text:
An open letter to the next owner of the Chicago Cubs
Or: A Cub Fan Manifesto for a New Era
Editor's Note: This will be a long article. If you don't think you have the time in one sitting, don't worry - it's going to be broken into chunks. Read 'em one at a time if you have to - but read them nevertheless.
Section 1: Assumptions
This section is the only one which is written directly to our regular readers. It is true that we are simple fans who rarely come closer to our favorite team than Row One. But make no assumptions. If you hear a ballplayer say that he doesn't read the papers or check his stats, you can bet it's malarkey. Likewise, don't believe for a second that players and executives have never stumbled across the blogs - we are a direct connection for them to what the fans are thinking.
If it's true that Tom Ricketts is to be the new owner of the Chicago Cubs, then make no assumption that he is a man who lives in a bubble, or an ivory tower. Chances are that he will stumble across this blog in the coming days in order to find out what the buzz is from the fans. So, I write this to him, and if you have anything to add please make a comment below. In the coming months there will grow a bubble, so this might be our only chance to make ourselves known.
Section 2: Introductions
Mr. Ricketts, my name is Kurtis Evans and I have been a lifelong Cubs fan. I was born shortly before the Chicago Tribune purchased the team, and I have grown knowing nothing but Tribune ownership. I have followed the Cubs in seasons in which they barely manged to escape 100 losses, and I have seen them come almost as close as possible toward reaching the World Series. But if I could impart upon you one piece of advice, sir, it would be this: winning a World Series should not be your immediate goal. Rather, winning should be the culmination of all other things done right.
In other words, you can't just hire the greatest general manager who's ever lived - and "the greatest GM who's ever lived" is so subjective that I wish you luck if you try. You can't just sign the top free agent. You can't just approve the big trade. You need to do all those things at the right time, and so much more. Permit me to explain.
Section 3: It's the Infrastructure, Stupid!
I said something the other day that fits perfectly here. The Chicago Cubs run their farm system like it's still the 80's. I mean no disrespect to your General Manager Jim Hendry - I'm sure he does the best with what he has. But Mr. Ricketts, while the Cubs have had great success with Geovany Soto, he is the only successful hitter the Cubs have had since I began noticing girls. (At this point, Ryan Theriot has had a good year, but he needs to do it once or twice more before I'd say he's a success rather than a fluke). Apart from Soto, the Cubs haven't developed a truly successful hitter since the 1980's. Seriously, sir, that's a ridiculously long time.
Please do not feel beholden to the people who run the minor league system. They have developed some pitchers, but the bottom line is that if you fail to develope successful positional players, then you're going to spend way more money buying what you need on the market.
In the meantime, there are some very successful teams out there with oustanding track records of developing their youngsters - Tampa, Boston, ... well, actually, just about every other team in baseball does better. It's time for an epic change within the Cubs hierarchy. It's time to shake up the coaches, the managers, the scouts, and every other guy in any front office associated with the team.
I'm not saying fire them all - I'm not even saying to fire any of them. I'm just asking that you analyze your situation with intensity. Maybe some of your guys have the kind of old school mentality that doesn't actually work anymore, and if they do then you need to shake their hands, give them a severance package so nice they could vacation in Greece on it, and improve your organization. And that leads us to...
Section 4: Any Edge, Every Advantage
Do not listen to your General Manager (well, unless he says what I'm about to say). He is well intentioned, but he already has methods. Methods hold you back. You need to go beyond methods. You need to create them at every turn. At every level of the game, I believe the best way to win is to discover the advantages. Give yourself an edge. Since I've been a Cubs fan, I've seen the team draft player after player who can be described as having "five tools" and being "athletic." I've seen every one of those guys fail, so maybe "tools" and "athleticism" aren't what you should be looking for.
Sir, there are highly trained, immensely educated people out there* who are obsessed with understanding baseball. They devote their time, energy, and calculators to figuring out what works. They invent new statistics. They hone nontraditional ones like "win shares" and "wins above replacement player" and all sorts of cool, crazy things that you won't understand unless you're mildly autistic or something. The point is, these guys are on the fringe and you should use them. Do you know why? Because most teams don't - but the ones that do win.
(*I'm not one of them. I mean, I've got three degrees, but not in the field I'm talking about.)
Basically, what I'm saying is this: if I could tell you that according to a number of tools and statistics the player asking for 5 million a year is actually more valuable to your team than the one asking for 15, wouldn't it make sense to go after that guy who makes less and is worth more? If I could tell you that there are a whole bunch of prospects who are underrated, wouldn't you like to know about them and why they might pay off later?
Baseball should not always be about throwing the most money at the shiniest player. Sure, it makes a splash to sign that guy with the name recognition, but you now own a team that would sell 2.5 million seats a year if they were in last place. Your fans aren't looking for the splash - they're looking for the result. Focus on that, please, if not because it will make you more money in the long run then for the sake of every 98 year old Cub fan fighting off cancer because he or she wants to see a World Series Championship before they die.
Section 5: What are you so afraid of?
Okay, so this piece of advice is made from a selfish point of view. But blogs are already a huge source of media. We get readers that the papers don't, and we reach more eyes now than ever before. And we're still growing. In England, they hire us to write for rags and mags because we're in touch (and probably cheaper than other writers).
So don't shut out the blogs. Give us limited access. What would it hurt to let us interview you? Why not hand pick one blog every month, give them a weekend's worth of press passes, let them cover the game and feed from the buffet, and then watch them write glowingly about how great you are and why every Cub fan should love you?
It almost seems as if MLB in general and the Cubs in particular are afraid of us. I don't know why, but I think there would be a mutual benefit from building a relationship with the best blogs out there.
Section 6: Your ballpark
You're going to find Wrigley Field to be less a sacred shrine and more a sacred cow. Particuarly in the sense that no matter how much damage it does to your shop you are forbidden from touching it.
Cub fans love Wrigley Field. It's in our conditioning. When we were growing up we were taught to obey the laws, walk on green, and love beautiful Wrigley Field. Unfortunately for you it's falling to pieces. You won't be able to build a new one so suck it up.
Sometime in the near future you're going to have to renovate the ballpark. Cub fans loathe this idea because it means a year or two in US Cellular. I don't think that's a big deal, but I think it'd be cooler if you could move into Soldier Field. Regardless, when the ballpark gets rebuilt I can only ask that you expand the bleachers and make the upper deck bigger and better. Also don't forget to improve the home team's clubhouse ... and leave the visitor's clubhouse as a hole. Every advantage, Mr. Ricketts. Any edge.
Oh, and I'm betting money that the Cubs win the World Series for the first time while out of Wrigley. It'd be too funny for it to not happen.
One other thing while I'm thinking about it - if you choose to capitalize off the fame of the ballpark by selling naming rights you will face staunch opposition from the vast majority of the fans. They apparently don't realize that Wrigley Field was the first ballpark to be named after a brand.
Maybe you could offer Wrigley's chewing gum a sweetheart deal to retain the naming rights or maybe you could rename it Rickett's Field just to mess with people, but if you sell naming rights to the park and put it immediately back into the payroll of the team you will have my full support. I don't care if it's called Trojan Condoms Field so long as the Cubs are winning.
Section 7: Your brand
The Cubs are worth so much to you. Already that lovely Cubs logo is on a ton of merchendise and we're sure that won't change. But there are still more ways to make more money. Actually I'm going to save this topic for another day because I have a laawwwt of ideas. But trust me on this. There are things you are not yet doing.
Section 8: In Conclusion
I said something earlier that might get a lot of heat from some of this blog's readers. I said, "Winning a World Series should not be your immediate goal." That 98-year-old Cub fan wants to throttle me because of it. Basically I mean only one thing: if you do it right, winning will come. We're just not used to that concept because the Cubs haven't done it right since William Wrigley died in 1932. That's a long-ass time to have bad ownership, but unless you really believe in curses then it is absolutely the reason for the drought.
The Chicago Cubs are a powerful organization. You already know that or else you wouldn't be spending close to a billion dollars to own them. Their brand is universal. Their fanbase is international. Only the Yankees have the capacity to make more money and there are only a handful of teams even in the same league: the Angels, the Giants, the Red Sox, the aforementioned Yankees, and the Dodgers.
The thing all these teams share in common is that they are in a position to win every single year. There should never be ten - or even five - year droughts between playoff visits. They have the fanbase and the money to do it right. So do the Cubs.
We know that there will be hard years. We know that the Cubs won't be playoff bound ten times a decade. But compared to the lightweights who the Cubs share their division with, Chicago should be playoff bound a lot more than they have been in my lifetime. We're not saying that you have to spend 200 million a year on payroll* - although we hope you always spend whatever it takes - but instead that you are buying an amazing franchise with a storied history and its fans deserve more than what they've gotten.
(*but we do hope you spend more on developing young players than any other team in baseball because doing so saves you money in the long run)
Put it to you this way. You know a lot about investments. Cubs fans have invested so much into their team. We've invested money, sure - probably tens of thousands of dollars (if not more) in our lifetimes. We've also invested time - perhaps tens of thousands of hours watching, cheering, and talking about the Cubs. But we've also invested our hearts, living and dying with every win and loss. And so far no Cub fan - be he 20, 50, or 100 - has gotten the return they were looking for on that investment.
Sir, it is time to deliver us our returns. If you do it right it shouldn't be hard but I am terrified that you won't. I'm afraid you'll say all the right things and do none of them. And if you're the wrong type of owner it might be another ten, or twenty, or fifty years ... and that's just way too much. Mr. Ricketts, you can do so much if you just work to do it right. That's all I'm asking. Do it right.
Oh, and please pass an edict to get the names off the backs of the home jerseys. The Cubs are classic. They are traditional. The names uglify the jerseys (that's right, I said "uglify"). Please fix it.
Great letter. If I could sign next to you I would. I agree completely with the "spend money in developing players to save money in the long run". It's amazing how far behind our farm system is in developing players. This absolutely has to change.
A Lot Of Great Ideas...
A lot of good stuff in this letter...let's just hope that the Ricketts family and Thomas Ricketts in particular pay attention to it...and this site in general.
It IS time for us to get a return on our investment of time, money, and love. I want to see the new guy do things right...and back up his professed passion for the Cubs with a commitment unlike any other in the league.
One last thing...I kind of like the names on the back of the jerseys!
Overall, I agree with most
Overall, I agree with most of this letter. My biggest problem with it is the contradiction you list. In Section 6 you say that you support selling the naming rights but towards the end of the letter you state you want the uniforms to return to "classic" and "traditional" looks as that is something the Cubs represent, can't really get it both ways. Also, Wrigley Field isn't the first ballpark named after a brand. The park was named after a person, just like Shea stadium. Just happens that that person owned a chewing gum company as well.
When the Cubs play on the
When the Cubs play on the field, I see the uniforms. I don't see the Wrigley Field sign. I don't notice advertisements on the walls at Wrigley.
Two totally, totally different things.
And while I'm at it ... I need not point out to you that every other "traditional team" - even those without names on the backs of their jerseys - have no problems with advertising within their park and selling naming rights for money to put back into the team.
Winning is way, way more important. Winning should be our tradition, not pleasing cosmetics.
Well Said
In addition, Congrats Mr. Ricketts, you have the opportunity before you to own one of the greatest sports franchises on the planet. Nearly everything has already been established that you as an owner will need to generate revenues - tradition, loyal fans, and 3 million bodies without question sitting in seats wearing cubs merchandise throughout the season. However, there is room for improvement in those areas, and improving the product on the field isn't quite as simple. As the owner, you are about to inherit one of the most abysmal farm systems in all of the game and one that needs serious attention and consideration. Its a breath of fresh air to see an owner in place that is actually a fan of the team (wild concept I know), as well as someone that is concerned with their success on the field. Its sad really that the money to put together a championship team has been around for years now, and yet no one has been able to parlay those piles of cash into a successful product on the field. Also I intend to one day buy the team from you when my baseball cards and auto & bank stocks turn-around, so we'll be in touch. Good Luck to you sir in dealing with the 3-ring circus that is Chicago.


text:
- Home ›
- Download ›
- Security ›
- Deep Freeze
Deep Freeze
Editor Faronics
(latest version)
A problem?Ask a question
Deep Freeze can protect your computer. To do so, it disables all changes made to the operating system at the next startup.
Key features :
- Complete security: After installing this software on your computer, your computers become bulletproof. Any accidental or malicious changes cannot affect your computers. The computer does not keep personal information. Thus the desktop is not cluttered with files.
- Update and maintenance: Its flexible scheduling options are very useful for IT administrators because they allow them to make tedious update and maintenance automatic.
- Use: Deep freeze is for student machines, instructor and employee computers. It includes flexible options for saving data, which allows the users to save their work with ease.
- Control: This application provides a trouble-free computing experience without worrying about malware, slowdowns, file congestion, unauthorized applications and hard drive degradation. In addition, you can use stealth mode to hide its system tray icon.
System requirements:
- Free hard disk space: 10%
- OS: Windows XP/Vista/7
- It provides peace of mind
- Efficient and stable
- It does not use too much CPU and memory.
- Difficult to understand
- Tricky uninstalling
See also
- Deep freeze free download
- Deep freeze
- Deep freeze download
- How to disable deepfreeze? » How-To - Windows
- Download Deep Freeze Standard » Download - Optimization
- Uninstall Deep Freeze » How-To - Software
- Deep Freeze® - uninstalling (Solved) » Forum - Windows
- Download Uninstall Tool » Download - Cleaning tools
Knowledge communities.
Add comment
Latest update on Friday November 23, 2012 12:43:07 PM

subset: commoncrawl


text:
An incredible day for major league baseball on Thursday. The trading deadline offered up some deals that will be talked about for years. Jon Lester to the A's for Yoenis Cespedes. John Lackey to the Cardinals for Allen Craig & Joe Kelly. Stephen Drew to the Yankees...yeah the Red Sox and Yankees made a trade! The biggest by far was the three way deal that ended up with David Price in a Tigers uniform. No one saw that coming. But it seems that Detroit GM Dave Dombrowski and A's GM Billy Beane have a nice little rivalry going and it has certainly been kicked up a notch this year. Brewer fans were clamoring for the team to make a move and they did. With the starting pitching doing well the biggest need was a bat...and preferably a left-handed bat to balance out the lineup and Doug Melvin found one. Gerardo Parra comes from the Diamondbacks for two minor leaguers and he will be a useful piece for the Crew down the stretch. He's a left-handed batting outfielder that can play all three OF positions and has won a Gold Glove at two of them. He can be used as a defensive replacement...for pinch hitting duties...and can give Braun, Gomez and Davis a day off now and then. It wasnt a flashy move compared to some yesterday...but Parra should help the Brewers get where they want to go...a playoff spot this year.
I'll be honest...when I saw the headline that the Brewers traded for Parra...I first thought they brought back Manny Parra and wasnt happy.
The Woodchucks played an excellent game last night and beat Lakeshore. Congrats to Brendan Hayden who set team records for doubles and hits in a season. The hits record had been held by former DC Everest player Matt Nohelty who set it back in 2005. Just three home games remaining for the Chucks including tonight against the Chinooks. I'll be in the booth with Sean Kellerman again tonight at 7:05.
And one more reminder...if you want to hear how I sounded as an FM DJ back in the my early days...tune in to WWSP 90fm Saturday from 1-3 pm. I'll be doing a shift as part of an alumni fundraiser for the student run radio station at UW-Stevens Point and will be playing songs that would have been played circa 1977-78 when I was music director at the station.
The Wausau East and Newman Class of 1974 is having their class reunion this weekend including tonight at the Domino in Wausau. I'll be stopping by after the Woodchucks game to raise a glass to my elders.
Songs of The Day (from my I-pod) The band Heartsfield played Stevens Point last night...here are a couple of classic tracks
Music Eyes-Heartsfield (1973) loved when this song would come on the radio
House Of Living-Heartsfield (1974) couldnt find a cut of "Shine On": so this one will have to do...another nice one...theses guys were good


text:
Wadi Rum, Jordan. May 2011 *because you asked for more pics ;)
This photo was taken inside one of the family homes where we ate dinner one night, at 'Rum village. I slept every night out in the desert, but during the day got to hang out with the Bedouin families, and share meals. Everyone was very hospitable, and it was a really cool experience.
They look so happy :) thank you for the photos. If you have more, feel free to submit. I enjoy reading the stories. I've always wanted to stay with a Bedouin family. Seems like an enjoyable experience.Posted 2 years ago with 24 Notes
#middle east
#wadi rum
- wavesaredancing likes this
- b0mbabe likes this
- gemsturrr-time likes this
- jojointransit likes this
- manamaha reblogged this from fuckyeahmiddleeast
- cold---tea likes this
- villapopmycherry reblogged this from fuckyeahmiddleeast
- temporaneity likes this
- afronativepride3p likes this
- ruggedindividual likes this
- sur-le-point likes this
- lezwitch likes this
- lindseydianataylor likes this
- omgoshitskabs reblogged this from fuckyeahmiddleeast
- omgoshitskabs likes this
- napoleonsrags submitted this to fuckyeahmiddleeast


text:
Chicken Meatball Soup & Spiced Oat Cake with Ginger Plum Buttercream
Delicious Links
A crazy good hot dog, a savory upside-down bread with chicken, and a spiced oatmeal cake in today's Delicious Links.
Today's Delicious Links
• Chicken Meatball Soup - Delicious Shots.
• Crazy Good Hot Dog - Breanna's Recipe Box.
• Upside Down Chicken Cake - Anncoo Journal.
• Spiced Oat Cake with Ginger Plum Buttercream - Whisk Kid.
Do you have a delicious link to share?
Send us a link here!
Send us a link here!
Previous Delicious Links
1 Comment
"Upside Down Chicken Cake?" The name alone is enough to give me the horrors. The creator of the recipe even says her family didn't like it...


text:
The Houston Independent School District held the first of 11 scheduled meetings to hear from parents and the community about their proposal to extend school days. The first meeting took place in Bellaire Tuesday evening. The district is proposing extending school days by 19 minutes. HISD believes that the proposed extension would save the school district $1.2 million. If the proposal is approved, the additional class time would equal an extra seven full days of school for the school year.
On Tuesday, parents showed up to voice their opinions about the proposed extension of school days. Many parents reportedly called the extension of the school days "disruptive". One parent also reportedly called the measure a "lazy one" on the part of educators. According to HISD, adjusting the school day would allow school buses to operate within routes more efficiently and the district would have a more unified bell schedule for all students.
Under the proposed schedule, schools would operate during the following times:
-About half of all elementary schools would operate from 7:30 A.M. to 3 P.M.
-About half of all elementary schools would operate from 8:30 A.M. to 4 P.M.
-All middle schools would operate from 7:45 A.M. to 3:15 P.M.
-All high schools would operate from 8:45 A.M. to 4:15 P.M.
For a complete list of meetings CLICK HERE.


text:
For almost 50 years Langdon Ford Financial has enjoyed a productive and successful history. It is with great pleasure that we announce our new name and new locations!
We have recently opened two New York offices; one in Uniondale, Long Island, and one right in the very heart of Manhattan. In early 2014, our Parsippany office will also move to a larger office space very close to our existing location. Our entire operation will officially be known as Allied Wealth Partners once our new headquarters in New Jersey is operational.
While we are now much larger and will be known by a new name, your advisor, your accounts and products remain exactly the same. This is an exciting time for Allied Wealth Partners that will no doubt enable us to continue our success well into the future. Please look to our website and your financial advisor for updates.
From all of us at Allied Wealth Partners, thank you for your continued partnership and trust.
As securities markets, financial products, tax and estate laws, and life in general become more complicated, clients can be best served through a simplified, collaborative approach to financial lifestyle management.
More →
When it comes to financial matters, it's easy to envision where you want to go, yet harder to figure out how to get there. Whether you're saving for retirement, investing for the future, funding a college education or reaching for any of a hundred other financial goals, we can help.
In today's complex world, the expertise and clear vision of a financial professional can help you reach your financial goals.
© Copyright 2014. Allied Wealth Partners


text:
Full size version is only available to registered users
Please Register as a New User or Login as Existing User to gain full access to all the photos on this site. Registration is quick and completely free.
Unregistered users can only view full size photos that have been added this month.
Swinging up the Backside of Death at Chapel Stile
Lee Warren, Sep 2009
© rockrat
Problem: The Backside of Death
Climbers: Iain Robinson
Camera used: Olympus mju 1030SW


text:
skip to main content
Join 3,562 readers in helping fund MetaFilter
Best Of
New User
How do people quit grad school?
February 7, 2012
How do tell my advisor that I am dropping out of grad school and finding a job?
So I've searched around here for people in similar situations, and I am slightly relieved that there might be life after grad school, but still very much freaking out about the next steps in my life.
The Situation:
I am at a very good university in a stats PhD program with a very well regarded, well connected (and actually quite nice) advisor, so the opportunities after graduation would be very good – for someone interested in being in this field. I am in the middle of the first year of the PhD program, after doing 2 years in the Master's program, working with the same research group. I have done very well in coursework, and been relatively productive in terms of research, but I completely failed the qualifying exams (generally not common, but >1/3 of people failed last year). You get 2 shots at the exams, and my advisor was surprisingly supportive after this.
The Problem:
I am very unhappy in my program. I am overworked, and way too stressed out all the time. I am uninterested in my research, and do not want an academic job in the future. I am not completely disinterested in the research aspect, but I really just don't care about the topic enough to feel a need to get a PhD. I have immense trouble sleeping, and have recently sought help for depression. I feel like this price is too high. In short, I just don't give a crap, anymore, I'm burnt out. I would rather salvage what's left of my sanity and health and live without all the pressure and expectations.
I think that I did not have the best reasons for getting going to grad school in the first place, and have always had doubts. I struggle a lot when people ask what I'm interested in, cause honestly, not a whole lot. I thought I could fake it long enough to find something that I thought was cool, but I'm ready to give up on that hope. I'd rather work less hours, have weekends off, and get better compensation. (is that naïve?)
I am almost certain that I am going to leave the program after this semester, my friend tried to drop out during last semester, but they told him that his funding would be revoked and he'd have to pay for the term out of pocket -- so I guess I will finish the term and cash out. What I am not sure how to do is how and when to bring it up with my advisor. I am also terrified of the process of getting a job, interviews, and such – grad school was partially meant to delay all that. How to I spin dropping out on my resume/CV (I have 2 years of master's classes, + 1 year of PhD classes)? How do I make it sound like I'm not a slacker or a quitter? Do jobs require letters of recommendation, or references, or whatever, and would an advisor write one for someone leaving his group (I know this is probably case-by-case)? Is it ridiculous to give up on an amazing opportunity?
And how do you explain this to people who live and breathe academia (I have a hard time with disappointing looks and guilt trips)? I've talked to other students in my program, and they look at me in shock that I could consider anything other than working for a research institution.
posted by
(17 answers total)
12 users marked this as a favorite
I quit grad school 1.5 years into a 3 year full funded research fellowship (this was in the School of Chemistry at George Washington University). This type of fellowship kept me solely on research with no T.A. responsibilities for 3 years.
When I quit it was because of pay and work hours issues. I also didn't feel any loyalty to the subject at hand. I did like the gadgets in a mad sciencey way, but the hours were harming me and seriously damaging my marriage. It was also at the height of the dotCom boom and we had a post Doc in the team who was being paid $20k, 3 years into being a post Doc. I had already put feelers out into the IT industry and had a job offer in hand from Sprint International as a Sr. Network Engineer starting at $48k (This was in 1996).
So I scheduled a meeting with my advisor and told her about the salary and the hours. Regarding the salary, she asked me if I had considered the long-term implications of quitting and possibly not pursuing my love. I said I was not pursuing it now, that despite her excellent research opportunities, I was not doing the nanotech/biotech I wanted to do, and I couldn't see the map that would take me there. She asked me about the hours. I told her about my marriage. She said that she found that the perfect solution for her marriage woes was to spend more time in the lab, not less. We established that we did not see eye to eye on many things and parted amicably.
It's possible to make it be entirely dispassionate. I recommend it. You can have a dispassionate parting and see if you can also get letters of reference.
Also don't discount the enduring hate a lot of private sector bosses have for academia. They likely will not see your quitting your doctoral program as a moral failing but as an understandable thing to do once you wake up and see where the ivory tower is taking you.
Finally, I have a number of friends who are in academia and they also completely understand. But I don't make friends with folks who give me guilt trips. Or I don't stay friends with them if they can't stop themselves.
posted by
on February 7, 2012 [
2 favorites
Hi. I was you five years ago. I realized that I was wasting my life chasing after a PhD in physics that I didn't feel confident about. I quit one year in. I didn't take two class finals. Quitting was the best decision and I'm happily employed as a computer programmer now. I like being able to go home and have weekends to myself now.
You already have your undergrad and your masters. You can be honest and tell employers that you didn't feel confident about your future in academia. They're not going to judge you.
posted by
on February 7, 2012
Many years ago, I left a grad program despite having 2 years left on the best four-year fellowship the school offered. Like you, I wanted to stay through the end of the year while I made plans, so I didn't tell anyone official until the semester was ending. I put my coursework on my resume as just that: "2 years graduate coursework in blah blah," and included any particular skills I had picked up. In my case, that was survey research, polling, and some statistics, so I made sure to emphasize those skills. I was able to find work doing data analysis for a market research firm. In my case, I found my first job through a friend-of-a-friend. You will need references, but you can use peer references--my partner used to have a job where the policy was for supervisors not to give references, so he and his co-workers were each other's references when job hunting. You can certainly ask your advisor for a reference, and I wouldn't be surprised if he was willing to give you one. Any faculty member you've worked for as an assistent would be a good person to ask, too.
I never regretted leaving my Ph.D. program. It was actually quite freeing to realize I didn't have to be a college professor! I didn't do a lot of explaining to friends and peers, just said that I'd been unhappy and was leaving. They made up their own stories (including that I dropped out to be with a girlfriend in another state), but who cares? With one or two exceptions, I never saw any of those people again.
Good luck!
posted by
not that girl
on February 7, 2012
Relax. It's going to be okay. People drop out, don't finish, get pregnant, spend years ABD all the time. Life happens, and you're not a bad person or a slacker or a quitter when it happens to you.
I'd tell your advisor what you're telling us: that you are burning out, that you've seen enough to know you don't want to see much more. You tried this and it wasn't for you. You truly do appreciate your advisor's support this far, and you'd like to make sure that you are leaving on the right foot. What can he tell you about how to leave and how not to leave?
Chances are your advisor has had this conversation with other grad students. It's even possible that he is anticipating having it with you. (When I'm depressed, I often think I'm holding it in and doing a great job with my brave face on. I'm not. You're probably not either.)
If your advisor is a decent person, or even a decent advisor, he will support and guide you as you close this chapter of your life. Maybe he will tell you about the grad student who degaussed all the backups before leaving on their last day, or whatever horror stories he has, and encourage you not to do that.
If your advisor is a pompous asshole who thinks his time is only worth spending on people who are going to Do Important Work for the Program, then you'll have a different conversation. It will be shorter and less helpful. He will still write you a letter of recommendation, and it might not be the glowing letter that you were hoping he would write to the hiring committee a few years down the road, but it will still help you. That's your worst case scenario: you learn that your relationship with your advisor was only as good as your performance in your program, and now he's done being your friend. So what? You're done now, you're free, you have an M.S. (right?) and some good work that you can point to.
You have the rest of your life ahead of you. You tried something and it didn't work for you. You're not disappointing anybody who understands anything: your fellow grads are participating in the shared illusion of the ivory tower. When you tell them that you're thinking of leaving, you are breaking the social contract that says The Program is Worth It, and they are unsettled by that. It's worth it to them (maybe), but it's not worth it to you, and you are the only one who has to life your life.
You are going to be fine. Good for you.
posted by
on February 7, 2012 [
3 favorites
I actually did this two weeks ago, after being here at my program for
years. My reasons were much the same as what you describe - I could almost have written them vebatim - and I certainly didn't go into the decision lightly, but still I was afraid of telling my advisor, letting her down, confirming everyone's opinion (in my head) that I was a total screw-up, etc etc etc.
Really, I did it just by doing it. I had a meeting with her where I was meant to be discussing the work I was doing, and instead I just sat down, let her know I had been thinking about this for a very long time now and realized that the best decision for me was to not continue. Instead of the head-shaking, tut-tutting, obviously disappointed response I "knew" I was going to get, she was incredibly understanding. She asked a little about why I'd come to this decision, was quite empathetic about the whole thing, told me that if I changed my mind I would still be someone she could see working in the academic world ... and then that was pretty much it! A few days later I summoned up the courage to tell the grad director of our program, and another professor I was even MORE sure would want to just launch me out of the program with a cannon after hearing the news; the former reacted much the same way as my advisor and even started making suggestions as to what to do next; the latter gave me advice on contacts I might get in touch with to look into the thing I'm considering for my next act.
So far the whole thing has gone SO much better than I ever would have though it could. I kept reminding myself that I was by no means the first person to make this decision and that all of my professors have seen it happen before ... what may be a big deal to me is just one of the things that happens in grad school to them. Ever since I came out and told my advisor I have been feeling SO much happier - having the energy freed up to actually start pursuing new avenues makes me feel excited about my future career potentials in a way I haven't in a while. Just take a breath and do it - you'll be glad you did.
Feel free to memail if you'd like to talk with someone going through much the same thing this semester. Good luck!
posted by
on February 7, 2012 [
1 favorite
If you want to talk about failing qualifying exams and what that does to one's psyche, memail me.
posted by
on February 7, 2012
The culture of my grad school as driven by the professors was based on the logical fallacy that if one must be the smartest, the most passionate, the most creative, the most dedicated, to fight your way to the top of the heap, get funding, get published, get tenure, and earn respect as a research professor, then anyone who was not trying to be a highly respected research professor was admitting they were neither smart nor dedicated. The idea that their job was not for everyone, this was a concept that the professors could only understand by saying "of course it's not for everyone, we're better than most people". By the time I left grad school, I was able to see that as blindness on their part, not a failing on mine.
Think about what you like about your grad program. You say you're not that into the research as a general thing, but there must be something you like. For me, I didn't care so much about the wider implications of my research. I didn't care what project I worked on. I found the idea of dredging up some kind of passionate plea for funding to be totally horrifying. Academia was totally not it. But I loved the actual lab work. Using a temperamental apparatus to take a measurement, and stringing together sets of measurements to define a system, was a challenge that I really enjoyed rising to meet.
What was really key for me was acknowledging the negativity around Leaving Academia, and turning that into a positive experience of Moving On. Grad school meant having discovered some things I like, and starting a job search that was really keyed into what I wanted. Your grad school advisor will definitely write letters of recommendation for you, and serve as a reference. If you sit down and explain what's important to you in a job and talk about what you think your skills are and how you want to use them, you are much more likely to get letters that are relevant to the jobs you'll be applying for. I felt like focusing on what I
want and
good at, instead of what I
want (academia) I was helping to introduce the idea that not every capable person wants the same thing, and that skills don't determine desire, or lack of desire to lack of skill. Ask your advisor who they know outside of academia - it's possible they have other former students in their history who they could put you in touch with, and it's just that they don't talk about these "failures" unless asked.
(also, is there any way you can use this last semester of work to convert your 3 years of classes into a Master's degree? Maybe dropping classes so you can write up a research paper?)
posted by
on February 7, 2012 [
1 favorite
I've talked to other students in my program, and they look at me in shock that I could consider anything other than working for a research institution.
They don't have perspective and experience. Your advisor does. I've advised lots of Ph.D. students and have talked careers with many more. We know not all our students become professors. We don't think that's bad and we don't think less of the people who don't choose that course.
On the other hand, I thought about quitting grad school all the time when I was a first-year, and I'm glad I didn't. If a student came to me and said they were thinking of quitting, I'd try to help them figure out whether they were more like me, or more like the many people I know who have happily left academic math behind.
Short version: you don't have to worry about how to tell your advisor. Just tell her.
posted by
on February 7, 2012 [
2 favorites
I quit my second year of a five plus year PhD program, fully funded, top university. I was miserable, for various reasons. Is it naive to think that life will be easier or better outside of academia/grad school? A bit. I have no regrets about leaving, nor any regrets about getting my MA, even though I not only don't work in that field, having the degree has actually hindered my job search (different story). Do you have a terminal masters?
I had no problem telling my advisor, my committe, my mentor, my friends/family, my decision to leave because a) I had thought about it long and hard and wasn't waffling at all and b) it wasn't a secret that I was unhappy. Most people were understanding. Academia is not for everyone. People looked at me like I was crazy for going on the first place; yep, people looked at my like I was crazy for leaving. Most of my professors understood, and in fact many of them wrote me letters of recommendation for other grad programs and jobs. My reasoning has always been honest and brief - the program was not a good fit for me at this time and I'm looking forward to the next step of a different adventure.
Also, I wouldn't worry about the guilt-tripping you might get from cohort-mates or other people in your program. The one thing that I (and my best friend, who also left his program around the same time) learned is that after a few months you won't even talk to many of these people anymore, anyway -- it's one of the consequences/benefits of leaving the bubble.
posted by
on February 7, 2012
A guy with whom I was good friends at the time was really unhappy in -- and didn't drop out of his PhD program -- until he had pretty much derailed his entire life, and I think in hindsight, at least to this outside observer, a lot of those mistakes were made because he was avoiding the issue didn't do it right because he was so embarrassed to be having this conversation -- especially wanting to avoid any conflict and disappointing looks and guilt trips (oddly this is probably while a relationship between he and I wouldn't work -- because we're so similar -- I totally get where you are coming from too); not taking the actions he should have to get the result he wanted (and was a lot less sure of wanting than you seem), made "re-railing" his life a lot harder because of that.
It doesn't sound like you're anywhere near this point -- but, and I doubt he'd disagree with me, don't follow his lead. The longer you wait, the harder it will be, and the sooner you do it, the better (though obviously waiting until the money/financing issue isn't an issue.)
Good luck!
posted by
on February 7, 2012 [
1 favorite
My vitals: Astronomy PhD from a fairly prestigious University (very prestigious undergrad; so-so for grad in Astronomy), two teaching-friendly postdocs, just starting a faculty job at a small liberal arts college.
I can totally understand where you're coming from. I considered quitting many times throughout my time as a grad student. I ended up finishing, although it was more of a momentum thing more than anything else. I've always been much more interested in the teaching side and, if I hadn't finished, I probably would have seen if I could have gotten a job at teaching high school. Honestly, one of the reasons I didn't quit is because I really had a strong desire to teach at the college level; that was one of my driving goals. If I hadn't had that goal, I probably would have not finished. However, my program was
a high-stress program and, moreover, I'm not the type to get very stressed about that stuff.
As many others have said, I think that your adviser will be more understanding than you think (s)he will be. Faculty understand that grad school isn't for everyone. I think your leaving at a very reasonable time (i.e. after the Masters, but early on in the PhD path) and at a point where your adviser should understand. There are jerks out there, but given your description of your adviser, I wouldn't be surprised if (s)he was not only understanding, but actually actively helpful in aiding you in your next steps. Aside from the academic side of things, advisers often build personal relationships with their students and want to see them succeed, regardless of if that's inside or outside of the grad program. You'll have a much better sense of this once you have "the talk" with your adviser, I think.
For your resume/CV, I think I'd spin it as:
M.S., Economics, XXX University, 2011
Additional Coursework, XXX University, 2011-2012 [with maybe some details here]
Good luck!
posted by
on February 7, 2012
Oh! And one of the reasons your cohorts may look at you like you're crazy is because you have been so successful in the program. They may think, "How can
be leaving the program?! (S)he did so much better than me in classes, has this great adviser, and is one of strongest people in the program."
That very thing happened with me, actually. My grad-school classmate (who always seemed to do half a grade better than me in every class) left after two years. He actually went to grad school in
subject and has an incredibly successful career outside of academia that makes him really happy.
posted by
on February 7, 2012
Thanks, all. I have only had time to briefly read all these, but I just wanted to say thanks for the quick responses.
If I go talk to my advisor NOW, then I still have 3 months of awkward hall passings, group meetings and such, which as cowardly as it sounds, I'd rather avoid. Plus everyone else knowing (we have a very gossipy department).
posted by
on February 7, 2012
Start looking for jobs now to get a jump on things rather than waiting until the term's over. You can easily spin that one year of the PhD, especially if you were TAing/marking/etc. during that time (i.e. you were employed by the university); even if not, plenty of people take a year away. See if your school offers any programs or workshops for people who want to leave academia and take them to learn how to best change an academic CV into a real-people-job resume.
If your advisor's awesome and you have a good relationship with him/her, then you could float the idea of leaving to them now. If not, I'd wait maybe till the beginning of April or so.
You will absolutely be fine. (Says the girl who left her PhD program after FIVE years. It's nice on the other side. Green grass and all.)
posted by
on February 7, 2012
you're making a career decision. you're not personally rejecting everything they stand for. just keep that in mind.
posted by
on February 7, 2012
Right, but if I start the job hunt now, would they contact my advisor to ask about me? I really have no idea how that stuff works! I really don't want him to find out second hand, but I would like to get going with the jobs and such, so that I have some idea what is happening in the future, cause this speeding approach to limbo/freedom is scary.
Thanks again for all your help and support!
posted by
on February 7, 2012
Is there anyone outside your graduate program who can give you a reference? I don't think potential employers will contact your advisor unless you list him as a referee. I agree you should not tell your advisor you're leaving the program until the semester is over. At that point you can ask him to be one of your referees in a non-academic job search.
Pick up a copy of
"So What Are You Going to Do with That?"
, discreetly take advantage of your university's career services (they're not just for undergrads--and you can start with a general "how the hell does a job search work" counseling session), and do a little sleuthing through LinkedIn or Facebook to find other people in your extended friends-of-friends network who have left the program without finishing the degree. Hit them up for informational interviews and ask for advice on the transition.
And how do you explain this to people who live and breathe academia (I have a hard time with disappointing looks and guilt trips)?
Stay positive, stay confident, and To Thine Own Self Be True. Were you ever taught to give an "elevator story" about your research? You just need a new, positive elevator story about your new career. Don't say what you're escaping from, but what you're moving towards. "I decided I want to __________ / work with ___________ / work in the field of ________ / apply my skills to __________ / explore __________, and I want to get started now. Let me know if you hear of any opportunities!" If you present it as a normal, positive thing, and not like you're slinking out the door with your tail between your legs, people are more likely to respond in a positive fashion. And if they don't, never mind. The academic track is just one path to one type of career and it's not morally superior to any other. When I was in college in the late '90s, our career center director told us that people of our generation were expected to change careers—not just jobs, but
—seven times in our adult lifetimes, on average. Changing careers is 100% OK and normal and smart. If someone acts like you're leaving their cult, then the problem is with them, not you.
posted by
on February 7, 2012
« Older
I need a question that prompts... | I have a timeline, a rough pla...
Newer »
This thread is closed to new comments.
Related Questions
PhD dropout
April 17, 2013
Is this an offer I'd be a fool to refuse?
September 24, 2012
Make me less of an academic island!
May 16, 2012
YANMT, but I can't afford a therapist so you'll...
July 13, 2010
A sure MIIS.
October 3, 2007
New User
MeFi Wiki
Buy a Shirt
© 1999-2014
MetaFilter Network Inc.
All posts are © their original authors.
| ☃


text:
|Contact us
Integral means "essential or necessary for completeness or wholeness"
Resources for Integral Relationship Evolutionaries:
Integral Relationships: A Manual for Men (and Curious Women)
Integral Relationships Covers:
12 Core Values for Integral Relationship Evolutionaries:*
(c) Martin Ucik. Permission to use with reference to the author and this website. Click here for German Version
Connecting:Sign up for our email newsletter and receive chapter 1&2 of Integral Relationships: A Manual for Men (and curious women) as a PDF file for FREE!
For the sake of your privacy, your information will NEVER be sold, given to, or shared with others.
Now available:
Click on Image above to watch a conversation with Jack Butler: "Thanks Martin for being a great guest on the show and for creating frameworks and understanding to guide men towards what is really going on in their quest for fulfilling and enduring relationships."
Dr. Keith Witt reviewed Integral Relationships: A Manual for Men in the Sep. 2012 issue of the Jounal of Integral Theory and Practice.
"Integral Relationships is a magnificent synthesis of Integral Theory and current relationship literature and research."
German 1:49:46 Integral Relationships Introduction DVD at http://www.arimedia.tv/
Click to see Patricia Albert and Martin discuss the highest possibility for Love relationships (or download/listen to better Audio)
The German Version of Integral Relationships is now available from Amazon.de, Phänomen Verlag and German book stores.
Click play above or right click here to download a conversation between Jack LaValley and Martin Ucik,
and here for an interesting conversation about arranged marriages
Listen to a 1 hour Interview in German with Martin at mann-sein.ch here
Listen to a 14 Minute Interview in German with Martin about Integral Relationships here
Visit Martin's blogs on Integral Life here
Download the conversation about 21st Century Relationships with Lion Goodman, David Richo, Robert Augustus Masters and Martin Ucik here. Click here for all other recordings
4/28/11 Integral Relationship Newsletter No. 1
Integral Relationships: A Manual for Men is available here at a 50% discount or on Amazon.com as paperback and Kindle version.
For women we also recommend:
For men and women:
|(c) 2010 singles2couples.org - Association for Healthy Relationships • Santa Rosa, CA 95403 • (707) 566-2106


text:
Annual Health And Wellness Fair
Faculty and Staff are invited to attend the 2013 annual Health & Wellness Fair on October 15, 2013 from 8:30 a.m. - 1:00 p.m. at Hankamer School of Business (HSB), Cashion 510.
Be proactive for your good health! Faculty and staff will have the opportunity to speak with professionals and participate in interactive booths. Flu vaccine, health screenings, special services and wellness activities will be offered. Come and join the fun! Prizes, give-a-ways, refreshments, and more will be available for those who participate.
Health Screenings from 8:30 a.m. to 10:30 a.m.
- Flu Vaccines and Health Screenings sponsored by Baylor Health Center will be administered on the Blume Conference Room.
- Flu Vaccines - Cost $20.00
- TSH (Thyroid) - Cost $8.00
- PSA (Prostate) - $10.00
- Lipid Panel (Cholesterol, Triglycerides) - Cost $5.00
- CMP (Blood Chemistry) - Cost $6.00
- Instructions prior to receiving the Lipid Panel and/or the CMP screenings:
- Don't eat or drink after midnight except water with necessary medicine
- Don't eat or drink after midnight except water with necessary medicine
- Flu Vaccines - Cost $20.00
- Results of tests available after October 18th at Health Services. Test results will be released to the individual only, if you would like to pick up your spouse's results, permission is required; ID required.
- Results are not interpreted by Health Services but must be taken to a person's own physician.


text:
'); } -->
4 bed, 3 full bath. Gorgeouse house in Fallon Park. This house has it all: 4 bedrooms, 2. 5 bathrooms, brick 3 sides, 3More info
3 bed, 3 full bath. Adorably Renovated,move in ready Wayland Heights Gem with abundant living spaces. Designer FeaturesMore info
4 bed, 3 full bath, 1 half bath. The Langley Forest is a 1. 5 story floor plan with a 1st floor master, 2 1st floor guests bedroomsMore info
3 bed, 2 full bath, 1 half bath. 1. 5 story Homes by Dickerson! Hardwoods, columns, soaring ceilings. Slate surround gas logs FP inMore info
5 bed, 3 full bath. Lovely 5 bedroom home with lots of space.More info
2 bed, 1 full bath. This 2 bedroom, open, sunny home sits on . 22 acres with a beautiful, fenced backyard and a big decMore info
3 bed, 2 full bath, 1 half bath. Prime location mins to I-40, I-540, shopping & Rex. Hdwds thru entire house. Eat-in kitchen w/gas sMore info
3 bed, 2 full bath. Grt N. Ral loc on quiet cul-de-sac. Newly added sunporch overlooks gorgeous bckyrd, perfect for plaMore info
3 bed, 3 full bath. You'll smile every time you drive into the driveway of this charming home. Loaded with recent improMore info
3 bed, 2 full bath. This ADORABLE upgraded home has everything you are looking for! Fresh paint & gleaming hardwoods thMore info


text:
From the Streets to the Shelter
What would you do if you found this at your neighborhood park?
Fortunately for this little shepherd mix, when my friends stumbled across him a few days ago they did more than hurry past and try to forget about the sad sight.
They contacted animal control.
That's not always an easy call to make. The shelter in Kansas City, Missouri, is not in good condition, and although euthanasia rates are down, not every animal makes it out of there alive.
For these reasons, my friends weren't thrilled to send the pup to the city pound, but they weren't in a position to tend to his immediate needs.
They did the right thing.
And again, they did not simply turn their backs when the truck drove off with the stray animal.
They recognized that to survive the shelter, this dog would need allies on the outside.
So, they shared his picture and story on social networks and lost pet forums.
They called up the shelter to see how he was doing.
They even went to visit him.
My friends would really like to adopt this dog, but at 45 pounds he is slightly too large for the rules set by their apartment complex.
They say he seems to be friendly and sweet, and the shelter estimates he is between 6 months and 1 year old.
Today, he is officially available for adoption from KC Pet Project. His identification number is 19425723.
Please share this dog's story with anyone you know who may be interested in adopting him.
What do you do when you find a wayward dog?
Read more about the experience of finding this dog at ginchy!
Posted on March 20, 2013, in Dogs, Dogtography, Wayward Dog and tagged adoptable puppy, animals, euthanasia rates, Kansas City, kansas city missouri, KC Pet Project, shepherd mix, what to do when you find a stray dog. Bookmark the permalink. 7 Comments.
That is so cool that your friends not only saved him, but are checking up on him and spreading the word about him! He is such a cutie! I hope he finds a forever home really soon!
I hope he does find a home soon, it's really cool that your friend is watching out for him.
It's tough to say what I'd do in this situation. Calling animal control when you can't take a pup with you is the best thing (even though I don't trust Wichita Animal Control) but if I could take one in we would go straight to the vet.
Good for your friends to do their best to help the dog and then to continue by trying their best to get it adopted. I do hope he finds a good home soon. Certainly looks like a sweet enough dog to make someone very happy
Well done them! Good luck to the gorgeous chap in finding a home.
FYI Kaleb was adopted yesterday! You can see a very cute picture of him on our facebook page at http://www.facebook.com/kcpetproject!
Thank you for the update! So happy for the little guy!


text:
West Africa Experts
Former Foreign Service Officer and US Ambassador to Ivory Coast
Retired State Department South Asia Specialist and U.S. Ambassador to The Ivory Coast
Former Director, Africa Program, Woodrow Wilson Center.
As a Foreign Service Officer from 1970-80, McDonald served as Political Officer in the U.S. Embassies in Uganda and South Africa and as the Desk Officer for Angola, Mozambique, Cape Verde, Guinea Bissau, Sao Tome and Principe. He also was support staff for negotiated settlements in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe and Namibia in the late-1970s and did conflict resolution work in Northern Ireland and Burundi.From...
Former Senior US Diplomat and Specialist in South Asia and West Africa. Ambassador to Pakistan (1998-2001); Ambassador to Bangladesh (1990-93); Chief of Mission in Liberia (1995-98); Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Finance and Development (1985-90)
William B. Milam is a Senior Policy Scholar at the Woodrow Wilson Center in Washington, D.C. Although his research and publications while at the Wilson Center have concentrated on South Asia, his current research focuses on Liberia and the efforts of this former failed state to balance political and economic reconstruction with justice and reconciliation.Before joining the Wilson Center, he was a...


text:
Send this news release to your friend or associate:
Automate 2013 reaches record number of attendees.
Enter your information below to send this news release.
Your name:
Your E-mail address:
Friend's name:
Friend's E-mail:
Add a Personal message:
To send this story, enter the security code shown below and press 'Send E-Mail'.


text:
The dramatic changes and controversies that occurred at Capitol Reef National Monument as a result of Mission 66 have been discussed earlier in this administrative history. This section will therefore merely summarize the changes and focus on administrative details regarding rights-of-way, multi-agency agreements, and alignments. [47]
The construction of a new road along the Fremont River involved multiple state and federal agencies, as well as private property owners. Because of the complexities involved, road construction east of Fruita, formally authorized in January 1958, was not started until the fall of 1961.
Once the decision was made to go ahead with the Fremont River route, the next step was determining which agency would fund which sections of the road. In January 1958, at a meeting of state, county, and National Park Service officials and Fruita land owners, the park service agreed to fund work along the Fremont River through Capitol Reef National Monument. The Utah State Road Commission would seek additional federal funds to complete the highway from the east boundary to Caineville, and would assume responsibility for the maintenance of the entire road through the monument. [48]
The other major issue involved the charging of National Park Service entrance fees on the new highway. In December 1956, the Utah Bureau of Public Roads District Engineer F. W. Smith wrote Superintendent Paul Franke that no fees should be charged on the new road. Smith reasoned that "a charge should not be made on a State highway for vehicles using the road since a large sum would be required to complete the improvement outside of the monument, and ...[since it had] been a State road since 1910." The State of Utah, he told Franke, wanted "a definite commitment of policy on this matter." [49]
Franke, in response, indicated that the National Park Service would not waive these fees. Pointing out that "the Utah parks needed 'stepping stones' not 'stumbling blocks'," Franke urged the state roads officials to reconsider their position. He reminded them:
Franke concluded, "At present there are no instrucions or regulations requiring the collection of fees at Capitol Reef. We assume we will be instructed to initiate fees at this area when the developments and facilities provided for park enjoyment by the Federal government warrant such charges." [51]
Regional Director Hugh M. Miller did not agree with Superintendent Franke. In an appeal to National Park Service Director Wirth, Miller stated his concern about charging fees on the new highway:
Director Wirth agreed with Miller and issued the following memorandum on January 25, 1957:
Thus, the National Park Service agreed with the state that no fees would be charged on the new highway through the monument. The decision, however, was based on the fact that there was no nearby alternative route, rather than on the concept of traditional use or the fact that the citizens of Utah were funding the western portion of the highway to the monument. During the multi-party meeting in January 1958, this promise not to charge fees was formally accepted and written into the cooperative agreement governing operations for the new highway on May 16, 1961. [54]
In June 1959, the survey of the Fremont River road was complete, but construction was delayed until the right-of-way through privately owned lands in Fruita could be obtained. [55] Delays in the appraisals of the inholdings would postpone construction for an additional two years. These delays were coupled with pressures from local and state officials and politicians to begin road construction. Hence, the National Park Service was pushed to initiate condemnation proceedings on tracts owned by Dean Brimhall, Max Krueger, Cora Smith, and Elizabeth Sprang. Right-of-way through 40 acres east of Fruita owned by the Campbell brother's Wonderland Stages was also required. Final condemnation of lands needed for the highway's right-of-way through Fruita was granted on June 2, 1961. Within one month, a $570,000 National Park Service contract for 5.73 miles of new road within Capitol Reef National Park was awarded to low bidder Whiting and Haymond Construction Company of Springville, Utah. Construction of the new route for Utah 24 began in August 1961 (Fig. 48). [56]
Despite the annual fall floods and other minor problems, road construction progressed through the rest of 1961. With construction more than half completed, work was suspended on Dec. 15 due to weather, to begin again the following February. On July 18, 1962, the Bureau of Public Roads accepted the new highway as satisfactorily complete. Capitol Reef Superintendent William T. Krueger estimated that the total cost of the road construction was $747,548.19, of which $677,548.19 were actual construction costs. Within one month, travel on the new highway had increased by more than 60 percent since the month before construction began. [57]
One reason for the increase in traffic on the new road was the larger number of visitors attracted by the new paved highway through the monument. Another reason was the fact that, once Utah 24 was paved all the way to Green River, this road became the shortest truck route between Los Angeles and Denver. Thus, prior to the late 1970s completion of Interstate 70 north of the park, semi-truck traffic through the heart of Capitol Reef was heavy. [58]
Perhaps the most noticeable resource alteration caused by the road's construction was near the current eastern boundary, where a cut was excavated to divert the Fremont River from its natural course. (In 1962, of course, the monument's eastern border along the Fremont River was west of this road cut, near the Behunin Cabin.) Rather than building the highway to follow the bend of an old riverbed meander, on property owned by Wonderland Stages, highway officials blasted directly through a soft sandstone cliff. Then, instead of building a bridge over the Fremont River and allowing the flow to continue along its natural course, they blasted out a new channel that cut off the meander and kept the river on the north side of the highway. The diversion takes the river on a new course over a small cliff, thereby creating a waterfall that has become a popular swimming hole for visitors and local youngsters. The old meander in wet seasons still holds water and provides habitat for a number of plant and animal species. Because this road cut and river re-channeling took place outside the monument, the National Park Service had no voice in the matter and apparently kept no records documenting this portion of Utah 24 construction. [59]
Once the new Utah Highway 24 was completed along the Fremont River, the old route through Capitol Gorge reverted to National Park Service control. As per the 1961 cooperative agreement and Capitol Reef's master plans, the road was closed off at the head of the Capitol Gorge narrows. The road from Capitol Gorge to Pleasant Creek remained open to vehicle traffic (Fig. 49). [60]
The increased traffic brought by the new highway led to a corresponding increase on the Scenic Drive as well. Approximately 40 percent of all visitors traveled at least part of this road, which was dirt south of Fruita. It was washboarded, rutted, and dusty most of the time, and the road turned to mud in the wet season. In July 1966, the National Park Service improved and graded Scenic Drive between Fruita and Capitol Gorge. Twelve new culverts helped solve the drainage problems. Superintendent Harry Linder considered the road to be "in excellent condition for visitor enjoyment with the exception of the dust which the summer rains should take care of." [61]
In 1969, Scenic Drive was scheduled to receive further attention, including chip-sealing the entire length from the campground to the mouth of Capitol Gorge. [62] However, the unexpected expansion of the national monument and all of its attendant worries evidently canceled that project, which would be revived in the spring of 1990.
During 1955-56, various drafts of the Mission 66 Prospectus developed the initial philosophy toward new trails within the monument. A November 1955 draft stated:
This preference for trails over roads would become a predominant theme in Mission 66 development of the monument. The final, director-approved prospectus acknowledged that utility roads would have to be constructed to the new campground and possibly to Pleasant Creek. Nevertheless, trails would provide the primary access routes into the spectacular backcountry of the Waterpocket Fold. The prospectus continued:
Trail mileage would significantly increase during the Mission 66 period from 1956 to 1966. In the 1956 estimates, only 8.6 miles of additional trails were planned. These included two miles added onto Broad Arch (Hickman Bridge) Trail, which would take visitors to Whiskey Spring and an overlook high above Fruita; 1.1 miles of trail into Cohab Canyon; and various walks and paths in the Fruita area. [65] Not listed were undeveloped trails along the bottom of Grand Wash and up to Cassidy Arch. [66]
By 1958, four miles of additional trails "to points of interest" were included in a revised development outline. [67] Then, in 1960, proposed total trail mileage in the monument was dramatically increased to 24.5 miles. This included seven miles of new construction and 17.5 miles of reconstruction or relocation. [68]
That same year, Superintendent Krueger raised the possibility that, since problems with purchasing the private inholdings needed for the new highway's right-of-way were delaying its construction, those funds could be shifted to trails and access roads. Krueger's first priority was the reconstruction and partial relocation of the Goosenecks Road, parking areas, and trail. Apparently, the road out to the goosenecks overlook had existed for some time, but there is no known documentation that gives an initial date for its construction.
As part of this same funding request in 1960, Krueger desired construction of the long-promised Whiskey Spring and rim overlook additions to the Hickman Bridge Trail, as well as rehabilitation of 1.9 miles of the Cohab Canyon Trail. Further trail work was also proposed for the previously unimproved routes to Cassidy Arch, Cohab Canyon spurs, through Pleasant Creek and up to the base of the Golden Throne. Unfortunately, no known record pinpoints exactly when these projects were initiated. [69]
The 1964 master plan drawings of established and proposed roads and trails show a total of 35.78 miles of trails within the monument. Which of these were improved trails, which were simply routes, and which trails were actually completed by 1964 is undetermined. [70]
Although trail construction records are sketchy, most trail building was apparently postponed until 1966. At that time, Superintendent Harry P. Linder reported, "The rehabilitation of the Cassidy Arch Trail was completed in July. This completes rehabilitation work on all but two trails which should be finished by end of summer. Everyone tells us the trails are in better shape than they have ever been." [71]
By October 1966, the Fremont River Trail was completed and work was begun on the Frying Pan Trail connecting Cohab Canyon with the Cassidy Arch Trail. [72]
By 1973, improved trails in the headquarters area of Capitol Reef National Park also included the three-mile Chimney Rock loop and a half-mile extension of the Fremont River Trail to the campground overlook. Unimproved routes included the narrows of Grand Wash and Capitol Gorge, along Pleasant Creek, out to Sunset Point off the Goosenecks access road, and through Spring Canyon to the north. Another traditional but unimproved route followed Sulphur Creek from the Chimney Rock parking area to the visitor center . [73]
Additional trails were built by Capitol Reef rangers during the late 1980s and early 1990s. These included an extension of the Rim Overlook Trail another two miles to Navajo Knobs, new trails to a high point above the Fremont River Gorge west of the visitor center, and a three-mile loop trail following parts of the old Grover wagon road (Fig. 50).
Development of new roads and trails in Capitol Reef National Monument was hindered by rugged terrain and isolation. Yet, miles of road and trail work were completed in the equally rugged Zion and Bryce Canyon National Parks from the 1930s through the 1960s, suggesting that isolation was the more important factor delaying construction at Capitol Reef.
When the long-promised highway was finally constructed, circulation patterns within the monument changed significantly. The new highway brought an increasing number of visitors. With additional money and staff, Capitol Reef slowly extended its trail system, thereby enticing visitors to spend more time in the canyons or hiking to scenic view points. Fortunately, planners for Mission 66 and later developments in Capitol Reef had anticipated increased visitation. As of 1994, the roads and trails in the headquarters area, except for the most popular routes up to Hickman Natural Bridge and in the narrows of Grand Wash and Capitol Gorge, remain relatively uncrowded.
When Capitol Reef National Park was established in December 1971, its managers inherited 48.5 miles of county roads, 13 miles of former Bureau of Land Management roads, and approximately 32 miles of four-wheel drive roads. There were no additional trails aside from backcountry routes used by ranchers, their stock, or wilderness explorers. [74]
The county roads included 25.6 miles to the north of Utah 24 and 22.9 miles in the southern portion of the new park. These county-maintained roads included the Caineville Wash and Cathedral Valley roads built in the 1940s (the Upper Cathedral switchbacks were cut around 1949), and the Hartnet and Notom Roads. [75]
It is unclear which 13 miles were built with Bureau of Land Management funds. In the North District, according to rancher Garn Jeffery, the two rough access roads from his ranch (often called Baker Ranch) and the Oil Bench road down Rock Spring Bench were improved by the BLM during the mid-1940s. [76] Those who built the road from the river ford up the bentonite clay hills to the Hartnet road are not clearly identified. Ward Roylance claimed that this road was built by the BLM during the mid-1950s. [77] Rancher Guy Pace, on the other hand, recalls that Wayne County, with his help, built the road during the late 1940s and early 1950s. More research is needed to accurately determine the history of the roads in the outlying areas of the park. [78]
The four-wheel drive roads presumably included the 13 miles of jeep track following Halls Creek south of The Post, as well as several dead-end spur roads in the North and South Districts, used for mining and grazing access. The ranching access roads included the Lower South Desert Overlook (originally built into the South Desert in 1958 for oil exploration), Upper Cathedral Valley line shack and corral, Gypsum Sinkhole and Lower Cathedral Valley access roads in the north, and the Swap Canyon and Red Canyon roads in the south.
Mining access roads included a few small spur roads off the South Draw road from Pleasant Creek to Bowns Reservoir; the Rainy Day Mine road off the Burr Trail; a spur into North Coleman Canyon from a Sandy Ranch road accessing the Oak Creek dam and canal; four-wheel drive routes from Dixie National Forest into Oak Creek Canyon; the Terry Mines road near Bitter Creek Divide; the 1956 oil exploration road past Jailhouse Rock into Little Sand Flat; and a connecting road into the Upper South Desert built in 1959 by seismographers, presumably looking for oil. [79]
Immediately after President Lyndon Johnson's presidential proclamation in 1969 expanded Capitol Reef to over 250,000 acres, an immediate outcry of protest arose from the area's traditional multiple-use operators. [80] Since access to many areas of the Waterpocket Fold was limited to a few dirt roads, users feared that some roads might be closed. During the May 31, 1969 subcommittee hearings over the monument expansion, South Desert rancher and Wayne County Commissioner Guy Pace stated:
As Pace implied, there was particular concern that the monument's expansion would terminate future road development.
The National Park Service attempted to placate road development advocates while defending the agency's management philosophy. The inherent conflict between these two objectives is expressed in a 1971 draft environmental statement issued for in-service use by Southern Utah Group General Superintendent Karl Gilbert. According to Gilbert, Capitol Reef should attempt to limit visitation into the fragile backcountry while at the same time promoting road improvements. [82] The final environmental statement provided a few more specifics on how this incongruous need for both better roads and protected resources would be managed:
One reason for the delay in formulating a roads and trails policy was the agency's unfamiliarity with the outlying regions of the proposed park. This delay, coupled with local concerns over roads, convinced sponsors of both the Senate and House bills to include a clause requiring a detailed transportation study for the new park. In November 1971, the congressional conference committee, which ironed out the discrepancies between the Senate and House versions, recommended that the Department of the Interior have sole responsibility for this "comprehensive" study and that it be coordinated with the studies for other National Park Service areas in the same region. The conference report specified, "Because of its importance to the future of the communities involved, the report and the recommendations are required to be completed and transmitted to Congress within two years after the date of enactment." [84]
The Department of the Interior seemed to have no objections to this requirement, provided that adequate funding was available. [85] Thus, with no apparent opposition, the following wording was included in the final enabling legislation for Capitol Reef National Park signed into law by President Richard Nixon on Dec. 18, 1971:
Similar wording was also included in the legislation creating Arches National Park and expanding Canyonlands National Park earlier in 1971. Notably, however, Glen Canyon National Recreation Area legislation was not passed until the following year and was therefore not formally involved in this particular road study.
Transportation study projections and analyses are often ignored in the political arena. By the 1970s, any road development in such a sensitive area as southern Utah was bound to lead to intense conflict that would be resolved either through compromise or court action. Thus, the only historical significance of such a transportation study would be contemporary listing of various options.
A professional services contract was issued to Environmental Associates of Salt Lake City, Utah to complete a joint transportation study for Arches, Canyonlands, and Capitol Reef National Parks and separate master plans for each. Unfortunately, no further documentation, such as a scope of work, has been found to indicate what the National Park Service wanted included in this study, how much money was authorized, or whether the project should be done in-house or under contract. Since the locations of Capitol Reef's records from the early 1970s are unknown, there is also no documentation of the park's and region's reactions to the joint transportation study when it was issued at the end of 1973. [87]
It is known that the recommendations concerning Capitol Reef National Park were never approved. Further, the 1973 master plan for Capitol Reef, prepared by the same consulting firm and including the same detailed transportation analysis, was rejected as unsatisfactory. [88]
In developing the joint transportation study and the separate master plans for each area, Environmental Associates evaluated existing and potential regional road systems and visitor services. In conjunction with the evaluations, the consultants also considered the various proposals submitted by the Utah State Department of Highways and various federal agencies, including the National Park Service. The purpose was to derive transportation management proposals that would enhance visitor experience, avoid congestion, maximize capitol investment, and minimize non-visitor traffic. The goal seems to have been to combine the various proposals into an acceptable compromise. [89]
The Utah State Department of Highways proposals were, naturally, the most far-reaching. Ever since the tourist potential of southern Utah was first realized in the early 1900s, state planners, often in cooperation with the National Park Service, had advocated building scenic highways through the rugged and beautiful terrain. By the 1970s, the state was pinning its hopes on a spectacular Lake Powell Parkway from Glen Canyon City through Canyonlands National Park and across Cataract Canyon to Moab. Other paved roads, some of which were of more immediate concern to Capitol Reef, would act as arteries to this highway through the heart of the Colorado Plateau. The new roads and upgrades proposed by the state included paving the Boulder-Bullfrog road and Utah Highway 12 over Boulder Mountain. The plan also called for rerouting and paving a road from Fremont Junction to Notom Road, which in turn would be paved all the way to Bullfrog Marina on Lake Powell. If any one of these roads was completed as planned, it would significantly change the volume and nature of visitation to Capitol Reef National Park. [90]
The consultants' recommendations, termed the "National Park Service Proposal," called for substantially less. According to the contractors, Capitol Reef managers should strive for the worthy but still contradictory goals of increased access and minimal visitor impact. Specifically, the joint transportation study recommended that the section of the Notom-Bullfrog road inside the park boundary be paved, that the Burr Trail be upgraded to an all-weather gravel road, and that the existing dirt road from Utah 24 north to Lower South Desert Overlook be widened and paved. [91]
In its 1973 master plan for Capitol Reef National Park, Environmental Associates recommended further road improvements. These included a new highway from Fremont Junction southeast to Hanksville, as an alternative to the Fremont Junction-Bullfrog paved road proposed by the state. Another was the possible paving of the entire Notom-Bullfrog Road and the Boulder-Bullfrog Road (except for the Burr Trail, which would be graveled). In the park's North District, a one-way, paved loop road should be constructed to follow the existing dirt roads from Utah 24, through Cathedral Valley, and then over the Hartnet. The plan also recommended that Scenic Drive be improved and paved, that additional trails be built in the Fruita area, and that the jeep track along Halls Creek be restricted to foot and horse traffic. [92]
Thus, only two years after Capitol Reef National Park was created, there was a wide range of ambitious proposals to improve the roads and trails in the newly expanded area. The plan proposed by Environmental Associates did achieve the goal of blending the various options into a compromise proposal. Yet, even if its recommendations were less than the state or counties desired, they were still too ambitious for the National Park Service -- especially since the park was so new, so little was known about its existing resources, and the political climate in southern Utah was so contentious.
In addition to the transportation study, Capitol Reef's enabling legislation required that a wilderness study of the new park be completed within three years. [93] Any extensive roadless wilderness within Capitol Reef would obviously restrict road construction or circulation changes proposed in the 1973 master plan and transportation studies. While the wilderness proposals took the transportation and master plans into consideration, there seems to have been no actual coordination between the National Park Service wilderness study and the privately contracted transportation and master plan.
In November 1974, after several preliminary proposals and public hearings, the National Park Service formally recommended that 179,815 acres of roadless wilderness be designated in Capitol Reef National Park. There were to be nine distinct wilderness units, each separated by a road or proposed utility corridor (Fig. 51). The recommendation specified:
Two other proposed roads in the vicinity of Lower Muley Twist Canyon were also rejected, due to their tremendous cost and potential resource destruction. These roads, routes Q and V on the 1974 Proposed Wilderness Map, were initially recommended as part of Glen Canyon National Recreation Area enabling legislation in 1974. They were summarily rejected in the Capitol Reef Wilderness Plan and were never seriously considered again. [95]
While a wilderness plan for Capitol Reef National Park has never been formally approved, it is the stated policy of the National Park Service to manage any proposed wilderness areas as if they were designated wilderness. Later additions in 1984 mean that management is now empowered to restrict road construction from the nine proposed wilderness areas that make up 90 percent of Capitol Reef National Park. [96]
Because of this policy, there have been only a few times when road machinery was used in the backcountry. In 1976, a bulldozer was illegally brought in to clear the Oak Creek stock driveway, and in 1986, Superintendent Robert Reynolds reluctantly allowed the reconstruction of two stock ponds in the South Desert area of the North District. [97] In reality, the wilderness recommendations have had more of an impact on roads and trails in Capitol Reef National Park than either the 1973 master plan or transportation study.
By the end of the 1970s, little road and trail building had occurred since the park's creation at the beginning of the decade. This was mostly because park-wide development plans were postponed until resource surveys were completed. [98] Meanwhile, the 1974 wilderness recommendations mandated that 75 percent of Capitol Reef National Park be managed as roadless wilderness. That stance prevented road-building and ensured gradual deterioration of many of the old grazing and mining jeep trails. By the early 1980s, however, preparation of the first general management plan for the park, right-of-way issues, and the growing Burr Trail controversy would push roads and trails management at Capitol Reef into a more active phase.
In October 1982, Capitol Reef National Park finally had a comprehensive, director-approved General Management Plan (GMP). [99] Because of their significance to park management, roads and trails were prominently featured in the 1982 GMP. Until a new general management plan is finished and approved sometime in 1998, the 1982 plan provides the operational guidelines by which Capitol Reef National Park manages its resources.
Overall, the 1982 plan instructed park managers to seek an active role in all future road developments. It stated:
This statement meant that park managers would work with county and/or state road planners, but would retain the National Park Service's right to determine final road alignments, speed limits, vehicle size limitations, and permitted periods of use. [101]
The 1982 general management plan called for construction of one new road, the paving of another, and several new trails, all in anticipation of increased visitation. A total of five action or plan alternatives were considered during the planning process. What follows is a description of roads and trails existing in 1982, and a summary of the desired changes expressed in the general management plan. (See that document for a complete table of alternatives).
Current Conditions. Utah 24 was still the only paved road through the park. Along this road there were 11 scenic pullouts, including the graveled Goosenecks/Panorama Point spur road constructed and maintained by the National Park Service. Scenic Drive was a paved, two-lane road to the campground, with a one-lane bridge over the Fremont River. South of the campground, the road became a two-lane gravel road to Capitol Gorge, where it then reverted to a graded dirt road. The road to Pleasant Creek was a narrow, graded dirt road. There was also the one-mile dirt spur road into Grand Wash, plus seven scenic pullouts. The entire Scenic Drive was owned and maintained by the National Park Service. [102] The South Draw jeep track that runs south of Pleasant Creek and continues on to Lower Bowns Reservoir in Dixie National Forest is not mentioned in the GMP.
There were approximately 16 miles of constructed or marked trails in the Headquarters District. These included maintained trails to Hickman Bridge, Chimney Rock, Goosenecks, Cassidy Arch, along the Fremont River, and up to the base of the Golden Throne. Other routes, such as those along the bottom of Grand Wash and Capitol Gorge, were unmaintained routes. Some, such as like the Frying Pan Trail, were marked by rock cairns. [103]
Preferred changes to Headquarters District. The only proposed change was to widen and pave spur road out to the Goosenecks Overlook at a cost of $228,000. Alternative 3 had also proposed spending almost $6 million to pave the Scenic Drive as far as Pleasant Creek, but the preferred alternative would keep the Scenic Drive gravel. [104]
The only new trail proposed was a two-mile loop through the historic Fruita area, connecting the campground with the picnic area, orchards, schoolhouse, Hickman Bridge trailhead, and visitor center. It was also proposed that trailhead parking be added at Pleasant Creek to encourage use of the canyon route, as well as more backcountry use in general by backpackers and equestrians.
Existing Conditions. The only South District roads mentioned in the GMP are the Notom and Burr Trail roads, which intersect near The Post, and an unmaintained four-wheel drive road up Upper Muley Twist Canyon to the Strike Valley viewpoint trailhead. The Burr Trail and lower section of the Notom Road were maintained by Garfield County; the portion of the Notom Road north of the county line was maintained by Wayne County. Other known roads, such as the Halls Creek jeep road and the Rainy Day, Terry, and North Coleman Canyon mine access roads were not mentioned, most likely because they were considered permanently closed. All trails in the south district were unmaintained, backcountry routes. [105]
Preferred Changes. No major alterations were seen for the Notom Road. It was proposed that small, five-car parking areas be added at Burro, Cottonwood, and Five-Mile washes and Sheets Gulch. While it was assumed that some change would occur to the Burr Trail, no specific alternatives were considered in the GMP. According to the general management plan, the anticipated increase in visitation resulting from the road's improvement might necessitate construction of a permanent contact station, employee housing, and a primitive, expandable campground at the foot of the Burr Trail switchbacks. [106]
The only new road proposed anywhere in the park would change the access to Strike Valley Overlook. The plan recommended that the old road through Upper Muley Twist be turned into a foot trail, and that a new, 2.5-mile gravel road be constructed from a point further west on the Burr Trail to a 15-car parking area at the Strike Valley trailhead. Gravel would also be applied to the rough, often impassable road over Bureau of Land Management land out to the Brimhall Bridge/Halls Creek Overlook Trail. New trails in the South District would be built at Bitter Creek Divide, with a spur trail to the Oyster Shell Reef. [107]
It should be emphasized that all these improvements were contingent on road improvements and the corresponding increase in visitation. Until the roads were upgraded, the NPS preferred that little change occur in the South District of Capitol Reef.
Existing Conditions. The two main access roads into the North District were the Caineville Wash and Hartnet roads. Both were graded dirt, maintained by Wayne County. Like the roads in the South District, they were considered impassable when wet, but the North District roads were much rougher and passable only to high clearance two-wheel or four-wheel drive vehicles. Short spur roads led from the Hartnet road to Lower South Desert Overlook, the Upper South Desert Viewpoint, and the Cathedral Valley Viewpoint. Spurs off Caineville Wash Road led to lower Cathedral Valley and the Temples of the Sun and Moon. It is assumed that these roads were also maintained by the county. The access roads up to Fremont Junction to the north or over Thousand Lake Mountain to the west are also mentioned. [108] By 1982, the former roads into the South Desert were closed and off-road vehicle use was prohibited.
Preferred Changes. Unlike the 1973 master plan proposals, no new development or road improvements were sought for the North District. Visitor access would be limited to the existing roads and hiking routes from Lower South Desert Overlook to Jailhouse Rock, from the Hartnet Road out to Middle Desert Viewpoint and the Lower Cathedral Valley Overlook. An additional trail was planned around the Wall of Jericho in Upper Cathedral Valley.
The 1982 Capitol Reef General Management Plan called for few significant changes in terms of roads or trails. The new Strike Valley access was the only new road planned, and only the short Goosenecks access was recommended to be paved. New trails would be limited to increasing the marked backcountry routes and creating a new, two-mile loop trail through Fruita.
Since 1982, little has changed in the still-isolated backcountry areas of Capitol Reef National Park. There are a few widened trailhead parking areas and improved trail markings in Upper and Lower Muley Twist Canyons in the South District. There is also a new dirt access road into the Oak Creek trailhead, necessitated by complaints from Sandy Ranch that the old access road crossed its property. [109]
In the north, a new trail was constructed by former Backcountry Ranger Larry Vensel out to the Wall of Jericho in Cathedral Valley. There are have been no other significant changes to the North District's roads or trails.
While Scenic Drive was paved in 1987 as far as Capitol Gorge, the Goosenecks Road is still gravel. New trails to Navajo Knobs and the wagon road loop and better access to Spring Canyon have increased trail variety in the headquarters area. Rangers have also marked a new trail from the highway across from the visitor center going up behind the "castle" formation. Surprisingly, after a steady increase during the early 1980s, backcountry use in the park has remained relatively stable during the 1990s.
Last Updated: 10-Dec-2002


text:
Your Crap Archivist brings you the finest in forgotten and bewildering crap culled from basements, thrift stores, estate sales and flea markets. I do this for one reason: Knowledge is power. Tackle, Block, StopAuthor: Charlotte Graeber and Joe BoddyPublisher: Thomas Nelson PublishersDate: 1985Discov ... More >>
Has any present Supreme Court justice seen a cop lying on the witness stand?


text:
S.C.I Box
Your Partner in Packaging
About Us
Contact Us
Welcome to our website.
S.C.I manufactures all types of shipping containers and inner components. We are your source for small, medium and high quantity containers of all sizes. S.C.I constantly performs to an exceedingly high level of quality exhibited by our less than one-half percent internal and customer reject record.
S.C.I appreciates the opportunity to be considered as your corrugated supplier. We look forward to our partnership with you and having you as a valued customer. As our history shows, our success and growth is built on taking care of our customers and providing the level of quality and service they want and have come to expect.
Speciality Products
Extensive Capabilities
We manufacture using a variety of mediums:
Foam - All Densities
Laminating - Foam - Corrugated
Build-Up and Pre-Assembly
Wood - Speciality Boxes or Pallets
Notch Fold and Triple Wall
We have extensive manufacturing capabilities. We can match your requirements. Our capabilities include:
Large and Jumbo Presses
Large and Jumbo Diecutters
Triple-Wall and Build-Up Notch Folding


text:
My dad & Kells.
My dad got the Lace Up logo tattooed on his arm because this movement means so much to me & he fully understands why I love Kells the way that I do. This is the most beautiful picture to me.
"Listen. Your music does a lot for my daughter. She can relate to everything you say, just like everyone else in EST, but I shit you not man, every time she plays 'Letter To My Fans' her whole body fills with goosebumps. I've never seen music affect somebody in that way. Thank you for giving her something to believe in, dude."
Worlds Greatest Dad.