India Pale Ale style well suited for Hemingway-esque trips to the Upper Peninsula. American malts and enormous hop additions give this beer a crisp finish and incredible floral hop aroma.
Archive for May 21st, 2007
Speaking of bees, cancel the apocalypse.
California’s almond farmers — who grow the most bee-intensive crop in the country — are forecasting a record harvest this year. In fact, the latest estimate, recently released, is for this year’s crop to be almost 20 percent bigger than last year’s. The state’s plum, peach and nectarine farmers say that their trees are full of fruit too. And so do cherry, pear and apple farmers in Washington.
Though pollination is still continuing for a few crops, there has been no indication so far that the honeybee disappearances will have any effect on any harvest this year.
One for Fred: St Margaret’s at Cliffe
Cows bounce! But only after the aliens mutilate them.
More on The Most Important Fish in The Sea.
Mr. Price also performed a study finding striped bass which ate menhaden had a higher body fat content than those striped bass who maintained a diet of other sea organisms. He also contends that 98 percent of an adult striped bass’ diet is naturally composed of menhaden.
The menhaden reduction industry involves purse-seining harvest practices where fishing vessels can catch entire schools at once using a large net and aerial support to spot the schools from above. The catch is then taken to a reduction factory that processes the menhaden into livestock and pet feed, Omega 3 supplements, make-up, paint and various other by-products.
Mr. Franklin’s book, “The Most Important Fish in the Sea,” points out that most East Coast states have outlawed the industry over the years due to concerns of ecological imbalance in coastal waters attributed to the menhaden reduction industry.
In 1986, I voted for the Simpson-Mazzoli immigration bill. We were promised that in return for amnesty for far fewer than three million illegal immigrants we would get:
* Control of the border;
* Enforcement of laws requiring employers to know someone is here legally before hiring them; and
* No more amnesty and no more tolerance of illegality
Fool me once, shame on you, Fool me twice……
It happens, more often than not in my experience. This one sprang from the Iraq discussion below. I’ve revised and extended in places as the mood, or the brown liquor, moved me.
—————
I, on the other hand, was perfectly happy with the invasion of Iraq. Still am.
What I disliked, a reaction which made me perfectly representative of the American public during most of the wars in our history, is how it was fought after the first couple of months.
We’re a picky bunch.
I’m happier with the strategy now, and in any case content myself with the knowledge of Clemenceau, that “War is a series of catastrophes that results in a victory.”
The point is to suffer one less catastrophe than the enemy–a perfectly achievable goal given our vast superiority in every resource aside from patience.
The question is, do we use those resources actively, to engage the enemy on our terms, or reactively, engaging them on theirs?
Think of it as a football game. The more time your side spends on offense, the less the other side gets to. What I want is for us to remain on offense for as long as possible. I understand the position of those who think that we’re creating more enemies than we are getting rid of by remaining in Iraq, but I also think they’re historically somewhat ill-informed. At the very least, a person taking that position conflates the various anti-insurgency campaigns conducted by the British and Russian Empires despite their very differing tactics and–tellingly–outcomes.
History shows that It is perfectly possible to kill a whole bunch of enemies without creating more enemies. What is important is how one goes about it.
We’ll end up staying in Iraq until the government there can govern, or we bug out prior to that and abandon the Iraqis to their holocaust. Either way, we’ll eventually prevail in the struggle we now find ourselves in, no matter what one calls it. Our advantages in the struggle are simply too large. The question is how long it takes, and how much damage we allow the other side to inflict prior to doing so.
———
The Football Metaphor: Americans like an exciting, fast paced, dominant offense. The problem with Iraq is that, after we ran the initial kickoff back for a touchdown, GB & company decided to protect a 7-0 lead by going with a three yards and a cloud of dust offense* for the rest of the game. Knowing this to be a moronically stupid–not to mention boring–strategy, Americans headed for the exit in droves.
Since then, Bush has changed quarterbacks, and we’re now running the option, with the plays called at the line rather than being sent in from the sidelines. It’s not West Coast Football, but it has the advantage of being a lot more unpredictable than our previous offense, and it seems to be having an effect.
*Given the unpopularity of the war among most of Left, one could call it a Single Wing, were one infatuated with one’s own cleverness.
———
Ethanol, rough as a cob.
Thus, it is no surprise that the price of corn has doubled in the past year – from $2 to $4 a bushel. We are already seeing upward pressure on food prices as the demand for ethanol boosts the demand for corn. Until the recent ethanol boom, more than 60 percent of the annual US corn harvest was fed domestically to cattle, hogs, and chickens or used in food or beverages. Thousands of food items contain corn or corn byproducts. In Mexico, where corn is a staple food, the price of tortillas has skyrocketed because US corn has been diverted to ethanol production.
Any sort of shock to corn yields, such as drought, unseasonably hot weather, pests, or disease could send food prices into the stratosphere. Such concerns are more than theoretical. In 1970, an outbreak of a fungus destroyed 15 percent of the US corn crop.
Higher priced food I can handle, but if bourbon prices start to go up I’m going to seriously consider some form of public protest.
Perhaps a small sign in the front yard, expressing my displeasure with current events.
That’ll show them!
See also: Ha!
It was a scant two years ago that Georgia’s Saxby Chambliss voted with 73 other giddy senators for an energy bill that required the nation to use 7.5 billion gallons of ethanol. Georgia’s farmers loved corn-based ethanol; Georgia’s agri-businesses loved corn-based ethanol; and all that meant that then-Agriculture Committee Chairman Chambliss loved corn-based ethanol, too.
Earlier this year, Mr. Chambliss introduced a bill calling for even greater ethanol use, though with one striking difference: The bill caps the amount of that fuel that can come from corn. Turns out Georgia’s chicken farmers hate corn-based ethanol; Georgia’s pork producers hate corn-based ethanol; Georgia’s dairy industry hates corn-based ethanol; Georgia’s food producers hate corn-based ethanol; Georgia’s hunters hate corn-based ethanol. And all that means Mr. Chambliss has had to find a new biofuels religion.
…
Things are even hotter in Washington, where lobbying groups are firming up their positions against corn ethanol. The hugely influential National Cattlemen’s Beef Association has gone so far as to outline a series of public demands, including an end to any government tax credits (subsidies) for ethanol and an axe to the import tariff on foreign ethanol. Put another way, the cattlemen are so angry that they are demanding free markets and free trade–a first. Maybe ethanol really is a miracle fuel.