text:
(written from a Production point of view)
Jadzia falls in love with a scientist on a planet whose inhabitants shift between this universe and a plane of pure energy, re-emerging every sixty years. Back on DS9, Quark tries to obtain a holo-image of Major Kira for an erotic holosuite program for a wealthy patron.
In the station's Replimat, Major Kira is sipping a hot cup of replicated coffee when Odo walks up to her. They sit together at a table and discuss the sensuality of food and drink, and the difficulty that Odo has in appreciating that sensuality by virtue of the limitations imposed by his Changeling physiology.
Just then Tiron approaches Kira and explains that he regretted her early departure from Quark's the night before. However, Kira's unimpressed and clearly anxious to make Tiron go away… so she tells Tiron that Odo is her lover. Hands are held, eloquent platitudes are exchanged all around, Tiron bids Kira farewell before leaving the Replimat crestfallen, Kira thanks Odo enthusiastically for playing along, and Odo is left staring at the hand Kira held after she leaves for Ops.
The USS Defiant is in the Gamma Quadrant on an exploration mission cadged from Starfleet notwithstanding the threat of Dominion attack. Gravimetric distortions are detected in the nearby Trialus system, so Commander Sisko orders Jadzia in to take the Defiant into the system for a closer look.
When the Defiant enters the system Dax discerns that the distortions aren't coming from the system's star. A few moments later, a planet comes into view and the distortions cease.
Act One
When Lieutenant Dax scans the planet in order to determine where it came from, they discover a settlement on the southern hemisphere of approximately thirty people, which shortly hails the Defiant. Sisko responds and describes his confusion; the woman at the other end of the connection introduces herself as Seltin Rakal, explains that her planet exists largely in a separate dimension that intersects with that of the Defiant and its crew, and invites the senior staff of the Defiant to the surface for first meal.
Once on the surface Sisko, Dax, Bashir and O'Brien sit down to eat with the inhabitants of the settlement. After some pleasantries, Sisko and Dax discuss with Seltin and Deral the nature of the planet's dimensional shifts. It is explained that the cause of the dimensional shifts is unknown but thought to be related somehow to the behavior of the system's sun. Seltin and Deral go on to explain that after each dimensional shift the planet, named Meridian, ceases to exist in normal space and its inhabitants become beings of "pure consciousness" until things shift back after 60 years, at which point everything is "just as [they] left it" since the planet is not subject to the normal passage of time while it is dimensionally shifted. Bashir says that he can see the appeal in this dimensional shift.
Back on the station, Tiron melodramatically explains to Quark that he couldn't stand his time in the holosuites, as he found it extremely boring and isn't likely to find it any more interesting, but describes what he really wants: a holosuite program built around Kira. Quark suggests that such a thing will be very expensive, and in response Tiron offers a bar of latinum and one of the rings from his left hand as payment. Deeply impressed by the suggested price, Quark remarks on the difficulty of the task, to which Tiron responds by baiting Quark over his reputation for getting things. Quark hesitates briefly, but promises to deliver the holosuite program Tiron's asked for. However, Tiron refuses to pay until the program is completed and deemed acceptable.
On Meridian, Deral explains to Dax that the inhabitants of the planet are descendants of an expedition that was stranded there a millennium earlier, and that their numbers have dwindled since they can only reproduce when they're not shifted out of the "normal" dimension, and those spells are growing progressively shorter, with the current phase lasting only 12 days. Deral goes on to explain that eventually the planet will be too unstable to shift back, at which point the planet and all of its inhabitants will cease to exist.
Act Two
Later, Sisko promises Seltin that he will do everything he can to help. Dax and Deral announce that they are beaming up to the Defiant to scan the system's sun.
Kira walks into Quark's only to discover that she's been declared the millionth customer. Quark tells her that she's won a number of gifts, including a beverage, a free spin at the dabo table and a free hour in the holosuite with a program of her choice. Kira's quite pleased with herself since she's never won anything. However, she points out that she doesn't like holosuites and tells Quark that she's going to give her free holosuite time to Ensign Quintana since it is his birthday. Kira excitedly takes her turn at dabo, however.
On the bridge of the Defiant, a probe with shield modifications is being sent into Meridian's sun. Once the launch goes off Deral, who's been steadily romancing Dax since she first came to Meridian, gives her an invitation back down to the planet for some quality time… which she accepts with mock bashfulness, as Sisko and O'Brien observe them from the other side of the bridge. Once on the surface of Meridian, Deral explains to Dax that he's a widower who's been "waiting for the right woman to fall out of the sky" – and that Dax is that right woman. Deral leads Dax into a tree and moments later they lean in to kiss, but Dax loses her balance and they climb down, instead. However, after a little more time they finally do share a passionate kiss.
Act Three
Later, Sisko contacts Dax to announce that they've obtained more telemetry from the probe, and throws in a few good-hearted jibes about her acceptance of Deral's affections. With the telemetry data downloaded onto a PADD, Dax is able to work out a way to keep Meridian in normal space for more than thirty years, once it has shifted out and back again.
Meanwhile, at the station Odo is with Kira on the upper level of the Promenade, and spies Quark attempting to take a holo-image of Kira from the mezzanine of his bar. Once he's been caught, Quark tries to weasel his way out of the situation, but Kira simply throws Quark's holo-imager over her shoulder and down onto the main level of the bar. She warns Quark that if she catches him again taking a holo image of her, she will make him eat the imager.
Back on Meridian, Dax explains that her idea will work, and will in fact equalize the time between dimensional shifts – but that the needed changes won't be completed until Meridian has already shifted back. This is at odds with Deral's desire to start a relationship with Dax, which she's entirely willing to reciprocate, so he offers to leave Meridian with her and return with the Defiant to the Alpha Quadrant.
Act Four
In Quark's, Tiron is waiting impatiently for Quark to finish the new holoprogram. Quark has obtained the encryption key for Kira's personnel file, and with this development he assures Tiron that he'll be able to finish the new program before Tiron leaves the station in two days.
However, Quark's efforts have not gone undetected by Odo. In his security office, Odo informs Kira of the security breach and that he traced it back to the Ferengi bartender. He offers to arrest Quark or have Kira do it herself, but the major has a better idea…
Back on Meridian, Dax and Deral are cuddling, but a distracted Deral concedes that he'd stay on Meridian if he could have Dax there with him. She offers to use the transporter buffer to make her physiology compatible with the demands of the dimensional shift, which greatly pleases a shocked Deral.
Act Five
Later Dax goes back to her quarters on the Defiant to put in a request to Starfleet for a 60 year leave of absence, which Sisko supports in spite of the fact that the prospect tugs on his heartstrings. The commander tearfully tells Dax how much he will miss her, and she emotionally tells him the same.
Again in Quark's, the Kira holoprogram is complete. Tiron goes into the holosuite to inspect his purchase. However, the Kira character has been altered… the body is Kira's, but the head and voice are Quark's! Tiron storms out of the holosuite and thence out of the bar, promising to do his best at ruining Quark's reputation. As soon as Tiron stomps out Odo and Kira step in, asking Quark if he's gotten "another satisfied customer."
Finally, after many emotional goodbyes, Dax is ready to beam down to Meridian and undergo the dimensional shift. Once it begins, however, something goes wrong – the others are shifting, but Dax isn't, and the bridge crew of the Defiant determines that the anomaly is threatening to tear Meridian apart. O'Brien goes to transport a dying Dax back to the Defiant… which allows the planet to complete its dimensional shift.
Later, Dax is alone in her quarters, beside herself with grief. Sisko comes in offering remorse, but Dax says that she'll "just need some time." After Sisko leaves, she sits down in a corner and says, "just sixty years or so."
Log entries
Memorable quotes
"Odo, I know you don't need to eat, but did you ever try it anyway?"
"Once. Not long after I was first able to assume the humanoid form."
"… And since I don't have taste buds it was very unsatisfying. Not to mention messy."
"I'd rather not talk about it."
- - Kira Nerys and Odo
"… We were having such a pleasant conversation."
"As I recall, you were the one doing all the talking."
- - Tiron and Kira
"I wish we'd had time to beam down to the surface and take a closer look."
"Yeah, but I'd hate to have run into a Jem'Hadar patrol while we were down there picking flowers."
- - Jadzia Dax and O'Brien
"The gravimetric distortions are intensifying, but they don't seem to be coming from the star itself."
"But where else could they be coming from? There aren't any planets in this system."
"There are now."
- - Jadzia and O'Brien
"I was admiring… your markings. Are they decorative?"
"No. Are yours?"
"No. …If you don't mind me asking… how far down do they go?"
"All the way."
- - Deral and Jadzia
"It's delicious."
"Especially if you've been looking forward to it for sixty years."
"That's a long time between meals."
- - Jadzia, Deral, and O'Brien
"Oh, for that kind of money, you can move into a holosuite. Now, what is it you want?"
"I want… Major Kira."
"Kir- What are you going to do with Kira in a holosuite? …No. Don't tell me. I don't want to know."
- - Quark and Tiron
"After eight lifetimes as a humanoid, existing as pure consciousness… might be interesting."
"Next time we see each other, I'll probably be a great-grandfather!"
"Good, then I can call you Old Man."
- - Jadzia and Sisko, finding it impossible to hold back their giggles
"Do you think you'll be done overhauling the station by the next time I see you [sixty years hence]?"
"I doubt it."
- - Jadzia and O'Brien
Background information
Story and script
- Mark Gehred-O'Connell's original title for the episode was "Prophet in the Wind". (The Official Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Magazine issue 10)
- "Meridian" is based on Brigadoon, a musical about a magical Scottish village that appears only once every one hundred years. Co-Executive Producer Ira Steven Behr, an admirer of Brigadoon, confessed to originating the idea about making an episode based on the musical. Of his idea to do a Star Trek show based on Brigadoon, Behr says "I am a moron." (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion)
- Mark Gehred-O'Connell commented: "["Meridian"] is an outer space version of Brigadoon, with Dax as Gene Kelly. It's really a fun story. We know that Dax has had many romantic entanglements over the course of three hundred years, but this is the first time that Jadzia Dax has fallen in love. That's the angle on which I'm building this script. There isn't a whole lot of jeopardy or danger and there are no bad guys. In that sense, it's a lot like "Second Sight". It's a light story in many ways, but it has emotional weight for Dax, and it's very appealing. All of her friends have to realize that this is her first romance. Sisko is used to thinking of Dax as old Curzon, and it comes as a shock to him". (The Official Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Magazine issue 10)
- The hologram consisting of Kira Nerys' body and Quark's head was supposed to be Nana Visitor's body with Armin Shimerman's head (in make-up) inserted in post-production. Although Visitor was scheduled to appear in the shot, it would have required her to wear a foam rubber head, which would be replaced by Quark's head. However, Visitor was still reeling from claustrophobia as a result of the Cardassian make-up she wore for "Second Skin". When her make-up artist, Camille Calvet, attempted to place the rubber head on her, Visitor panicked. Thus, body double Leah Burrough filled in for her. (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion)
- The garden set of Meridian, where Jadzia and Deral engage in a relationship, was filmed at the Huntington Library Botanical Gardens in Pasadena, California. The house of Deral is a reuse of the set used for the temple in TNG: "Masks", and was built on Paramount Stage 18. The backdrop seen outside the house was actually a 270-degree backdrop borrowed from Walt Disney Studios, where it had been originally created to be used on Mary Poppins. (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion)
- The aerial view of the settlement on Meridian was a reuse of a shot previously used in Star Trek: The Next Generation's sixth season episode "Birthright, Part II". That shot was a composite of a Thai jungle picture, taken by Dan Curry, and a maquette of the Carraya IV Romulan prison camp. For "Meridian", the shot was slightly modified to match the full-scale set of Meridian. To dispel the notion of it being a walled prison, a large hall was added to the depiction of the model, matching the full-scale set, a small building was put outside the walls with other walls and watch towers either being removed or modified. [1]
- Jeffrey Combs commented: "["Meridian"] was my first time on a Star Trek set so it was very exciting. I remember there being a lot of hair. Because I was a new alien, they kept making me change my hairstyle. They would take Polaroids, then come back 30 minutes later and change the hair again. That got to be annoying. That's honestly what I remember about it". (The Official Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Magazine issue 21, pp. 17 & 19)
- Some members of the DS9 staff consider this episode to be the weakest of the season. For example, writer Hilary J. Bader says "Of all the stories I've done for Star Trek, "Meridian" is my least favorite"; writer/producer Ronald D. Moore claims "I don't think anyone likes the show. I don't think we liked the show. This one just went wrong. It never gelled"; and visual effects supervisor Glenn Neufeld says "A classic case of making it up as we go. I don't want to talk about it." (Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Companion)
- Ira Steven Behr commented "There are some nice things in it, but to make that show really work, we would have needed another $200,000 for opticals. There were some sweet things in the show, some nice moments, but it was tough to do. We were trying to create a society that was not tech oriented, yet there were all these tech questions that had to be answered: what do they wear, how do they live? How do you tell a love story in thirty minutes? It's really difficult. I can't say as a love story the show was really successful". (Captains' Logs Supplemental - The Unauthorized Guide to the New Trek Voyages, p 87)
- Terry Farrell enjoyed making "Meridian". Farrell commented: "I thought that show was done well. I loved working with Jonathan [Frakes]. But, to be honest, I thought "Rejoined" worked better as a love story. I don't think "Meridian" was as emotionally honest as "Rejoined" in its approach to a Dax relationship and its dialogue. I just fell in love with the guy. Boom! Many people enjoyed that show and, as an actress, I did too, especially the scene where I had to say goodbye to Avery Brooks. Those kinds of scenes are very easy to play with Avery, because he's so supportive of me. If it hadn't been for Avery, I don't know if I would have gotten through our first season". (The Official Star Trek: Deep Space Nine Magazine issue 14, p. 7)
- Rene Echevarria commented "I think Ira's sister is the one who said it seemed like an original series episode, and I'll take that as a compliment. On the original Star Trek, they often asked the audience to accept a love story, a huge premise or a tragic separation – sometimes all three – in a single episode". (Captains' Logs Supplemental - The Unauthorized Guide to the New Trek Voyages, p 87)
- David Livingston commented "It was mostly talking. Jonathan got some really nice performances out of Terry and our guest actor. We went back to Huntington Gardens and we found this tree that was great. It was a sweet scene". (Captains' Logs Supplemental - The Unauthorized Guide to the New Trek Voyages, p 87)
- This episode features the first appearance of Jeffrey Combs on the series, as well as on Star Trek. He would later play the recurring characters of Weyoun and Liquidator Brunt on the series and Commander Shran in Star Trek: Enterprise, as well as many more single character appearances like Tiron. Combs, who had originally auditioned for the role of William T. Riker on Star Trek: The Next Generation, was cast as Tiron by this episode's director, Jonathan Frakes (who actually got the part of Riker).
- During the first meal Deral asks Jadzia how far down her markings go, to what she replies "All the way". It is seen in "Equilibrium" that Jadzia's spots do go down to her feet, as they can be seen briefly in shots of her on the hospital bed at the Trill homeworld.
- This episode marks the return of composer Dennis McCarthy to DS9. He had left temporarily to compose the score for Star Trek Generations.
- This episode marks the first appearance of the Defiant's transporter room.
- This is the first episode in which Sisko goes back into the Gamma Quadrant since the season opener, in which they located the Founders and effectively initiated a cold war with the Dominion.
- Meridian's reveal in the teaser on the Defiant's viewscreen is similar to when the planet Aldea appeared suddenly in front of the USS Enterprise-D in TNG: "When The Bough Breaks".
- A script for this episode was sold off on the It's A Wrap! sale and auction on eBay. [2]
- Cirroc Lofton (Jake Sisko) does not appear in this episode.
- This was the last episode of Deep Space Nine to air before the release of Star Trek Generations on 18 November 1994.
- According to a stardate reference from the Star Trek: Voyager episode "Maneuvers", this episode takes place one month after "Caretaker".
- Reference to 47: in the scene before Dax transports to Meridian after spending six hours "having [her] molecules scrambled", O'Brien states "the next dimensional shift should occur within the next 47 minutes".
- Tiron orders a glass of Andorian ale when speaking to Quark about the mediocre holosuite programs. The actor, Jeffrey Combs, would later go on to play an Andorian commander in Star Trek: Enterprise.
Video and DVD releases
- UK VHS release (two-episode tapes, CIC Video): Volume 3.4, 27 March 1995
- As part of the DS9 Season 3 DVD collection
Links and references
Also starring
- Rene Auberjonois as Constable Odo
- Siddig El Fadil as Doctor Julian Bashir
- Terry Farrell as Lieutenant Jadzia Dax
- Cirroc Lofton as Jake Sisko
- Colm Meaney as Chief Miles O'Brien
- Armin Shimerman as Quark
- Nana Visitor as Major Kira Nerys
Guest stars
Uncredited co-stars
- Sam Alejan as sciences officer
- David B. Levinson as Broik
- Mary Mascari as Bajoran woman
- Unknown performer as
- Leah Burrough as body double for Nana Visitor
2368; 47; 14th century; 2371; Alpha Quadrant; Andorian ale; Bajoran Military Academy; Bolian; business associate; Cardassian; cloaking device; coffee; contract; corona; corporeal form; dabo; data path; Dax, Curzon; Dax symbiont; decryption protocol; Deral's wife; dessert; dimension; Dominion; Federation; first meal; flower; forest; fusion cycle; Gamma Quadrant; gamma radiation; garden; gravimetric distortion; helio-seismic scan (helio-seismology); hemisphere; holopicture; holo-scan; holosuite; ionization trace; Ishka; isolinear rod; Jem'Hadar; Kandora champagne; Keshara; kilometer; Kylata system; Kylata II; last meal; latinum; M-class; Meridian; money; Morn; non-corporeal (aka non-corporeal state); Old Man; ops; pattern buffer; Pelians; personnel file; phenomenon; Picnic with the Pleasure Goddess of Rixx, A; pond; probe; Promenade; psychiatric profile; pulp; quantum fluctuation; quantum level; quantum matrix; Quark's; Renar; Replimat; retinal scan; rind; sector; Serilians; singularity; spectral scan; Seltin Rakal's species; Starfleet; taste buds; temperature; tongo; tongo player; tree; transporter; Trialan sun; Trialus system; Tuesday; vajhaq; vintage; vertigo; voiceprint
Unused production material
External links
- "Meridian" at Memory Beta, the wiki for licensed Star Trek works
- "Meridian" at Wikipedia
- "Meridian" at StarTrek.com, the official Star Trek website
| Previous episode:
"Civil Defense"
| Star Trek: Deep Space Nine
Season 3
| Next episode:


text:
The currency sell-off in the emerging markets bring back bad memories of the 1997 Asian crisis. Back then, there were fears of a world-wide economic meltdown. Sara Eisen reports how this time, things are different.
Hot Topics
About NBR"Nightly Business Report produced by CNBC" (NBR) is an award-winning and highly-respected nightly business news program that airs on public television. Television's longest-running evening business news broadcast, "NBR" features in-depth coverage and analysis of the biggest financial news stories of the day and access to some of the world's top business leaders and policy makers.
Top Stories from CNBC
- Why Germany's coronavirus strategy might come back to haunt it
- 'I felt so afraid and so anxious': Young people adjust to a new reality as their job prospects fade
- Kevin O'Leary says election pollsters are 'irrelevant' and 'do not know what's going on anymore'
- Economic recovery could slow in Q4 after 'steroid of fiscal stimulus' fades, JPMorgan Asset Management says
- IMF says Asia's economy will shrink more in 2020 than it previously thought
NBR on TwitterMy Tweets
NBR on Facebook
Subscribe to RSS

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Secretary Richard K. Sullivan Jr. Secretary, Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs View Secretary Sullivan's Bio One of the things I'm focused on is reducing energy use at state facilities. By investing in energy efficiency, the Patrick-Murray …Continue Reading Energy efficient lighting project will save $4 million
We want to hear from you. Connect with us.


text:
In March 2009, the Library requested proposals to provide a Facilities Master Plan which would serve as a guide for future renovations, additions, replacements or reconfigurations within the system. In May 2009 Bostwick Design Partnership was commissioned to carry out this Master Plan.
Cuyahoga County Public Library recognizes that as our public face in the community, each branch should reflect the same level of quality as the services provided. While achieving system-wide excellence, there exists a quality disparity among individual facilities, stemming from the history and complexities of branch development in each community. This Facilities Master Plan quantifies these differences, to aid future decisions about the size, location, design and function of library branches so that over time, all facilities may equitably and effectively serve their communities.
The plan was presented to our Library Board of Trustees on December 15, 2009. The facility assessment for each branch is available below:


text:
The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has unveiled its shortlist of 10 films that will contend for the Best Visual Effects Oscar. The films that have made the cut include The Dark Knight Rises, Cloud Atlas, Skyfall, The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey, and Disney's John Carter. The list is full of impressive blockbuster fare from 2012, but as we were reminded last year (Hugo over Rise of the Planet of the Apes) the winner of the category tends to favor a Best Picture nominee. As Ang Lee's adaptation of Life of Pi includes stunning visual effects and is an early favorite to land a Best Picture nomination, prognosticators would do well to keep their eye on that film as the race moves forward. That said, there's not exactly a lack of great work to thumb through, so this should be an interesting category.
Hit the jump to check out the full list of contenders, and leave your thoughts on the shortlist in the comments. The nominations for the 85th Academy Awards will be announced on January 10th, followed by the ceremony on February 24th.
Here's the list of films that remain in the running for the Best Visual Effects Oscar:
The Amazing Spider-Man
Cloud Atlas
The Dark Knight Rises
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey
John Carter
Life of Pi
Marvel's The Avengers
Snow White and the Huntsman


text:
FUW reacts to shooting of Borth lynx
THE FARMERS' UNION OF WALES says the authorities reacted appropriately in deciding to shoot an escaped lynx after a specialist veterinary surgeon advised that the risk to public well-being had increased from moderate to severe.
The escaped Eurasian lynx was already suspected of having killed seven sheep within a few hundred yards of the town of Borth, in Ceredigion, after escaping from Borth Wild Animal Kingdom, and had since strayed into a populated area.
"In an ideal world the lynx would have been quickly recaptured, but this did not happen," said an FUW spokesman
"Given the risk to people and livestock, action to remove such a danger was long overdue. Had the animal not been allowed to escape in the first place, this situation would not have arisen, and it seems a number of our member's livestock would not have been attacked and killed."
Sheep have been found to make up more than a third of wild lynx diets in Norway, alongside bigger herbivores such as roe deer, reindeer and even moose. Attacks by lynxes on humans have also been recorded, but are rare.
"Despite being around the size of a sheepdog, an animal like this will routinely kill animals much bigger than itself, and the fact it was used to humans increased the risk it posed to the public," said the FUW spokesman.
"Some have already expressed their outrage over the shooting, but the public reaction would have been far greater had the animal attacked an adult or child, as has happened elsewhere."
Last week the the FUW wrote to the Welsh Government and the local Police Commissioner expressing concerns that the danger the animal posed was not being taken seriously.
With proposals to introduce lynx to the north of England, and even parts of Wales, the FUW says the incident should come as a stark warning.
"It is no coincidence that the places targeted for campaigns to release lynxes are remote rural areas, and claims their impacts on livestock are negligible are not borne out by the evidence from the continent.
"If they are really as harmless as some people say, why aren't we considering their release in heavily populated areas such as Surrey?"
Leave a Reply
Farmers 'totally let down' by Labour
I AM late and apologetic and Janet Finch-Saunders, the Conservatives Shadow Minister for Rural Affairs, is in a hurry to beat the foul weather and get to Cardiff to attend the Senedd.
I have committed the cardinal sin of booking two interviews close together and the first has run over.
We get through understandably brisk introductions and she explains: "I'm heading to Cardiff for the week's business. It's the least we can do as members: actually turn up and try to hold the Welsh Government to account. I think it's ridiculous that ministers can't be bothered to turn up in the Chamber to face proper scrutiny.
"Zoom is all very well but it's no substitute for detailed questioning, face-to-face. Most people turn up at their place of work and are expected to. Yet Welsh ministers, who live nearby, can make it to a TV studio in Cardiff but not get to the Chamber where they should be answering questions in person," she added sharply.
"Turning up isn't a gesture. It's where Senedd members, are supposed to be and it's disgraceful Welsh Labour ministers aren't."
With that chilly blast out of the way, we move rapidly on to policy.
Janet Finch-Saunders took on the rural affairs brief as a result of Paul Davies' re-shuffle of his frontbench team. She succeeded the combative Andrew RT Davies and she also doesn't pull her punches about the Welsh Government's approach to farmers and rural communities.
"They've been totally let down by this Welsh Labour Government," she said, continuing: "Cardiff Bay is not governing for the whole of Wales. Our farmers and rural communities are being ignored and treated as an afterthought. The Welsh Government is set on its own agenda which doesn't take account of the importance of farming to the lives of rural communities, let alone the livelihoods of the people who live there.
"Eight-four percent of land in Wales is rural. Rural communities are an integral part of Wales and who we are. But after twenty years of devolution they don't have much to show for how important they are. The Welsh Government has wasted money on its own vanity projects and programmes; taken the maximum cut out of funds that should have gone to farmers and thrown it at projects which delivered no measurable benefit; its policy on Bovine TB is a total mess.
"The Welsh Labour Government has no rural constituency seats and it shows in the way it approaches policy: a few think tanks filled with the usual suspects tell it what it wants to hear and off it goes without any understanding of farming and rural life. And farmers and rural groups who oppose Welsh Labour's pet-projects are then said to oppose measures to improve the environment! It's nonsense."
We asked whether there was a particular policy Janet Finch-Saunders had in mind and she responded in a flash.
"NVZs (Nitrate Vulnerable Zones). That is a policy which the Welsh Labour Government asked its own statutory advisor, Natural Resources Wales, to advise it on how the Welsh Government should deal with nitrate pollution in rivers. NRW gave its advice, which was that there was no need to declare the whole of Wales an NVZ and that enforcement would be impossible within its current budget. But the Welsh Government went ahead and did it anyway. Then, during recess and at one of the busiest parts of the farming year, the Minister (Lesley Griffiths) started a consultation, ignored requests to postpone it because of the coronavirus pandemic, and that is going to be the background to government's approach.
"This sort of government, by consultation after consultation (when the Welsh Government has already made up it's mind) and communicating Cabinet statement has to stop. Ministers must make informed decisions which take account of everyone who is involved in what happens on the ground. They have to turn up to the Senedd and answer for them."
When it came to a specific issue, Janet Finch-Saunders identified the plight of Wales' wool producers.
"The price of fleeces has fallen through the floor. We have a fantastic product which can be used for so many different things. I am glad the Welsh Government has taken on board the pressure from farming unions and my requests to commit to using Welsh wool. It's environmentally-friendly insulation and should be used in Welsh Government buildings at every opportunity.
"It's criminal that wool farmers are having to use fleeces for compost because wool processors are not taking up the allocation they usually would because of COVID. That's an instance where the Welsh Government can make a big difference by making a relatively small commitment from its budget to support Wales' wool producers."
Janet Finch-Saunders' predecessor was not shy of criticising Lesley Griffiths for avoiding attending the Senedd to answer questions; unsurprisingly, given her earlier words, neither is Janet Finch-Saunders.
"There is no good reason for avoiding being questioned in person, Making announcements when members cannot ask you about them is ridiculous. I've written to Lesley Griffiths on behalf of a constituent and waited ages for an answer. The person's problem needed sorting out. How are Senedd members supposed to help their constituents when a Minister is permanently unavailable?"
Warming to her theme, Mrs Finch-Saunders continued: "This is a shambles of a government. I can tell you that a Welsh Conservative Government won't treat our rural communities and farmers with such contempt. They will be front and centre of our policies.
"The problem, as Paul Davies has said, is not devolution but the way Welsh Labour has mismanaged it. It's wasted money and wasted opportunities. It's dithered, delayed, kicked cans down the road, and achieved a fraction of what it could've and should've for Wales. That gap in achievement is nowhere bigger than when it comes to farming and our communities.
"A Welsh Conservative Government will close that gap. We will make the most of opportunities to deliver locally-focussed schemes which will also benefit Wales as a whole. We will strip out inefficiency and waste and get on with delivering policies which will make a real difference to our farmers, agricultural industries, producers and the rural communities which depend on them."
And with that, Janet Finch-Saunders really had to go and travel to Cardiff through the pouring rain to make sure she was where Members of the Senedd should be.
Bringing back beaver
PLANS to reintroduce beavers to the Cors Dyfi Nature Reserve have been criticised by the local branch of the FUW.
The Montgomeryshire branch of the union described the plans as 'a short-sighted move'.
FUW Montgomeryshire County Executive Officer Emyr Wyn Davies said: "We believe there is insufficient evidence to conclude that this animal does not pose a threat to livestock and the people living here, including bringing disease into the area. That's just one of many concerns and we are extremely worried about this short sighted move."
Other concerns raised by the FUW about the reintroduction of the beaver include the animals damming watercourses, which could severely impact the adjacent agriculture land; the risk of the animals escaping their enclosure and the low lying levels of the Dyfi, which are already prone to flooding through natural means – the introduction of an animal which dams watercourses by instinct is likely to exacerbate the flooding propensity for this area.
Emyr Wyn Davies continued: "We must also consider what happens if a landholding in close proximity to the proposed enclosure enters a Welsh Government agri-environment scheme to increase biodiversity habitats by tree planting and on a Welsh Government inspection is found to be in breach of contract because of vegetation damage by beaver activity – which organisation compensates the at loss landowner?
"Furthermore, will NRW have a legal obligation to monitor and clear debris entering water courses as a direct result of beavers felling timber?" Mr Wyn Davies questioned.
He added that whilst the farming community is supportive of increasing biodiversity and habitats, this must not come at the expense of people living in an area.
"Let's also not forget the ambulances getting through to Bronglais Hospital on a stretch of road next to the proposed release site that's only just stopped flooding whenever it rains – the alternative is a 60 mile detour!"
Reintroducing a species which has been absent for over 400 years is a challenging project from an ecological and social perspective.
Over such a timescale, the ecosystem and its biodiversity have changed considerably due to a host of natural and anthropogenic drivers. Moreover, people have forgotten that beavers were a natural ecosystem component and so species that have been absent for hundreds of years may now be considered as invaders or intruders despite being originally native.
There have been more than 200 formal beaver reintroduction projects (plus numerous unofficial releases) in more than 26 European countries.
Beavers are often referred to as 'ecosystem engineers'. They make changes to their habitats, such as digging canal systems, damming water courses, and coppicing tree and shrub species, which create diverse wetlands. In turn these wetlands can bring enormous benefits to other species, such as otters, water shrews, water voles, birds, invertebrates (especially dragonflies) and breeding fish.
However, through their activities, there's the potential for beavers to come into conflict with land management, flood defence and fisheries interests
Additional problems arise when so-called 're-introducers' release species into the wild unchecked and outside the stringent statutory procedures regarding wild animals return to UK habitats.
The reintroduction of beavers into the Scottish countryside almost came unglued after the unauthorised and unmonitored release of beavers to waterways around Tayside.
With regard to the illegal releases on the Tay, both the reintroduction process and the government's response in Tayside (the Scottish Government declined to act) had been responsible for fuelling the conflict there.
Previous deliberate and ultimately disastrous introductions of non-native animal species into the Welsh countryside, for example mink, have also undermined the case for reintroducing once-native species.
In beavers' case, the issue isn't just about the reintroduction of a species – it's about the reintroduction of an entire ecosystem that disappeared over 400 years ago..
Those who support beavers' reintroduction say it will benefit both farmers and wildlife because beaver dams help reduce downstream flooding by holding back water and releasing the water slowly after heavy rain while reducing silt build-up.
However, research into Scottish releases revealed that among those opposed or sceptical about beavers' reintroduction, identified that while projects listed 'desired outcomes', none of them considered what to do if those 'desired outcomes' were not achieved. The need to control beavers, their spread and absence of long-term funding for their management was also a concern.
Reintroductions involve humans. Individuals or groups carry out these projects which, in turn, have an effect on landscapes and the way they are being inhabited, used or simply perceived. In light of this, any reintroduction project is challenging. It implies looking at a specific species, its effects on the environment and people's perceptions and acceptance of it. It also requires engaging in effective discussions which involve all the actual and potential stakeholders, without labelling them, to agree on a broad and long-term plan for the landscape.
The lack of trust between wildlife/conservation groups and farmers is the largest barrier to reintroductions' success. In the case of the Dyfi Biosphere, the controversial Summit to Sea project drove a wedge between local farmers and projects involving species' reintroduction which will take many years to resolve.
Agriculture Bill passes Commons
THE CONSERVATIVE Party used its Commons majority to ram through its Agriculture Bill on Monday, October 12.
Along the way, it voted down amendments which would have forced Boris Johnson's government to uphold its manifesto promises on food production standards and animal welfare.
The Government's actions, combined with its procedural manoeuvre to block an attempt to give a proposed trade watchdog teeth, have drawn universal condemnation from farming unions and organisations.
Fourteen Conservative MPs opposed the Government, including former DEFRA Secretary of State Theresa Villiers. Every Welsh Conservative MP voted against safeguarding farmingstandards.
The Wildlife Trusts of Wales and England described the vote as: "[T]he clearest signal yet that the Government do not intend to uphold their election manifesto commitment to maintain the UK's high environmental protection, animal welfare and food standards in trade negotiations."
Phil Stocker of the NSA commented: "There is now the very real risk, despite Government's assurances, that the UK's standards that our nation's farmers are proud to work to, could be undermined by lower standard imports."
Speaking to The Herald after the vote, TFA Chief Executive George Dunn said: "To say that the events which took place in the House of Commons last night were a disappointment, would be a major understatement. For the Government to whip its MPs to vote against an amendment entirely in line with its own policy has created a breach of trust in believing its rhetoric around protecting our high environmental, animal welfare and food safety standards in future international trade agreements."
"It was also shocking that the Government used a procedural manoeuvre to deny MPs the opportunity of voting on a crucial House of Lords amendment that would have improved the operation of the newly appointed Trade and Agriculture Commission," Mr Dunn told us.
He continued: "This was a shocking piece of political chicanery which prevented MPs from even debating this important piece of legislation. Over a million people signed a petition earlier in the year calling on the Government to ensure the strongest standards in trade and it is an issue for which there has been cross-party support. Expanding the role and remit of the Trade and Agriculture Commission would not, as the Government claimed, tie its hands but merely ensure that its future trade policy had proper scrutiny and support from an expert panel."
Mr Dunn concluded by drawing attention to the erosion of trust between the Conservative Government and the agriculture industry: "Day after day we hear Government Ministers declare that they will not jeopardise our high environmental, animal welfare and consumer safety standards in trade. Sadly, their words say one thing, but their actions say another. Unless we have strong legislation in this area, the fine words are just empty promises."
Carmarthen East & Dinefwr MP Jonathan Edwards told this newspaper: "The Agriculture Bill was a missed opportunity to safeguard in law food product standards and in particular food production standards.
"Warm words from the British Government that they won't allow Welsh farmers to be undercut by lower standard food in trade deals won't wash.
"The fact that the British Government have gone out of their way to stop democratic accountability over trade deals does not fill me with confidence.
"Wales should have a veto over trade deals negotiated by the British Government in the same way that every single member of the European Union could veto trade deals negotiated by the EU.
"The reality is that the future of Welsh farming is in the hands of a British Government who I fear will be conceding access to food markets in order to gain concessions for London banks."
NFU Cymru expressed dismay but vowed to continue lobbying for binding commitments to safeguard farming's high standards in future trade deals
NFU Cymru Deputy President Aled Jones said: "It is a blow that the Grantchester amendment (on animal welfare) was not adopted by a majority of MPs, nor did MPs have the chance to vote on the Curry amendment (strengthening the Trade & Agriculture Commission). However, NFU Cymru remains steadfast in its belief that Welsh farmers must not be undermined by imported products produced to lower standards than those observed here in the UK."
Adopting an upbeat approach which suggested NFU Cymru was prepared to take government promises and MPs' words at face value, Mr Jones continued: "We were encouraged to hear so many MPs in last night's debate expressing their support for those high standards – standards that consumers in this country have come to expect – and we thank those MPs who spoke up in favour of this important cause.
"This ongoing debate around food standards is matter of a huge importance for Britain's farmers and Britain's consumers, also. We simply cannot risk any trade scenario which could result in food imports coming into this country that would be illegal if produced here."
Looking forward to the next stage of the Bill's passage to the statute books, Aled Jones added: "With the Agriculture Bill set to return to the House of Lords, this gives peers another opportunity to put forward amendments that we hope will bring about the changes we want to see – UK farming's high standards protected and enshrined in law, while also giving more power to the elbow of the Trade and Agriculture Commission."
Plaid Cymru's Shadow Rural Affairs Minister, Llyr Gruffydd MS, told us: "Last night, Plaid Cymru supported amendments that would have protected food standards in future trade deals and strengthened parliamentary scrutiny of trade negotiations.
"Yet again, the Conservatives let down Welsh farmers when given the chance to protect their livelihoods. Despite all their promises and manifesto commitments, the Government defeated the amendments, exposing our farmers to cheap produce in future trade deals.
"Plaid Cymru will continue to put forward a positive vision for our food producers based on a greater say for our devolved governments and the protection of food standards. This is not because we not only believe them necessary now, but because they are fundamental to our farmers and food producers in the future."
Lesley Griffiths, Wales' Minister for Rural Affairs, said: "Although UK Ministers continue to insist they will maintain existing high standards of food safety and animal welfare in any new trade deals, their rejection of the opportunity to put this commitment into statute speaks volumes – especially given the fact that the amendments put forward by the Lords gave them a prime opportunity to do so.
"Food safety and welfare are devolved matters, and we have been clear that we would resist any clauses in the Internal Market Bill which would allow Westminster to start a race to the bottom in terms of standards – a move which would not just impact consumers, but also risk farm businesses across Wales as they face international competition from companies willing to forego the standards to which they adhere."
Prominent farmer and TV presenter Gareth Wyn Jones tweeted: 'Very disappointed this morning after last night's government defeated amendments to the #AgricultureBill which would have protected our #food & #farming standards. Don't forget they've not only sold the farming community out but the health of our nation. @BorisJohnson'
Conservation groups and environmental campaigners also expressed their concern at the government's unwillingness to commit to anything more than warm sentiment over environmental standards and welfare measures.
The RSPB said: "The UK Government must now say how it will meet its manifesto commitment to maintain standards in future trade deals, as confidence in them to do so is now at a chronically low ebb."
RSPCA Chief Executive Chris Sherwood also underlined the Government's failure to put meat on its manifesto promise.
Chris Sherwood said: "The Government once again failed to make good their manifesto promise that they will not sell out the UK's animal welfare for a quick trade deal. The vote shows a disregard for the British public, 83% of whom said they did not want lower standard imports coming in from the US when we leave the EU."
Nature Friendly Farming Network UK Chair, Martin Lines, observed: "Despite manifesto commitments and repeated assurances from successive governments not to lessen standards in trade, the government has instead passed on one of the final opportunities to enshrine our high-quality environmental and animal welfare standards in law and to protect the UK farmingindustry."
James Russell, BVA President, said: "This result is a severe blow for animal welfare and a betrayal of the Government's own manifesto commitment to maintain and improve on health and welfare standards.
"We have long argued that the UK cannot commit to raising the bar domestically while allowing in goods that don't meet the high standards that British consumers rightly want and expect.
"If the government won't legislate to protect our standards it is vital that the Trade and Agriculture Commission is given more powers and stature to safeguard them in future trade deals."
CLA President Mark Bridgeman sounded a warning note: "Government Ministers have successfully convinced MPs they can be trusted to protect food production standards without the need for legislation.
"Time and again Ministers have promised to protect British farmers from a flood of cheap imports produced to animal welfare and environmental standards far below our own.
"Farmers across the country will be watching Government's every move very closely from hereon in."
News2 weeks ago
Llanelli bus depot to close after 100 years
News5 days ago
Free Community Crime Prevention Kits to be distributed in Llanelli area
News4 days ago
Llanelli Christmas Carnival goes online
News2 weeks ago
Two week national 'Firebreak Lockdown' announced for Wales from 6pm on Friday
News4 days ago
Business offer Welsh Government help in 'non-essential' shopping row


text:
Once again, heavy rain at end of work. Last friday I was suppose to go home like this - heavy shower, tree leaves flying around as the wind is blowing and thunderstorms grumbling. But I stayed in the office for awhile. I have my reasons. lol
Luckily it started to rain only when I'm in the car. Lol
Must be his smile that gave me luck. =D lol wtf.
Now I wonder if he's alright. It's raining heavily yo.


text:
COVID-19 Update: We are currently open for business and our team has been developing policies, procedures and preventive measures to minimize risks.
Disinfection practices for surfaces in our showroom have been implemented as well as social distancing. We will continue to increase our inventory on our website and offer free shipping on orders over $100.
We want to thank you all for being valued customers. The health and well-being of our customers, our employees and our community is our top priority and we are closely monitoring the evolving situation.


text:
Official name: Valencia Club de Fútbol
Nicknames: Los Che; Valencianistas
Founded: 1919. The club celebrated its 93rd anniversary on March 18 with a 3-0 win over Athletic Club in Liga BBVA play. Leading scorer Roberto Soldado recorded a hat trick.
Stadium: Estadio Mestalla. Valencia's home opened in 1923, and has a current seating capcity of 55,000. It is known for its steep terracing and intimidating atmosphere.
History: Valencia is one of the most successful clubs in Spain, having won six league titles, seven Copa del Rey trophies, and reaching seven major European finals, winning four. The club, managed by Spaniard Unai Emery, is competing in the 2011-2012 UEFA Europa League. Valencia has finished among the top four teams in Spain's first division in four of the last six seasons.
Manager: Unai Emery has managed Valencia since 2008. The 40-year-old Spaniard has led the club to the UEFA Champions League twice in his four seasons at the helm.
Champions League success: Valencia has advanced to Champions League four times in the past six seasons, including reaching the quarterfinals in 2006-07 and 2009-10. Valencia's greatest Champions League success came in the 1999-00 and 2000-01 tournaments when they advanced to the final. In 2000, Valencia lost the final to Real Madrid, 3-0. In 2001, Valencia suffered another heartbreaking defeat, falling to Bayern Munich in the final on penalty kicks.
Key player: Valencia is led by striker Roberto Soldado, who has scored 25 goals in all competitions this season. The 26-year-old Spanish interntaional is currently fifth on the Liga BBVA scoring chart with 15 goals. Soldado joined Valencia in 2010 after a two-year stint with Getafe. The striker has represented Spain at the U-15, U-17, U-18, U-19, U-21 and senior levels. He has three caps for the senior national team and scored three goals in a 5-0 friendly win over Venezuela on February 29.
The captain: The captain of the Valencia squad is midfielder David Albelda (pictured above on left). The Spanish international has made more than 400 appearances in all competitions for the Valencianistas. The 34-year-old midfielder has 51 caps for the Spanish national team and was a member of Spain's World Cup teams in 2002 and 2006 as well as the Euro 2004 and 2000 Olympic team which won a silver medal.


text:
Your investment in Boys & Girls Clubs of Northwest Georgia helps guarantee a strong future for our young people and our nation. We invite you to invest in America's future. The choice is yours, but the rewards are shared by everyone—especially the children who represent America's future.Learn More
Thank you for your interest in supporting the long-term sustainability of the Boys & Girls Clubs. Our hope is to provide you and your family with helpful gifting information that will enable you to enjoy valuable benefits such as lifetime income and tax savings while also creating a life legacy. We invite you to explore the benefits of gift planning and to see how your gift might help save a child.Learn More
The Boys & Girls Clubs of Northwest Georgia organize community events throughout the year to bring services to our families and to bring service organizations together as we strive for a safer, more stable Northwest Georgia.


text:
Stockmen's Liability Under the Missouri Nuisance Law
Stephen F. Matthews and Coy G. McNabb
Department of Agricultural Economics
There is no one thing a stock owner can do and gain absolute protection under the nuisance law. Thus you must attempt to prevent such lawsuits from arising. This implies that those who follow a "good neighbor" policy are less likely to be sued. Try to avoid causing your neighbors discomfort.
This publication only discusses some general principles affecting the civil liability of feedlot operators under the nuisance laws. if you are faced with a potential air or water pollution problem, don't hesitate to discuss it with your attorney. Technical information on constructing lagoons and other pollution control facilities can be obtained through your local MU Extension center.
Pollution of water and air caused by the raising of cattle, swine, poultry and other domestic farm animals in confinement systems is a very real problem. Whether conditions arising from any particular operation constitute a nuisance is a question of fact and depends on the circumstances of each case. Should the conditions be found to constitute a nuisance, damages and/or an injunction are the legal remedies and are determined by the courts.
The purpose of this publication is to discuss general aspects of lawsuits for nuisances and to emphasize the importance of taking steps to prevent such lawsuits from arising.
What is a nuisance?
A nuisance is essentially an unreasonable interference by one person's use of his or her property with the use and enjoyment of another's property. Typical unreasonable uses are those producing foul odors, water pollution, loud and recurring noises, and physical conditions amounting to a health hazard. The defendant (the person being sued) counters by arguing that the animal operation is her or his livelihood. To close down the operation would cost the owner thousands of dollars invested in buildings and equipment which cannot readily be converted to another agricultural use. The defendant argues that it is not fair to shut down the operation.
But what is "fair?" Should the complaining party be forced to continue living under allegedly undesirable conditions? Should the farmer be forced to close down his livestock operation and lose a substantial investment? Obviously, the court's decision may work a hardship on one of the parties. To generalize what is fair in all cases is impossible. Instead, the circumstances of each case determine which party has the greatest interest. As the circumstances change, the legal result may also change.
Legal remedies in a nuisance lawsuit
In a nuisance lawsuit, the complaining party (the plaintiff) may ask for
- An injunction
- Damages (either actual or punitive)
- Both an injunction and damages.
A lawsuit for an injunction is referred to as an equitable action. This means that the primary factor determining whether the court will close down an animal operation is fairness to both parties. The court must go through a process of weighing the interests of both parties in deciding which has the greatest interest. In essence, the court must balance the relative hardships involved between closing down the defendant's operation and forcing the plaintiff to live in undesirable conditions.
Injunctions are of two basic types: temporary and permanent. Where the farmer simply needs more time to alleviate the nuisance-causing condition, courts are prone to grant an injunction of a temporary nature. Once the nuisance has been eliminated, the court reviews its injunctive order; if the court agrees that the proposed use is reasonable, it allows the farmer to resume his enterprise. Where the farmer is unable to alter his operation to make it less objectionable, a permanent injunction is sometimes appropriate. Partly because of the severity of a permanent injunction, courts have been reluctant to permanently enjoin a farmer's operation.
Many petitions for injunctive relief are accompanied by a separate request for actual and perhaps punitive damages. By seeking actual damages, the plaintiff wants reimbursement for her or his out-of-pocket expenses and property losses. Basically, actual damages reflect any decrease in property values that result from the nuisance condition. Punitive damages, on the other hand, are awarded on account of the defendant's malicious conduct (legal malice).
Legal malice is basically defined as the doing of a wrongful act intentionally without just cause or excuse. For example, you might be liable for punitive damages if you could have altered your method of operation at little or no cost and thereby prevented any damage to your neighbors. In general, if your management practices are far from ideal, it is possible that punitive damages may be assessed against you.
Nuisances: permanent vs. temporary
A temporary nuisance is one that is abatable. For example, a farmer might be able to make his animal operation less objectionable to his neighbors by constructing lagoons, spraying for flies or hauling manure more frequently. Should a farmer be sued for a temporary nuisance, he is liable in damages for the inconveniences that the complaining party has suffered in the past. If the farmer fails to take steps to abate the nuisance, he can be sued by the same plaintiff for damages arising since the previous lawsuit.
A farmer may periodically find himself defending a lawsuit if he fails to abate the nuisance condition. Thus, the farmer is encouraged to alter his management practices in order to avoid being sued again.
A nuisance that is not abatable is known as a permanent nuisance. All damages — both past and future — can be awarded the complaining party in one lawsuit because nothing can be done to relieve the inconvenience being suffered by the complaining party. The same plaintiff cannot later sue the farmer.
The court determines whether an operation constitutes a temporary or a permanent nuisance. This classification may have a decided influence on the farmer's future course of action.
Another classification of nuisances: public vs. private
Nuisances are also classified according to the number of people affected by the unreasonable use. When a person uses his or her property in such a manner as to interfere with the rights of a substantial number of people, this may characterize a "public nuisance." If he or she interferes with the rights of only a few people, a "private nuisance" is said to result.
Where a public nuisance is involved, it is more likely that an injunction will be granted. Since the court is weighing the interests of the parties, the interests of the public will likely be greater than those of a private individual.
The current trend in court decisions is to require the owner to modify the nuisance-causing operation if economically feasible. Ideally, this will relieve the plaintiff of the alleged inconvenient living conditions while permitting the defendant to continue to operate his modified feeding facilities.
Thus, the court may not close an operation if modifications significantly reduce odors, wastes and noise. However, odors, wastes and noise from feedlots may spread in many different directions. Thus, a farmer may have great difficulty cleaning up polluted air and water. For this reason, agricultural enterprises must search for preventive solutions to this problem.
What have the courts said about livestock and related operations?
Several cases in the Midwest serve to illustrate the effect of nuisance laws on various types of livestock operations. In Case A, the operator of a 7,500-head feedlot was sued by the owner of a nearby dairy farm. A small creek originating near the feedlot also ran through the dairy farmer's land. The dairy farmer had a well near the creek which was his only source of water.
After a heavy three-day rain washed manure out of the feedlot and into a creek flowing through the farm, the water in the farmer's well turned brown and smelled strongly of manure. Cattle became sick after drinking this water. The farmer had substantial veterinary expenses and some cattle died. He was forced to start hauling water from other sources, and eventually had to abandon his dairy operation.
The dairy farmer sued the feedlot operator and the court awarded him $15,000 in actual damages (i.e., veterinary expenses, value of cattle lost, lost profits, etc.). However, the feedlot operator was not required to pay punitive damages, evidently because he immediately took steps to avoid further pollution as soon as he learned the dairy farmer's well was contaminated.
This case illustrates some kinds of losses for which actual damages can be reimbursed. Several similar cases can be found in which farmers brought suit against cities that were dumping raw sewage into streams running by the farmer's land. Again in these cases, the farmers were paid actual damages incurred when cattle became sick from drinking water from the polluted stream.
Other recent cases illustrate that, under some circumstances, the individual causing the nuisance may also be held liable for punitive damages. In Case B, a poultry processing plant was the alleged offender. Here a nearby resident complained that the defendant processing company's three lagoons, all located within 300 to 500 feet of his personal residence, drained onto his property. More specifically, he complained of odors, flies and insects that accompanied the wastewater and filth. In essence, he was arguing that their operation constituted a hazard to his family's health and that the value of his property had been lowered. Evidently the jury agreed; they returned a verdict for $25,000 in actual damages and $15,000 in punitive damages.
Nuisance law controlled the outcome of both Case A and Case B. Thus, a logical question is: "Why were punitive damages granted in Case B but not in Case A?" You will recall that punitive damages have been defined as "the doing of a wrongful act intentionally without just cause or excuse." This does not mean that you will be held responsible for punitive damages only if you intend to damage you neighbor. Rather, it means that you may be held liable for punitive damages if you could or should have foreseen (or if you knew) that the manner in which you conducted your operation might damage your neighbor. That is, if you intended to do the act which you should have known might interfere with your neighbor's rights, you may be held responsible not only for actual damages, but also for punitive damages.
With this background, compare the facts in the two cases. In Case A, an abnormally heavy rain contributed to the pollution problem. Thus, it was less likely that the feedlot owner could or should have foreseen that runoff from his feedlot might damage the dairy farmer. And as soon as the feedlot operator learned of the problem, he immediately took steps to try to solve it.
In Case B, the lagoons had a capacity to handle the waste from 11,000 birds per day, using 55 gallons of water per bird. However, the plant was actually processing 20,000 birds per day, using 70 gallons of water per bird. The Missouri Supreme Court stated that this was sufficient evidence on which the jury could award punitive damages. In other words, operating the plant at approximately twice the lagoon capacity could foreseeably overload the lagoons and create uncomfortable living conditions for residents within 300 to 500 feet of the lagoons. Thus, legally this was "the intentional doing of a wrongful act without just cause or excuse."
How can these lawsuits be avoided?
Obviously, all livestock operators want to avoid being held liable for both actual and punitive damages if at all possible. Likewise, they do not want to see their buildings and equipment stand idle after being closed by an injunction.
Different legal problems exist in a suit for damages than in a suit for an injunction. The primary question in a damage suit is: "Did you damage your neighbor?" Whether you intended to do so or negligently did so is irrelevant to your liability, at least with regard to actual damages.
However, as previously noted, in a suit for an injunction, the court simply weighs the interests of the respective parties. This means there is no one thing that you can do to assure that the scales of justice will always tip in your favor. Thus, livestock operators must seek to prevent the problem from arising if possible.
The following discussion may be important to you in either preventing lawsuits or improving your position to make it more likely that the scales of justice will tip in your favor.
Comply with state and federal laws
A good way to avoid penalties resulting from a lawsuit is for livestock and poultry producers to comply with the laws and regulations in force. Both federal and state laws have been passed in recent years in an attempt to prevent pollution at its source. Agencies charged with enforcing laws and regulations of most interest to livestock and poultry include the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and a state agency, the Missouri Clean Water Commission.
The EPA has national responsibility for implementing the 1972 Water Pollution Act and amendments that include control of confined feeding operations. In Missouri, EPA works through the state regulatory agencies. So livestock producers should contact the Missouri Clean Water Commission when questions arise about animal waste management regulations.
Have an approved waste management system
To comply with state and federal laws on water pollution related to confined feeding of livestock and poultry, it is necessary to have an approved waste management system for the confined feeding unit. The system approved by the Clean Water Commission includes three basic concepts:
- Systems must be designed so that there will be no direct discharge into surface or subsurface water as there is in industrial or municipal waste treatment systems.
- Systems must be designed and managed so that all animal wastes are collected and applied to the land in a controlled manner.
- A letter of approval will be issued by the Clean Water Commission upon completion of an approved system. Structures and facilities must be designed to handle the wastes produced.
Good management is important
The owner has the responsibility, according to the law, that no water pollution will originate from his property. If all the waste is applied to the land in an approved manner, then water pollution does not occur. But any waste management system designed so that there is no point source of discharge from the property will require attention and proper management from the operator and/or owner.
A properly designed, well managed livestock waste disposal system is not likely to create water pollution and odor problems or bring complaints from neighbors. But even a properly designed system can be mismanaged so that pollution results. If the owner permits overflow or fails to haul and spread at the proper time, a nuisance could be created. Thus, proper management is extremely important.
A letter of approval may be helpful
An important part of the Missouri Approach is the letter of approval issued by the Clean Water Commission. This letter is issued to all individuals who apply and show sufficient evidence of having a waste management system that can be managed and operated so that water pollution problems will not be created.
The letter of approval offers incentives to the livestock producer. A record of his waste disposal system is placed on file, indicating that the wastes are being disposed of in an approved manner and are not causing water pollution problems.
Securing a letter of approval does not mean that a neighbor cannot bring suit or that the operation will automatically not be declared a nuisance. However, a letter of approval may be very important in the outcome of a lawsuit. If an operator has complied with all requirements of the regulatory agencies, it is less likely that a jury would conclude that the plaintiff was intentionally injured by a wrongful act. In turn, this would make it less likely that punitive damages would be assessed.
Select a site away from residences and streams
As a practical matter, locating a feedlot some distance from residences and streams may be the most important single factor in avoiding nuisance lawsuits. Location is also the key to preventing stream pollution. In selecting a site, remember that an equitable action for an injunction is tried in a court of "good conscience." Thus, "do unto others as you would have them do unto you" is a good rule to follow. Would you like it if someone built a large confinement shelter for finishing hogs directly across the road from your home?
This situation occurred in one recent case when a 40 x 500 foot confinement turkey feeding shelter was erected directly across the road from a neighbor's house. The neighbor's request for an injunction was granted, and the shelter house is now idle. Only one flock of turkeys had been fed in the house, so the loss to the owner was substantial.
Does it help if you were there first?
The feedlot is less likely to be held liable for damages to a nearby neighbor if he initiated his operation before such neighbor moved into the nearby residence. The fact that you were there first does not ensure that you will always win a lawsuit, but the jury is permitted to consider this fact in their deliberations.
One can argue that a neighbor must accept the bad consequences of country life along with its benefits. In essence, this implies that a resident moving near a 500-head feedlot assumes the risk of undesirable living conditions. However, most courts would not grant a feedlot owner absolute protection under these circumstances for two reasons. First, if one assumes the risk of living in these conditions, this presumes that he realized how bad conditions were at the time he took residence. This may not be true, for example, if a person moves near the feedlot during the winter when little or no odor problem exists.
Second, even if a person realizes the quality of living conditions near a 500-head feedlot, is it fair to say he has no right to sue if the lot is increased in size to 1,000, 5,000 or even 10,000 head? Obviously, subsequent increases in size of the feedlot may potentially cause greater water and air pollution and may also affect property values for nearby residents. Thus, the courts do not give the feedlot operator automatic protection just because he was there first, but do allow the jury to take this into consideration in arriving at their verdict. A jury probably would be unsympathetic toward a nearby neighbor who moved in one month and sued the feedlot operator the next.
Know contractual rights and duties
When livestock are fed by farmers on a contract with a feed company (or processor), possibly either or both may be liable for damages in a nuisance action. Here, the terms of the contract may be a factor in determining which party is liable for such damages. If the contract creates an employer-independent contractor relationship, the farmer may be solely liable.
Thus, it is imperative that farmers know what type relationship is created by their contract. An attorney can analyze such contracts and make this determination.
County zoning
In some situations zoning restrictions may help farmers avoid nuisance lawsuits, while in other situations they may not help at all. An area zoned for agricultural production is less likely to attract residential development, thus lessening the likelihood of confrontation between farmers and rural residents. On the other hand, once a nuisance lawsuit arises, the presence or absence of an agricultural zone may not be significant.
The courts have not yet gone so far as to say that nuisance lawsuits cannot be brought against farmers in areas zoned for agricultural production. Many nuisance problems have arisen between farmers operating in an area zoned for agricultural use and rural residents living nearby in an area zoned for residential use. Furthermore, land zoned for agricultural use may be rezoned for residential use as the public interests shift from rural to more urban orientation.
To secure the maximum benefit from zoning, farmers must participate in the process of creating and re-examining zoning restrictions to ensure representation of their interests.
There are circumstances in which you can be held responsible for nuisance conditions arising from livestock confinement. Whenever your operation unreasonably interferes with the use and enjoyment of another person's property, a nuisance exists. Remedies for nuisance include damages, injunctions, or both.
To avoid creating liability for nuisances, farmers must take preventive steps. Proper management is of primary importance. Do not exceed the design capacity of feedlots. Lagoons should not be allowed to overflow. Animal carcasses should be disposed of properly and promptly.
Location and design of the livestock facilities are equally important. State and federal laws regulate aspects of larger livestock facilities. Compliance with pollution regulatory agencies will help reduce your liability for punitive damages. Once approval is acquired, proper management is necessary. Locating the facility away from residences and streams may be the most important single factor in avoiding nuisance lawsuits.
Nuisance conditions are easily created by livestock confinement where management becomes careless and fails to follow a good neighbor policy. Prevention is the key.


text:
By Chad Waller, NAIA Director of Communications and Sports Information
Photos courtesy of www.NAIAPictures.com
COLUMBUS, Ga. – (Box Score) No. 6 Williams Baptist (Ark.) advances to its first-ever round of four at the 2013 NAIA Softball National Championship final site after a 4-0 victory against No. 8 Reinhardt (Ga.) at the South Commons Softball Complex on Tuesday. The Lady Eagles rode the arm of senior pitcher Karisa Hendrix. Hendrix gave up three singles and a double in the complete-game win.
Williams Baptist, who becomes the first team from the American Midwest Conference to make the semifinals since 1995 (McKendree (Ill.)), takes on No. 2 seed Lubbock Christian (Texas) Wednesday at 4 p.m. EDT in the day's first semifinal. Reinhardt finishes its season with a 45-9 record.
Hendrix shook off her last ineffective start from Monday. In the 7-1 loss to No. 10 seed Spring Hill (Ala.), Hendrix gave up six earned runs in 4.1 innings. Today, she shut out a Reinhardt offense that last went scoreless May 17, 2012 in national championship pool play.
Reinhardt had its scoring opportunities though, with two walks, but the team stranded seven runners. The Lady Eagles left the bases loaded in the bottom of the fourth inning and runners were stranded at second and third in the fifth frame.
Williams Baptist plated a run on starting pitcher Maddie Monroe in the top of the first inning. Felicia Woodard reached on a dropped fly ball and came around to score on a single by Lauren Sweeten. It was Sweeten's first hit in seven at-bats in the championship.
The Lady Eagles increased the lead to 4-0 with a trio of runs in the third. With the bases loaded, Monroe was called for a balk, which scored the inning's first run. Callie Brooks drove in two runners with a single up the middle. That big inning for Williams Baptist was enough to support Hendrix in the circle.
Hendrix moved to 25-6 on the year as she fanned six Lady Eagles.
"We had really good defense," said Hendrix when asked about the win. "I know whenever I am throwing, the defense will always have my back. We got an early lead and that kind of relaxed everybody and I was able to just throw."
A year removed from playing in its first-ever national championship, the Lady Eagles are using that experience this time around.
"That (championship) gave us confidence," said Hendrix. "We were a really good team last year and we were able to build on it. This year we have some freshman that are stepping up and so it's been fun to become one big unit, cheer each other on and have each other's backs."
Sweeten and Brittany Merritt ended the day with two hits apiece for Williams Baptist.
Lindsey Booker finished 2-for-3 for Reinhardt. For the four games in the championship, Booker batted 6-for-11 (.545) with two runs scored.
The championship is a 10-team, double-elimination event hosted by the Columbus Sports Council. This is the 33rd annual championship and takes place in the state of Georgia for the first time in NAIA softball history.
For more information on the national championship, click here.


text:
When he saw UFC matchmaker Joe Silva's number come up on his caller ID, Keith Jardine knew exactly what the call was about; he was being released by the UFC.
He didn't spend much time to dwell on the setback, though.
After all, not more than 48 hours after the call, Jardine was booked for a main event gig at Saturday's Shark Fights 13 pay-per-view event in Amarillo, Texas.
Now, Jardine (15-8-1) is very clear about his immediate career goals and plans to work his way back to the octagon with a win over Strikeforce and UFC vet Trevor Prangley (22-6).
"There's really no hard feelings," he told MMAjunkie.com Radio (www.mmajunkie.com/radio). "The future's in my hands."
Once considered among the top light heavyweights in the world, Jardine netted key UFC victories over Forrest Griffin, Chuck Liddell and Brandon Vera in a quick rise to the top of the promotion's most-stacked division. But his wins were punctuated by bad knockout losses, and after four consecutive setbacks, he was given his walking papers.
However, two of the four setbacks – decision losses to former champ Quinton Jackson at UFC 96 and Matt Hamill at The Ultimate Fighter 11 Finale – won him "Fight of the Night" honors. That's an encouraging statistic to Jardine, a protege of famed trainer Greg Jackson and the owner of a new gym in his hometown of Albuquerque, N.M.
And more often than not, he's delivered exciting fights, even if he often came up short.
"I just need to get on a winning streak and put a few (wins) together," Jardine said. "That's my goal now … to put a few wins together and get back in the UFC title picture, and I'm pretty confident I'm headed in the right direction."
Jardine originally was supposed to meet Houston Alexander, who knocked him out cold at UFC 71 more than three years ago, at Shark Fights 13. But Alexander instead was slotted to face PRIDE, UFC and Strikeforce vet Rameau Thierry Sokodjou, and Jardine's chance at revenge would have to wait.
That's no bother to "The Dean of Mean," who burst onto the national MMA scene as a cast member and semifinalist on "The Ultimate Fighter 2."
"I thought it would have been the perfect time for [a rematch with Alexander], but for some reason, it just didn't work out," Jardine said. "But I've got to fight … a much more well-rounded guy."
Prangley is also on the mend after a May loss to Strikeforce middleweight contender Tim Kennedy, as well as a technical draw three months prior at Strikeforce Challengers 6 that arose when he accidentally poked opponent Karl Amassou in the eye.
Before he hit the skids, Prangley enjoyed a five-fight win streak in mostly regional competition.
"Prangley is a much tougher fight," Jardine said.
And with a card that includes fighters such as Alexander, Sokodjou, Paul Daley, Joey Villasenor and Brock Larson, among others, Jardine feels like he's in good company.
"I'm really excited to be a part of it," Jardine said of Saturday's event. "A lot of people think [they went] out and put together a card of UFC veterans, but they didn't just do that. All these fighters are extremely exciting fighters. All these guys … have never been in a boring fight."
Jardine's obligation to Shark Fights ends with Prangley, but so far he's been impressed by the Texas-based promotion.
"I'm a very, very loyal guy, and the way Shark Fights has come through for me on this fight – if something in the future comes up, they'll get first priority," he said.
That said, there's only one place he wants to end up: the octagon. UFC officials hasn't given him a set number of wins to pick up before he returns, but any opportunity he gets will be with another UFC contract in mind.
"That's top priority over everything," Jardine said. "As long as I go and do what I'm supposed to do, everything will come to me."
For more on Shark Fights 13, stay tuned to the MMA Rumors section of the site.


text:
There has been a lot of various interpretations of the 'fish' on the new ossuary in Talpiyot B. Absalom's tomb was the primary response initially; this was due to the misrepresentation of the image (in photos the alignment of the image was sideways to make it appear as though the object were swimming) by various media outlets and by those involved in the find. However Tabor, in response to these criticisms, made the community aware that the orientation of the image was down (that is, the circular object which Tabor, et al, claim to be Jonah being spit out of the mouth of the fish is facing toward the bottom of the ossuary). Another interpretation of this image was that it was a nephesh monument but again the orientation of the object was not clearly known at the time these interpretations were given. In a conversation with Mark Goodacre, I had suggested to him that the object, oriented upside-down, reminded me of pottery. And it seems I was not the only one who had this interpretation (keep in mind that there is no interpretation from the vagary of expert interpretations which has thus concluded 'fish'–that is to say, none outside of Tabor's interpretation which has been under heavy criticism). Currently the discussion has shifted to what type of pottery at which we're looking (amphora or krater).
But I still feel that there are some important details which must be considered when making our interpretations of the iconography on the ossuary. First we must remember that we do not have the ossuary itself. At best we have a "museum quality replica" but I am not sure that we can have a replica of something we can't accurately depict yet. Sure, we have some pictures, but these are not entirely trustworthy. At present there is a general discussion happening in the comments section of Bob Cargill's ASOR article on the iconography which has focused on digital manipulation. While it is clear that there has been some digital work done on the image, the question seems to be about the extent of the digital manipulation. Bob is an expert on the subject (he headed up UCLA's Center of Digital Humanities and his work has focused on using digital technology in the field of archaeology) and is more than capable of exposing any digitally doctored image, so if he sees the manipulation at play and can demonstrate it adequately, then we must wonder to what extent this museum replica that Jacobovici and Tabor produced is a precise reproduction of the ossuary.
There are still more troubling factors. The multiple photos of the iconography are not showing the same thing, as Bob Cargill has made clear in his response to Tabor on the ASOR blog. This may be the result of photo doctoring, but the fact is that part of the iconography is obscured (see this image):
As you can see, the 'fin' is obscured partially in this photo. Whatever is obscuring the image is not there in other images. Unless someone moved whatever is obscuring it before snapping another photo (it looks like another ossuary), then it was digitally removed from the image and someone 'filled-in' the rest of the 'tail fin' before it was given to media sources:
The most striking thing about this isn't just that there is no longer a mass on the upper left corner of the screen obscuring the object but that there is no indication that there ever was something there. For example, if we presume that the object was removed by the robot with the camera (like by a claw or something) we would expect to see coloration differences, different types of microbial forms, there would be some evidence of an object which has sat on top of this ossuary for hundreds, if not some thousands, of years. Yet there is nothing there to suggest to us that this has been the case. That upper corner looks identical to the rest of the ossuary. This suggests to me that the image has been digitally altered. So there is no way, at present, we can be certain of the dims of the iconography; there is just no trustworthy image we know of that hasn't been altered to been skewed by angle or hasn't had someone digitally add in dimensions using digital media. This also means that the replica used at the press conference is simply unreliable.
Then there is the troubling question: what is it? Well, speculations about 'fish' aside, it looked to me, from the time the orientation was known, that the image is of pottery. At the beginning, it was suggested that it had been an amphora, but amphora have very specific handles (usually, not always) that this iconography lacked. The handles one typically finds on amphorae are hooped from the middle of the vessel to the brim at the top:
Though there are exceptions to this; some amphorae have handles akin to those on the ossuary iconography (see the 'fins' on the sides):
It is also interesting that there is a 'ball' at the bottom of this (this is a Hellenistic glass amphora); this is specifically interesting because Tabor and Jacobovici have claimed ad nauseum that the 'ball' at the bottom on their iconography must be a 'head' wrapped in seaweed (yep!) and there is no other easier explanation. But amphorae are not the only types of ancient pottery that sometimes contain a ball bottom like this. Many unguentarium have this 'ball bottom' feature:
Note the shape of this as well; like the glass amphora above, this design contains the 'fins', the 'ball' at the bottom, and the fish-like shape. This is why I believe that the 'fish' on the ossuary are more than likely an example of this sort of pottery. As Joan Taylor points out, these ungenutarium serve a specific funeral and ritual purpose and are commonly found in tombs.
Oddly, however, even though this is likely, Tabor continues to point to 'fish' and, even more strange still, he continues to suggest that the ball at the bottom of the fish (or, rather, what is coming out of its closed mouth) is Jonah. And he feels this is the most likely and easiest explanation. He gives some reasons why he believes that the fish is more likely than the pottery:
1. The "tail" of our image is sharply pointed and quite elongated on the left side. In fact, when we first got a glimpse of the partial image we thought it was the prow of a boat! In contrast, the mouths of amphora and perfume bottles are round and quite symmetrical.
But this is irrelevant, since we don't know the exact shape of the tail of the 'fish'. The fact is the images we have are digitally changed, and often in extreme and tragic ways (see Bob Cargill's comments here and judge for yourself). The tail seems to be shaped by digital means and clearly, as demonstrated above, the tail is partially obscured in whatever image we have left. And we can't rely upon any of our 'images' since frankly we can't trust them. And that is criminal. Truly criminal. Alas, like with the lead codices, we can only go by the photos since we do not have the physical ossuary to examine. And unless Tabor wants to release unaltered photos that can be examined by experts–and I mean experts not on any payroll associated with this discovery–then the photos must be dismissed as admissible evidence.
2. The clear stick figure in our image with the enlarged "ball" or head at the bottom seems to be in contrast to the typical flattened or knob like ends of some perfume bottles.
One must wonder if Tabor has ever seen glass amphorae or unguentarium? If not, there are some on site at the Metropolitan Museum he should consider evaluating.
The arms of the figure are positioned in a classic eastern pose (oaanes), in contrast to what we find in the west–the orans position of supplication with both arms raised. This is a major point and we are presently preparing a special paper dealing with the motifs associated with the various sea-man figures of the eastern Mediterrean world in this period.
Here are the facts: the stick figure appears more or less to be wishful thinking. Let us examine more closely this 'figure':
Note how completely 'unhuman' the 'stickfigure' looks when you isolate the lines (in red) and see what is really there. Frankly, I'm finding any resemblance to a 'stickfigure' to be completely disingenuous. Also, take note of all the red squares. Those are repeated notches which indicate to me that this item was not just digitally modified but parts of it were copied and pasted into the image to fill it out. The left side of one notch in the middle-upper-left of the image has been cut off (and looks like a smudging effect was applied). So how is it that Tabor expects us to carefully examine this iconography in any detail when the iconography presented is not an accurate representation of what is on the ossuary?
The "head" itself has a very distinctive pattern on it which we have taken to be the artists attempt to represent seaweed "wrapped about my head" as mentioned in the text of Jonah (2:5). The "eye" of the fish is also etched on the lower right side, with a curved line. We are not yet certain what the Etruscan "F-like" marking is to the left of the figure's body as it is now oriented but our guess is it has to do with an eastern mythical hero motif and several suggestions have been made by two of our ancient art historians.
This is simply nothing more than a case of pareidolia. Tabor is seeing Jesus in a burnt piece of toast and calling it the 'find of a lifetime'.
3. The patterned body of the "fish" with its scale/tile like patterns, which led some to conclude it was the brickwork of a tower, we understand to be akin to the armor of the mythical fish Leviathan (aka Behemoth, Rahab, etc.)–which in modern Hebrew still means "whale." In Jewish tradition this unique sea creature represents "death" and the righteous are to eat its flesh in the last days, thus "swallowing up death" forever (Isaiah 27:1; 25:8; Baba Bathra 74b). When this happens the "dew of light" will shine on the world of the death and those in the land of shades will live or be resurrected (Isaiah 26:19).
Again, Tabor is seeing what he needs to see in order to force 'fish' into this pottery motif. These are not 'scales' at all but resemble more the patterns associated with what one would find on ancient pottery. Here is an example of 'scales' on pottery (or, more specifically, the patterns one might find on amphorae in antiquity):
Again, consider looking more closely at these doctored images:
Looks to me to be patterns one might see on a piece of pottery. It certainly doesn't resemble anything I've seen of fish scales. James talks about the oaanes poses but based on his observations that the pose is similar, he doesn't seem to recall what the representations look like:
Anyone with even a mediocre degree of observation could see that the two are not even close. And while we're on the subject, has anyone noticed that the 'head' of the images that Tabor provides have been altered in size? Consider this for reference:
The green lines represent the 'closeup' of the image to show the 'stickfigure' located on the right. The red lines are the far-away shot of the whole image on the left. One is flatter than the other. How anyone could deny some level of image modification and tampering is beyond me.
4. The downward orientation of our fish image, which some have taken as an objection to it being a fish, is to the contrary just what one would expect, as we understand Jonah is being spat out on land in this depiction. To have the nose of the fish oriented upward (heavenward), or to right or left, would be to spit him into the waters of "chaos," which he is now to escape, by being vomited on dry land. The head of our "Jonah" figure is actually touching the border of the bottom of the ossuary, which seems to represent that land.
Tabor may not be aware of these image modifications, and if that is the case at the very least we could say Tabor has quite the imagination–he would have to in order to present a rationalization like this. Again, one must ask if Tabor really believes that this is a better explanation than that for pottery. First, I have never seen any example of a fish spitting out a human before–even in images of Jonah and the fish, the orientation is never down and the mouth is never closed:
And frankly why would it be? It makes no sense for an artist to draw an image which goes against the known motif of all the images of the fish which would have been commonplace for Christian or Jew in antiquity. Why would one change the orientation to 'down' and make the iconography so counter to what one expects to see? Now consider more carefully the pottery iconography:
Without accurate representations of the iconography, there is no way to know how the lip (or 'tail fin') actually looks. But even if this is precisely how the image looks, the pottery iconography simply makes more sense. It explains the orientation (in this case 'down' would be 'up' and would not require additional explanation), it explains the patterns (pottery patterns rather than the most bizarre form of 'scales' ever seen), and the 'fins' (top of pottery and handles rather than 'fins') and base (part of many glass pottery motifs rather than 'sea-weed covered Jonah head').
I have nothing but respect for James Tabor; I think that when he is not working with Jacobovici, he is lucid and erudite and an exceptional scholar. But every time he backs one of these sensational stories, I do have my concerns. I can't fathom–not now, perhaps never–how someone can look at all this data and say 'Yes, that is definitely Jonah and the Whale'. It mystifies me. It should concern Tabor; if nothing else the evidence of the manipulation of the photos should concern Tabor! It certainly concerns me.
Bob Cargill has posted a very thorough article on the digital manipulation of the images and why it matters. here is a snippet:
Unfortunately, the visual evidence detailed above compels us to conclude that Fig. 21 from pg. 42 of Dr. James Tabor's original Feb 28, 2012 Bible and Interpretation article entitled, "A Preliminary Report of an Exploration of a Sealed 1st Century Tomb in East Talpiot, Jerusalem," has experienced a high degree of digital manipulation. Given the changes to the "tail fin" of the supposed "fish," and given the deliberate rotation of the image's orientation causing it to more resemble the natural orientation of a fish without offering a compass point or any indication on the image whatsoever that the image has been rotated, it can be argued that the motivation behind making these digital alterations to the image was the desire to create, or at least "enhance" the illusion of a "great fish" swimming freely in the ocean, while vomiting forth a human head.
Read on here: http://robertcargill.com/2012/03/05/if-the-evidence-doesnt-fit-photoshop-it/
His most damaging point, in my opinion, is the revision of pg. 42 of Tabor's Bible and Interpretation article:
Make specific note of how the orientation of the fish sideways in the original version has an image from the Roman catacombs depicting Jonah and the Whale sideways as if to suggest a similar motif. In the context of the new version, having that image makes no sense (see my argument above). The motif is usually always sideways up oriented up, never down.
Filed under: Ancient Near East, Archaeology, Belief, Biblioblogging, Scholarship | Tagged: amphorae, iconography, James Tabor, Jonah and the Whale, Jonah Ossuary, ossuaries, Pottery, Resurrection Tomb Mystery, Simcha Jacobovici, Talpiot, Talpiyot, The Jesus Discovery, unguentarium |