarah Harris, both African Americans. Sarah's father was the local distributor of the abolitionist newspaper, The Liberator. Marcia sometimes would leave copies of the newspaper where Crandall would find them.
In the fall of 1832, Sarah Harris asked Prudence Crandall to admit her to the Canterbury Boarding School. Originally from Norwich, Connecticut, a town traditionally having a larger population of African-American families, Harris hoped the education Crandall's academy offered could help her achieve her goal of returning to Norwich as a teacher. Crandall agreed to let Sarah attend the school as a day student. She immediately lost the support of the townspeople. A number of Canterbury's leading gentlemen, including the secretary of Crandall's Board of Visitors, supported the colonizationist movement, which feared the integration of the races and proposed sending all African Americans in America to Africa. This issue was being passionately debated at the time Crandall admitted Sarah Harris to her school.
Parents threatened to withdraw their daughters if Harris remained in the school. Crandall soon realized she must find some alternative to keep the school open. In the spring of 1833, she traveled to Boston to meet with William Lloyd Garrison, publisher of The Liberator. They discussed the possibility of closing the academy to white students and reopening with an African-American student body. With Garrison's assistance she traveled throughout New England to meet with upper-middle class families who might be willing to send their daughters to the school. She soon realized this idea could be successful. Newspaper advertisements were placed announcing that as of April 1, 1833, the academy would reopen for the purpose of educating "young ladies and little misses of color." According to Crandall, "the sole object, at this school [was] to instruct the ignorant and prepare teachers for the people of color that they may be elevated and their intellectual and moral wants supplied."1 A delegation of town leaders urged her to abandon the project and led a general boycott of the school when Crandall refused.
Although the school opened with only three students, Crandall recruited others from Boston, Providence, and New York City. Enrollment soon rose to 24 students, most of whom were boarders. The curriculum was identical to that of Crandall's first Canterbury school. Both Crandall and her students endured harassment from angry townspeople. Shopkeepers refused to sell them food and townspeople pelted the building with stones and eggs. Under the shield of darkness, the school's opponents even attempted to set the building on fire in January 1834. Crandall's Quaker upbringing contributed to her moral convictions and her decision not to bend to public pressure. The Quakers strongly opposed slavery and promoted education for women and minorities. Crandall herself believed in the cause of immediate abolition.
So determined and influential were Crandall's opponents that, on May 24, 1833, the Connecticut General Assembly enacted a measure known as the Black Law. This act restricted African Americans from coming into Connecticut to get an education and prohibited anyone from opening a school to educate African Americans from outside the state without getting the town's permission. The law did not prevent African Americans that were residents of Connecticut from going to district schools. Convinced the Assembly's action was neither morally just nor constitutionally correct, Crandall ignored the law and continued to recruit and teach her students until her arrest on June 27, 1833.
Crandall spent one night in jail for violating the Black Law. At her trial on August 23, 1833, the jury failed to reach a verdict. The case went to a second trial in October 1833, where she was found guilty. Judge David Daggett told the jury, "It would be a perversion of terms, and the well-known rule of construction to say that slaves, free blacks or Indians, were citizens within the meaning of that term, as used in the Constitution. God forbid that I should add to the degradation of this race of men; but I am bound by my duty, to say they are not citizens." According to this argument, the Constitution did not entitle African Americans to the freedom of education. Crandall appealed the decision to Connecticut's Supreme Court. While she and her abolitionist supporters pursued their legal challenges to the Black Law, her school continued to operate. When supporters visited the school, Crandall's students performed a song for them, revealing their fear and sorrow:
Sometimes when we have walked the streets
The Black Law and Crandall's resistence to it sparked a year-long debate among New Englanders on the issues of abolition and colonization. The Liberator thundered against the injustice, and soon all of America knew of Canterbury and Prudence Crandall. The conflict allowed abolitionists to dramatize the evils of prejudice. Leaders in the movement helped Crandall recruit students for her school, gave her support, and provided for her financially.
On July 26, 1834, the Connecticut Supreme Court of Errors dismissed the case against Crandall on a technical issue. The lower court decision that African Americans were not protected as citizens, however, remained standing. Although Crandall had won a technical legal victory and was free to return to her school, the townspeople of Canterbury would not accept the Supreme Court's decision. On the night of September 9, 1834, an angry mob broke in and ransacked the school building. With clubs and iron bars, the mob terrorized the students and broke more than 90 windows. What the Black Law and local ostracism had not been able to accomplish, this mob achieved. Fearing for the girls' safety, Crandall closed the school the following morning.
In 1834 Prudence Crandall married Calvin Philleo. They left their home in Canterbury shortly after the school closed. Her courage and persistence continued to win her national attention in abolitionist circles. She spoke and was entertained at banquets sponsored by abolitionists and African-American societies. In 1848 she moved to Illinois where she farmed land owned by her father and taught school. In 1877 she moved to Elk Falls, Kansas, where she started a school that served American Indians. In 1883, Mark Twain, a resident of Hartford, Connecticut, helped obtain a pension for Prudence Crandall from the Connecticut Assembly. He also offered to buy her former home in Canterbury for her retirement, but Crandall kindly declined the offer. She died in Elk Falls in 1890 at the age of 87.
Questions for Reading 1
1. How did Crandall come to understand the injustices against African Americans in the New England states? What was The Liberator? Who first showed it to her?
2. Why did Crandall close her school the first time? What did she do next? Why?
3. Why do you think the events at Canterbury captured such great attention at the time?
4. What was the Black Law? How did it affect Crandall's school legally? What was her reaction to the law?
5. What was the legal result of Crandall's trial?
6. What does the song that Crandall's students performed reveal about what they endured?
7. Why did Crandall close her school for good? What might you have done in her situation? How did she spend the rest of her life?
8. Based on this reading, how would you describe Prudence Crandall?
9. In 1984 Prudence Crandall became the official heroine of Connecticut. In what ways were Sarah Harris and her fellow African-American students heroines?
Reading 1 was adapted from Dr. Page Putnam Miller, "Prudence Crandall House" (Windham County, Connecticut) National Historic Landmark Nomination Form, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, 1970; Marvis Olive Welch, Prudence Crandall: A Biography (Manchester, CT: Jason Publishers, 1983); and Randy Ross Ganguly, The Prudence Crandall Museum: A Teachers Resource Guide (Connecticut Historical Commission, State of Connecticut).
¹Randy Ross Ganguly, 67.


text:
America: Warts and all
In last Thursday's Addison Independent, we covered the naturalization ceremony in which 36 Vermont residents became American citizens. The ceremony was held at the Middlebury Union Middle School, and is one of about a dozen held throughout the state each year. Along with friends and family, more than 120 MUMS students observed the 40-minute ceremony — an event that was made all that much more meaningful by the thoughtful comments of U.S. Bankruptcy Court Judge Colleen A. Brown. The oath of allegiance to their new country, Brown told the 36 Vermonters seeking nationalization, "requires you to 'absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state or sovereignty to which you were previously a subject or citizen.'�"The oath makes clear what is it you are giving up and what duties you are undertaking in order to become a U.S. citizen. What I would therefore like to comment upon is the way in which your participation in our society will enrich the United States. It is by welcoming and integrating people from around the world that the United States has become as vibrant a country as it is today."Unlike many other countries in the world, the United States is a blending of cultures that combine to become a new culture. What distinguishes us is that we combine all of our many traditions and natural attributes, but retain and are able to identify the flavor of each ingredient. That is why I believe the U.S. is more like a quilt or a collage than a melting pot…"One cannot have a collage if all the pieces are exactly the same; and we cannot have the United States of America without its ethnic, social, religious and cultural diversity. By becoming American citizens you are helping to enrich the United States' diversity … As you may know if you have ever made a collage, the more varied the pieces are, the more difficult it is to get them to fit together and sometimes it is hard to arrange the parts in a way that is harmonious. Likewise, it is not always easy to accept others who are different or those who do not agree with us. The country was formed, however, in large measure by people who did not feel accepted or free to speak their minds in their own countries. They came here and founded a society governed by the principles inherent in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. These principles ensure that each of us has freedom to speak our own views without fear of prosecution, to worship in our own faith without fear of persecution and to pursue our own dreams without fear of repression."For each right we have there is a corresponding and substantial responsibility. If you are to enjoy the rights of American citizenry, you must also be ready, willing and able to fulfill the duties that correspond to those rights. In order for these rights to have meaning, we each have an unwavering obligation to respect and encourage every other American's exercise of these rights too. We must be able to tolerate — and appreciate — views we may disagree with vehemently. If we are to have our right to free expression, others must too…"This country's history is replete with examples of the tragedies that ensue when we do not conduct ourselves in a way that is consistent with the principles set forth in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights. The United States is not proud of how she treated Native Americans or of the racial and ethnic hatred and discrimination that has been tolerated and ignored in so many often insidious ways over the course of these last 200 years, or of the atrocities we now know occurred at Abu Ghraib Prison, or of what we have done to denigrate the natural splendor of the Earth. But we do not hide what has happened and we have made great strides in trying to find ways to deal with these wrongs in the best way we can…"But please remember that democracy breaks down when people abandon the process and leave it to the few to make the decisions that affect us all. Democracy is often slow and is sometimes a very frustrating way to make decisions, but it is important that the government operate on democratic principles, that it operate openly, and that we come to important decisions based upon input from all who wish to be heard…�Apt words, also, for many Americans born and raised in this country, but who have forgotten the values of tolerance, of open government, of ethnic and racial diversity, of government restraint (particularly in its ability to spy on its own citizens), and of the importance of freedom of speech. America is a great country — warts and all — but never more so than when tolerance and freedom reign supreme.


text:
I honestly can't even figure out this newlayout. If you don't already have me on facebook or twitter, follow my blog at www.toozface.com
My account here expires next month and I won't be returning. It's been fun meeting so many of you and finding the love of my life. Be well.
VIEW 4 of 4 COMMENTS
I already said when they zotted me, they'd never get another penny. When my "gift" account expires, I'll be done here for good.


text:
The peavey point is retractable so it's there when you need it and gone
when you don't. The jack attachment slips over the peavey point and attaches
with the clevis pin provided. The versatility of the tool is invaluable
in the woods and no tools are required for the swap.
The jack raises the log 6", allowing you to cut from the top of
the log or the bottom, while avoiding the risk of dulling your chain on
dirt or rocks as well as avoiding the risk of pinching the blade. With
a jack capacity for logs up to 20" in diameter and a peavey/cant
hook capacity of 28", it covers the range you normally need.
Both the jack and the peavey handle are made of 6061 aircraft aluminum
and, best of all, all components are guaranteed for life. Overall length
is 53" and it weighs 10 lb with the jack attachment on.
Made in USA.


text: premier-04 written by Anthony Nguyen 10/05/2012 0 comment 0 Facebook Twitter Google + Pinterest Anthony Nguyen Hi I'm Anthony Nguyen...originally from California and previously in Hawaii, currently in Portlandia with my 1973 BMW 2002. New location...new adventures - this is how it looks through my eyes . Fast Car Magazine . anthony[@]fatlace.com Leave a Comment Cancel Reply


text:
World Asthma Day is an annual event organized by the Global Initiative for Asthma (GINA). The event raises awareness about asthma and works to improve asthma care around the world. This year's theme is "You Can Control Your Asthma". It aims to continue the focus on asthma control described in the latest version of the GINA guidelines [1].
You Can Control Your Asthma
May 3, 2011 | by


text:
Well, for those of you who haven't seen us in a while we are having another baby in November. It was a big surprise for us, but what an awesome surprise! I wanted to make sure that everything was good before I told everyone, and everything looked great. Well, we had our ultrasound yesterday, and I thought for sure this one was going to be my little girl, but nope.....we're having another little boy. I was hoping for a girl, but 3 little boys in a row so close together will be a blast. I'm way excited! Plus, I don't have to buy anything new, unless I want to, because I have all the boy stuff already. Now we just have to come up with a name. November may seem far away for you guys, but for me I can wait for a while to have 3 little boys 3 years and younger running around the house. It's going to be CRAZY!
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Posted by Christensenfamily at 7:02 AM 8 comments
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)