At Dumpster Labs, we strive to bring you the best service at the best price available. We have a wide selection of dumpster sizes in stock in Fort Mitchell, AL, with flexible & timley pickup and delivery. Give us a call today for all your dumpster rental and roll off needs.
These kind of roll down dumpsters are probably the hottest size utilized amongst property owners. They are ideal for getting rid of extra trash immediately after dealing with some general upkeep on a home, especially when enhancing or cleansing room in the attic.
Don't trust a bid from a crap hauler that does not present to come out and give free on-site quotes. It is not possible for a crap removal need to provide you with an accurate price devoid of seeing just what junk as well as waste items you ought to be hauled absent. In addition it is pleasant to get a great on-site quote. Re-decorating a way of figuring out the quality of customer support a company delivers without paying money. This is your possibility to observe the number of the truck. Dimension does matter! Fortunately, there are dumpster positives out there that will take care of the series and the convenience of the trash you're reducing. If you are looking pertaining to comprehensive cleanout enable, ask around from different dumpster firms to find out exactly who offers that will type of service. Knowing exactly who offers precisely what ahead of time will help you make an informed decision when it comes to hiring a dumpster service.
Do you desire your land to stand on the list of top countries of the world? If yes, then motivate yourself to promote recycling of the squander in Eco-friendly fashion there by lessening the impact of pollution about the environment. Not everyone who produces the squander knows the entire process of recycling, hence the customer is in dilemma once again at this moment. Professional 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell, AL carrier's networks in the market delivers spellbound services doing your task simple at very affordable cost. These kind of professional 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell, AL carrier's networks being an skilled in the industry takes a credited care to make sure that the disposed squander is recycled in enviromentally friendly friendly fashion. Service providers present dumpsters on rental foundation in order to defend against your created waste and take care of the article responsibility of recycling the particular waste Eco-friendly fashion.
Let's now hop on on the charges to these services which might be really not expensive. Every company may offer another fee design. Some demand flat fee for the service per day and others may offer the packing containers for a 7 days or much less. Some firms may offer more affordable rates. You simply need to beware of invisible costs which may be hiding below those promises. To avoid any unwanted unexpected situations, make sure you go through the terms and conditions on the company supplying you with the services.
Obtained trash? Dumpster rental as well as full-service trash haulers provides the tailored junk eradication service you would like for your precise needs! Before you choose a 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell, AL company, service selections vary consequently sift through all of them and work out the best one for you.
Let us talk about the reason behind every one of these horrifying troubles affecting the planet of Canada; it is the one and only our dangerous deeds. We're contaminating the surroundings by means of disposing the particular solid squander in inappropriate way. Bed mattress the air pollution of the condition affected by inappropriate disposal of waste? Your solid squander generated as a result of household tasks and professional projects while piled up from our job position for longer period of time, emits toxic gas into the surroundings contaminating air. The squander waiting at the job place will get accumulated with the particles probing the workers to many infectious diseases. Many residents on the state opt to channel the garbage into normal water. Contaminating water by getting rid of the strong waste will result in making the particular survival of inhabitants in water miserable. Consumption of this afflicted water will certainly affect the health of citizens as well.
Every single community tidy up project involves a community coming together to clean upwards their setting. Safety is a consideration for those who go walking or play around a picture that has waste, debris as well as rubble into their community. Your area, church or even community heart can enjoy a reliable environmental tidy up project having a construction 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell. As the helping palms come together to keep your environment neat and safe for their children, loved ones, and good friend a design 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell is the best alternative in getting examine of all the waste materials and dust.
Large assignments that generate huge a great deal of waste create 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell inevitable. People dare not really step forward for any 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell to home the trash with the fear of high costs. They might have invested a tremendous sum of money with the completion of the work. They cannot even think of paying off the trash on self because it involves massive risk with regards to health and investment in terms of money and time. They look out there for a way to select the dumpster at lower price.
A new through research really needs to be conducted so as to escape from the particular fake enterprise services in the market. Getting linked to the good company will give the best returns. There are many factors that must be taken into consideration for example promptness in providers, customer centric service, as well as transparency within pricing. The most crucial one this is transparency within pricing. This specific factor can be a standalone credential to measure the particular honesty from the company within providing good quality service to the customers can use and this performs a vital role within increasing the subscriber base and gaining their devotion.
Industries use trash rental providers to home their waste materials on finishing of their output process utilizing the responsibility with regard to environmental problems. industries typically requires substantial sized Dumpster in order to dispose their particular waste without they hurting the environment. The commercial waste includes construction waste materials which is result of construction work with progress many different projects.
The tiniest next day dumpster is for smaller assignments and it is 10 cubic lawns in size. If you have a smaller household with smaller rooms compared to the smallest next day dumpster is perfect for the needs you have. If you are cleaning out or redesigning your basement this is the ideal size. Or you do not have an extremely large home than the 10 cubic backyard next day dumpster is for you.
Now comes in the question how to choose a ideal company together with affordable cost. If you want to decide on any of the company for this service and are confused about which one to go with then net is the best manual. On internet you'll find many companies delivering such providers. You can compare quotes and earn your decision relaxing at home. Internet can even allow you to pay for the skills online with your credit card or any other options which the company could provide you with.
Help make your dream home a reality. Don't simply assume that the particular contractor hired to remove your cabinets are going to be removing the dust; do not worry if you see the pile amassing. Call today this will let you 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell delivered the very next day. There is no need in order to bag waste or break it down as you need in order to for the neighborhood trash pickup truck. Keep your house looking clear during the design process having a dumpster.
Yet dumpster accommodations are not one-size-fits-all. To help you keep the costs in balance, you pay exclusively for the receptacle size that meets your number of trash. Consequently whether you rent a 10-, 20-, or 30-yard capacity dumpster, you may have precisely the expanse of space you need to jettison all your junk. Speak to your local junk hauling program today for any free, no-obligation calculate on the different sizes of dumpsters.
Some sort of rolloff dumpster is a larger than what you see typically dumpster which is transported to your location, generally filled up to help capacity, and then picked up once again. If you need a dumpster and it's really your first moment, then check out a few great sites on the net first. They have got everything structured to get you the local dumpster almost as rapid as you might ever want to buy. Because it's local, that means the actual dumpster costs less, and will also arrive quicker.
As the evening approaches, will set things up. Mark your property as a selling participant. Start off marking the items with the price tag you think you can actually sell it for. Be realistic about these costs; if you think you may make more on an auction site, sell there instead-but in case you really could hardly sell it on the net, don't expect a great exorbitant price tag in person! Obtain tables or old bedsheets to display things on. Commence early the early morning of through setting every thing out where individuals can easily see these individuals, grab yourself any chair and also a brimmed hat, and prepare to sell! Some sort of roll off of 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell, AL looks as being a miniature dumpster that you can rent for your own personal or business use. You can get these kind of dumpsters in get in touch with sizes which include some genuinely big dimensions that will competitor the ones you make use of at your local dumpster. You may be asking yourself just precisely why they are known as roll off of 40 Yard Dumpster in Fort Mitchell, ALs to start with. Well the key reason why they are known as roll off of dumpsters is because they drive them on a big truck. The truck will pick up and the dumpster will actually roll off of.
Let us discuss the reason behind all these horrifying problems affecting the earth of Ak; it is the one and only our dangerous deeds. We are contaminating your surroundings through disposing the actual solid waste materials in inappropriate way. How's the polluting of the environment of the point out affected by inappropriate disposal connected with waste? The solid waste materials generated by means of household assignments and business projects as soon as piled up in our job spot for longer period of time, gives off toxic un wanted gas into the ambiance contaminating atmosphere. The waste materials waiting in your job spot will get gathered with the airborne dirt and dust probing employees to many contagious diseases. A number of residents of the state decide to channel the trash into water. Contaminating the water by throwing the stable waste will lead to making the actual survival connected with inhabitants in the water miserable. Intake of this afflicted water will probably affect the health of residents as well.
Those are the most convenient way to help dispose of people wastes. Due to these waste materials management businesses for providing you dumpsters on rent where you can deposits different types of people waste created at the construction site such as disposal meals packages storage units made of cardstock etc.


text:
Il teatro di Sabratha è un teatro romano dell'antica città di Sabratha, nella provincia romana dell'Africa proconsolare, oggi in Tripolitania (Libia).
L'edificio conserva il colonnato della scena (scaenae frons), su tre ordini, quasi completamente ricostruito e una serie di bassorilievi che decorano la base del proscenio verso l'orchestra (pulpitum). Poteva accogliere circa 5.000 spettatori.

Storia

La data di costruzione dell'edificio è stimata tra la fine del II e gli inizi del III secolo d.C., che fu periodo di grande prosperità per l'Africa proconsolare. Antonino Di Vita ritiene sia stato edificato sotto il regno di Commodo (180-192) o di Settimio Severo (193-211).

Alcune iscrizioni rinvenute nel teatro testimoniano che era ancora in uso alla metà del IV secolo. L'edificio era stato probabilmente danneggiato in occasione dei terremoti che colpirono la città nel 306 e nel 310 e del terremoto del 365. Fu abbandonato dopo un incendio, testimoniato dallo strato di ceneri osservato al momento dello scavo, e fu occupato da abitazioni private. Fu utilizzato come cava di materiale di reimpiego durante la rioccupazione bizantina dell'Africa settentrionale nel VI secolo.

Quando la Libia divenne una colonia italiana, il teatro fu scavato da Renato Bartoccini nel 1927 e da Giacomo Guidi, a partire dal 1928. Dal 1932 Guidi si occupò della ricostruzione della scena, sulla base dei filari di muratura ancora in piedi e delle numerose colonne rinvenute. I lavori si conclusero nel 1937 ad opera di Giacomo Caputo e il teatro fu inaugurato alla presenza di Benito Mussolini con una rappresentazione dell'Edipo re di Sofocle.

Dal 1982 il teatro, insieme a tutto il sito archeologico di Sabratha, è inserito tra i patrimoni UNESCO. Il teatro e le sue murature, in pietra locale friabile, sono soggetti all'erosione degli agenti atmosferici e a possibili atti di vandalismo a seguito della frequentazione turistica. La situazione politica instabile della Libia a partire dal 2011 preoccupa le autorità.

Architettura

Il teatro si trova presso il foro cittadino, con la cavea rivolta verso il mare, a nord, sensibilmente disassato rispetto alla pianta regolare del quartiere.
L'edificio è costruito in blocchi di arenaria rossastra proveniente da cave in prossimità della città, in origine rivestiti di stucco. Le fondazioni poggiano su un sottosuolo roccioso, una leggera depressione del quale venne utilizzata per ricavarvi l'orchestra.

Cavea

Le gradinate della cavea semicircolare si appoggiano su una struttura con facciata ad arcate su tre piani (due parzialmente ricostruiti). Gli archi poggiano su pilastri di ordine dorico e sono inquadrati da lesene con fusti lisci di ordine corinzio.
Le 24 arcate al piano terra davano accesso a un corridoio anulare interno: da qui si poteva accedere alle estremità a due ingressi (vomitoria), che scendevano in leggera discesa verso l'orchestra, collegati fra loro, inoltre, da un secondo corridoio anulare più interno; sempre dal corridoio più esterno altre sei aperture davano su scale che salivano ad una galleria superiore, da cui altri cinque vomitoria consentivano l'accesso ai gradini della cavea; sulla galleria si aprivano inoltre ambienti di servizio o per gli spettatori.

Le gradinate della cavea erano divise in tre livelli (maeniana): quello inferiore (ima cavea), tuttora conservato, di 12 gradini, era diviso in sei settori (cunei) per mezzo di sette scalette. Il secondo livello (media cavea) aveva 7 gradini ed era diviso in sette settori, accessibili dai cinque vomitoria già visti. Il terzo livello, oggi scomparso, doveva avere altri 15 gradini, in pietra oppure costruiti in legno.

Scena

Il muro che chiudeva la scena (scaenae frons) aveva un'altezza complessiva di 22 m ed è stato ricostruito nelle forme originarie con l'anastilosi delle 96 colonne di ordine corinzio che lo decoravano. Le diverse dimensioni delle colonne hanno permesso di attribuire i resti ai tre ordini sovrapposti, con fusti rispettivamente di 5,54 m di altezza per il primo ordine, di 4,90 m per il secondo e di 3,65 m per il terzo. I fusti sono di marmo pavonazzetto al primo ordine, di marmo bianco al secondo e di marmo pavonazzetto e granito al terzo.. I fusti si presentano con molte varianti: lisci, scanalati o scanalati a spirale o anche scanalati per due terzi dell'altezza e lisci sul terzo rimanente.

Il muro si apriva con tre porte, collocate sul fondo di grandi esedre semicircolari: quella centrale (regia) larga 1,95 m, quelle laterali (hospitales) 1,37 m. Le porte sono inquadrate da edicole di due colonne sui tre ordini, distaccate dal resto del colonnato e quelle inferiori più grande delle altre.

Palcoscenico e orchestra
Il palcoscenico sul quale si recitava (scaena), ha una larghezza di 42,70 m per una profondità di 8,55 m ed è rialzato di 1,38 m rispetto all'orchestra. Era anticamente costituito da un tavolato in legno poggiato su una serie di muretti. Gli attori vi accedevano o dalle porte della scaenae frons, oppure da sue sale che si trovavano sui lati e che comunicavano anche con il corridoio anulare sotto la cavea. Queste sale erano pavimentate lussuosamente in marmi policromi e le pareti erano rivestite in lastre di marmo bianco: questa decorazione è stata in parte ricomposta.

Lo spazio sotto il palcoscenico (hyposcenium) era accessibile mediante una piccola scala di 11 gradini, per le esigenze della rappresentazione. Una sorta di stretto canale anteriormente serviva ad ospitare il sipario.

L'orchestra è pavimentata con lastre in marmo proconnesio. Quattro gradini bassi e ampi ospitavano i seggi lignei delle persone di riguardo, separata dalla cavea per mezzo di una balaustra di 1,50 m di altezza.
L'acqua piovana era raccolta da una canalizzazione che passava sotto la scena

Rilievi del pulpitum

Il muro del dislivello che separa la scena dall'orchestra (pulpitum) presentava tre nicchie semicircolari, in corrispondenza delle esedre della scaenae frons, alternate ad altre quattro a pianta rettangolare. Le sporgenze tra le nicchie sono decorate da due piccole colonne e su tutta la lunghezza del muro sono presenti una serie di bassorilievi in marmo bianco, di varie tematiche:
 avancorpo che maschera le scalette che salgono sul palcoscenico: due danzatrici
 nicchia rettangolare: sul fondo gruppo di attori o di filosofi, ai lati disco solare su una colonna, sei rotoli legati posati su un piedistallo e uno aperto su un leggio
 avancorpo: Fortuna o Nemesi con ruota
 nicchia semicircolare: le nove Muse
 avancorpo: piedi di una figura panneggiata
 nicchia rettangolare: sul fondo scena di pantomima, sui lati un cesto e forse un altare
 avancorpo: rilievo mancante
 nicchia semicircolare centrale: personificazione delle città di Sabratha e di Roma, circondate da soldati e tra due scene di sacrificio (a sinistra una libagione, forse da Settimio Severo e da Caracalla)
 avancorpo: Mercurio col caduceo portante Bacco fanciullo
 nicchia rettangolare: sul fondo forse scena di tragedia, ai lati due maschere teatrali
 avancorpo: Ercole
 nicchia semicircolare: giudizio di Paride e le tre Grazie
 avancorpo: Vittoria
 nicchia rettangolare: scena di pantomima
 avancorpo che maschera la scaletta: simmetricamente al primo, danzatrici

Note

Bibliografia
Giacomo Guidi, "Il teatro romano di Sabratha", in Africa italiana, 3, 1930, pp. 1–52 (vedi anche  René Cagnat, "Notes de lecture sur Il teatro romano di Sabratha de Giacomo Guidi", in Le Journal de savants, maggio 1931, pp. 193–199, con testo on line su Persee.fr).
Giacomo Caputo, Il teatro romano di Sabratha e l'architettura teatrale africana, l'Erma di Bretschneider, Roma, 1959.
 Jean-Claude Lachaux, Théâtres et amphithéâtres d'Afrique proconsulaire, Aix-en-Provence, Édisud, 1970.
 Robert Polidori, Antonino Di Vita, Ginette Di Vita-Evrard, Lidiano Bacchielli, La Libye antique. Cités perdues de l'Empire romain, Editions Mengès, 1998, ISBN 2-8562-0400-7.
 Frank Sear, Roman théâtres. An architectural study, Oxford University Press, 2006, ISBN 978-0-19-814469-4.
 Claude Sintes, Libye antique, un rêve de marbre, Paris, Imprimerie nationale, 2010, ISBN 978-2-7427-9349-5.

Altri progetti

Collegamenti esterni

Patrimoni dell'umanità della Libia
Sabratha
Siti archeologici romani in Libia
Sabratha

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaWikipedia


I had a doctor's appointment the morning of this storytime, and I showed up at work just in time for storytime, but I didn't have time to take a picture of Quacky first. So we are Quacky-less in this post. You're all very disappointed, I'm sure.
This is a story about a monster from planet tickle. He flies around in his space ship and lands on distant planets to tickle cute little creatures. Told in rhyme, it points out various body parts (including some tricky ones, like arm pits.) As we were reading, I'd ask the children where said body parts are: "Where's your tummy/chin/arm pits?" The interactive aspect, along with the brightly colored illustrations kept the kids interested throughout the entire story. And the library assistant who helps me with storytime liked this one so much that she checked it out after storytime so that she can read it to her grandson!
I shamelessly stole this one from the absolutely brilliant Mel from Mel's Desk (and the astronaut clip art is courtesy of Anne from So Tomorrow.) We sang this to the tune of 'If You're Happy and You Know It,' and we stomped, clapped our hands and patted our heads at the appropriate parts.
This is a whimsical book about all the types of stars we encounter in our world. Very cute, though it worked better with the older kids in the crowd than it did with the younger ones.
I got this idea from Sunflower Storytime. Everyone crouched down low and put his/her hands (palms together) over his/her head. We then began the countdown from 10 all the way to 1. Then we shouted 'BLASTOFF' and jumped high into the air. The children loved this one, and we did it several times.
This is a very simple story about a girl who's getting a push on the swing by her father, and she keeps exclaiming 'Higher! Higher!' until she's up in outer space. The children loved exclaiming 'Higher! Higher!' along with me, and the parents got a chuckle out of the ending ('Again!').
This story is about a little boy showing us his home by starting out in the universe and then zooming in (hemisphere, country, etc.). It has rhyme and bright illustrations, but it's a bit on the long/repetitive side, and the children lost interest halfway into it despite my asking questions about the story to try to keep them interested.


text:
Q: Please explain break and continue on Objective-C First excuse my newbie question. I am learning Objective C and very new to programming itself.
Can you guys explain me what causes a break or continue inside a loop?
For example, what is the difference between the two codes?
 for (int i=0; i<100; i++) {
      if ([self okToProceed]) {
         [self doSomething];
      } else {
         break;
      }
  }

and
  for (int i=0; i<100; i++) {
      if ([self okToProceed]) {
         [self doSomething];
      } else {
         continue;
      }
  }

Will the first code stop the loop the first time okToProceed returns false and the second loop simply continue to run, but doing nothing when okToProceed is false?

A: break will exit the loop completely, continue will just skip the current iteration and will carry on the next one.
For example in your loop in let's say i is equal to 50 and you put break the loop will exit the loop but if you use continue it will skip this iteration and it will start the next one - i will be equal 51.

A: A break statement exits the loop.
You can think of it as a means to create loop exit conditions.
For example, in your code: for(int i=0; i<100; i++), i<100 is a loop condition.
i.e. loop will exit if this condition is not met.
Similarly, inside if you have something like if(i == 34) { break; }.
This will exit the loop when value of i reaches 34 even though the loop exit condition specified was i<100.

A continue statement is used to skip to the next loop cycle.
This statement is used to basically avoid running the rest of the code within the loop.
Example:
for(i=0; i<5; i++) {
   if(i == 3) {
      continue;
   }
   print(i);
}

This loop will print 0 1 2 4.
When i will be 3, continue will skip to the next loop iteration and the statements after continue (i.e. print(i); will not execute).
Ofcourse, the loop condition is checked before the loop runs.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


text:
<!DOCTYPE html>
<!--
Copyright 2016 The Chromium Authors. All rights reserved.
Use of this source code is governed by a BSD-style license that can be
found in the LICENSE file.
-->

<link rel="import" href="/tracing/core/test_utils.html">
<link rel="import" href="/tracing/extras/importer/trace_event_importer.html">
<link rel="import" href="/tracing/metrics/v8/execution_metric.html">
<link rel="import" href="/tracing/value/histogram_set.html">

<script>
'use strict';

tr.b.unittest.testSuite(function() {
  test('executionMetricBasic', function() {
    var model = tr.c.TestUtils.newModel();
    var histograms = new tr.v.HistogramSet();

    tr.metrics.v8.executionMetric(histograms, model);

    [
      'v8_execution_cpu_total',
      'v8_execution_wall_total',
      'v8_execution_cpu_self',
      'v8_execution_wall_self',
      'v8_parse_lazy_cpu_self',
      'v8_parse_lazy_wall_self',
      'v8_compile_full_code_cpu_self',
      'v8_compile_full_code_wall_self',
      'v8_compile_ignition_cpu_self',
      'v8_compile_ignition_wall_self',
      'v8_recompile_synchronous_cpu_total',
      'v8_recompile_synchronous_wall_total',
      'v8_recompile_concurrent_cpu_total',
      'v8_recompile_concurrent_wall_total',
      'v8_recompile_overall_cpu_total',
      'v8_recompile_overall_wall_total',
      'v8_optimize_code_cpu_total',
      'v8_optimize_code_wall_total',
      'v8_deoptimize_code_cpu_total',
      'v8_deoptimize_code_wall_total',
    ].forEach(function(name) {
      assert.isDefined(histograms.getHistogramNamed(name));
    });
  });

  test('noDoubleCounting', function() {
    var events = [
      {name: 'V8.Execute', args: {}, pid: 52, ts: 0, cat: 'foo', tid: 53,
        ph: 'B'},
      {name: 'V8.Execute', args: {}, pid: 52, ts: 100, cat: 'foo', tid: 53,
        ph: 'E'},
      {name: 'V8.Execute', args: {}, pid: 52, ts: 20, cat: 'foo', tid: 53,
        ph: 'B'},
      {name: 'V8.Execute', args: {}, pid: 52, ts: 40, cat: 'foo', tid: 53,
        ph: 'E'}
    ];

    var model = tr.c.TestUtils.newModelWithEvents(JSON.stringify(events), {
      shiftWorldToZero: false
    });
    var histograms = new tr.v.HistogramSet();
    tr.metrics.v8.executionMetric(histograms, model);

    var value = histograms.getHistogramNamed('v8_execution_wall_total');
    assert.closeTo(value.running.sum, 0.1, 1e-5);
  });
});
</script>

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaGithub


text:
Jonas Hiller
Top 3 All-Time Ducks Goalies
Charlie Hiller | January 18, 2023
From the moment the Anaheim Ducks joined the league in 1993, they've been blessed with consistency at the goaltending position. One of the hardest positions to account for, the Ducks…
Jonas Hiller's Quick Spiral Out of the NHL
Colton Pankiw | June 16, 2020
In the summer of 2014, the Calgary Flames made a big move when they signed free agent goaltender Jonas Hiller to a two-year, $9 million contract. At the time, this…
Team Switzerland Men's Roster & Preview for Winter Olympics
Alessandro Seren Rosso | February 13, 2018
A hockey nation perennially on the rise but failing to find that extra gear, Switzerland will enter the 2018 Winter Olympics dreaming about a medal but with little chance of…
Flames' Hiller Headed to Swiss Team EHC Biel
Mike Necciai | April 19, 2016
Jonas Hiller, former Anaheim Ducks and Calgary Flames goaltender has reportedly signed a three-year deal with Swiss team EHC Biel. Jonas Hiller signed a three-year deal with #Swiss team EHC…
Anaheim Ducks History: The Number Ones
John Gove | March 14, 2016
The Mighty Ducks/Ducks have been an NHL franchise for 22 seasons. In the grand scheme of things, 22 seasons is not an extremely long time, making Anaheim one of the…
Calgary's Goaltending Problems Key in Flames' Struggles
Ben Shelley | March 4, 2016
Usually when a team is shelling out over $12 million to their goaltenders alone, they would expect a guy in the crease who can stop a puck here and there. Montreal…
Flames Crowded Crease Will Soon Be Empty
Andrew Mendler | February 18, 2016
Eyes will be firmly on the Calgary Flames crease over the next seven weeks as management contemplates what to do about their upcoming goaltending situation. Come July 1 the Flames crease…
Hudler, Hiller the Center of Calgary's Struggles
Andrew Mendler | February 2, 2016
With the NHL regular season on pause for All-Star weekend, many players, GMs and fans around the league have time to reflect on the unofficial first half. For the Calgary…
Report: Calgary Has Interest in Jonathan Bernier
Dustin L. Nelson | December 17, 2015
No, that's not a typo. The Calgary Flames have had interest in taking on Jonathan Bernier's contract during the 2015-16 season. The Calgary Sun's Eric Francis told Sportsnet 590 The…
Jimmy Howard Would be a Fit in Calgary
Jacob Messing | November 23, 2015
Calgary's goaltending has been widely ineffective this season, ranging from Karri Ramo to Jonas Hiller to Joni Ortio. Ramo, 29, leads the three with 13 starts, 6 wins, 3.04 GAA…
THW Live: What's Wrong With The Calgary Flames?
Michael Straw | November 16, 2015
The Calgary Flames were the sweethearts of the NHL last season. With countless third period comebacks and exciting players like Johnny Gaudreau, Sam Bennett and Sean Monahan, everyone thought the Flames were set to rise into a top team in the Western Conference for years. Unfortunately, that just hasn't been the case.
Calgary has gotten off to a poor start even with players like Gaudreau and Monahan playing well. No matter what, they just can't seem to string together multiple wins at a time.
In the latest episode of THW Live!, we talk about the problems plaguing the Flames with reporter Ryan Pike. What has been the biggest issue for the team's lack of success this season, what needs to happen to fix the ship and how long until a major change happens in the organization?
Tune in now to hear what we have to say, and don't forget to subscribe to THW Live! on iTunes. Also, we want to hear your thoughts so contact us on Twitter @TheHockeyWriter, @MikeStrawWrites or @RyanPike using #THWLive. Your comments and questions could be used on an upcoming episode of the show.
Early Struggles Cloud Calgary's Goaltending Future
Ryan Pike | November 15, 2015
The Calgary Flames entered this season with a unique problem. After making the playoffs on the backs of strong performances by veteran goalies Karri Ramo and Jonas Hiller, and a…

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Mary Moore, left, answers questions from her physician, Dr. Sarah Glover, center, and scribe Matt McCoy.
Published on Monday, December 30, 2019
By: Gary Pettus, gpettus@umc.edu
An up-and-coming education program in the School of Health Related Professions is grounded partly on the notion that a key cause of physician burnout is a keyboard.
That is, a computer keyboard – one used in the cause of electronic health records.
It's a serious proposition considering that family physicians and other specialists often link dissatisfaction and stress with the demands of digital documentation, which have meant less time for meaningful contact with patients at work and with loved ones at home.
SHRP's new Medical Scribe Specialist Program is designed to, among other things, supply them with experts explicitly trained to relieve those documentation burdens and recover that lost time, said Dr. Cynthia Casey, associate professor of health sciences and chair of the Health Sciences Program.
"Physicians are seeing more and more patients; documentation is so important now. Having a scribe helps with billing and coding issues and frees up the physician to be more one-on-one with patients. It increases patient satisfaction and physician satisfaction.
"Having a scribe is another layer to ensure more accurate coding. When coding is not done correctly, hospitals lose revenue."
Accepting only students with bachelor's degrees makes the program a first-of-its-kind in the arena of formal medical scribe training, which isn't offered anywhere else in the state, Casey said. Right now, there are few education requirements, beyond a high school diploma, for applicants to such programs as ScribeAmerica, a company that "prefers" a college degree and computer and typing skills.
Reulet
"Having a post-baccalaureate degree increases the quality of the scribes who will be working out there," said Britney Reulet, director of the Health Sciences Program and part of program's trio of instructors, including Casey and Dr. Pamela Jones, assistant professor of health sciences, in SHRP.
Working out there right now for Dr. Sarah Glover is her current scribe, Matt McCoy, who earned a microbiology degree at Mississippi State University.
"God bless Matt," said Glover, professor of medicine and director of the Division of Digestive Diseases at UMMC. She has also worked scribe-less, she said.
"Yes, it was horrible. I hated it. I was always behind on my charting."
Glover hated it enough to figure up, computer keyboard-wise, the average number of "clicks" it took to document one gastro-intestinal patient visit: "Four hundred."
Her arithmetic was part a study she presented at the University of Florida in Gainesville, where she started a pilot medical scribe program before arriving at UMMC a year ago.
Glover's report, which introduced the program at UF, swarmed with such tantalizing findings as these: With a scribe, clinic appointment length dropped by 13.5 minutes; between the first quarters of fiscal years 2015 and 2016, total charges billed rose by $71,439; the extra revenue for the first quarter was 536 percent higher than the salary of the scribe.
"Documentation stress decreased," she wrote.
"The use of scribes improved the physician-patient relationship, clinical efficiency, physician productivity, bone density screening, and vaccinations for flu and pneumonia," the report concluded.
When Glover was hired at UMMC, she had a provision for a scribe written into her contract. "Scribes catch a lot of things I might miss," Glover said. "They improve the quality of care." Enter McCoy.
"Matt is technologically savvy," Glover said. "He made changes to templates and streamlined forms, all of which helped improve patient flow in our clinic."
McCoy is apparently only one of two Medical Center employees with "scribe" officially attached to their titles, as in "Epic Scribe," a reference to the electronic health record system in place at UMMC since 2012.
Employed by Glover, McCoy works in the clinic and lab with the physician, documenting on his laptop her spoken observations during gastrointestinal procedures or, in the exam room, a patient's history, symptoms, etc. Later, he types up an after-visit summary and a patient plan of action, which uploads to MyChart.
"I can book more cases because I have more downtime," Glover said. "It almost doubles my productivity."
Scribe Emily Turner, left, works on a patient's chart alongside Dr. Pegah Hosseini-Carroll.
Emily E. Turner, the other medical scribe, works for Dr. Pegah Hosseini-Carroll, assistant professor of medicine in the Division of Digestive Diseases. "Having a scribe beside me allows me to focus more on the patient; I can make more eye contact," said Carroll she reviewed patient-visit notes with Turner, an MSU graduate with an accounting degree.
"Emily saves me a lot of time. I'm faster when she is with me." Still, Carroll is not 100 percent scribed-up: Turner splits her time among various doctors. Which may explain why Carroll spent 10 hours over the Thanksgiving holiday catching up on her charting work at home. "I was on Epic the other night until 11," she said.
Typing fatigue has certainly taken hold among dermatologists, said Dr. Robert Brodell.
Brodell
"Until about five years ago, dermatology had the happiest doctors in America," said Brodell, chair of dermatology at UMMC. "But in a recent survey we're now in the middle of the pack. There's only one logical reason." EHR, he said.
When the survey asked physicians how they have improved their work life, one replied: "Say(ing) no to unreasonable requests to function as a data-entry clerk."
"The electronic health record has benefits," Brodell said, "but it also makes you 30 percent less efficient." Faculty members spend an average of 60 to 90 minutes daily on EHR after work, Brodell said.
For evidence, he cites an article for which he is listed as a co-author; its conclusion: adding assistants to perform a scribe's tasks allows physicians to "see more patients and generate more income."
In fact, there are other scribes at the Medical Center, although you probably shouldn't call them that. Often, they are nurses or nurse practitioners – their real jobs – or, in many cases, students in medical school or on the way there.
Turner, for one, will begin pursuing her medical degree at UMMC this coming fall; her job as a scribe has enabled her to shadow a physician.
And the person who trained her, McCoy, trained himself on the job. He has applied for a physician assistant program he hopes to enter by early summer; as a scribe, he's able to meet that program's admissions requirement for clinical hours accrued.
In other words, for McCoy and Turner, their current occupation allows them to literally write their own tickets as they journey toward other careers.
As a physician, Brodell has dealt with this dynamic of transience. Last year, he hired as a scribe a prospective UMMC medical student who was then accepted to a different school and left.
"That tells me that this is not the correct way to use medical scribes in a clinic," Brodell said.
A better way, Reulet and others say, is to put in place an education program that encourages its students to embark on medical scribe careers. SHRP's course, which offers classes online, had five applicants by year's end, and Casey hopes to double that, at least before the March 1 application deadline.
"In our program, students can do their clinical work at Merit Health hospitals and Baptist Medical Center, and at any site where UMMC has a clinical affiliation," Reulet said. "We hope that will be an advantage.
As a medical scribe, McCoy, left, has helped "improve the quality of [patient] care," said Glover, right.
"This gives those sites students that can be molded there and hired when they graduate."
As Glover put it: "It's a return on your investment to have a scribe. Do you really want to pay a physician, say, $100 an hour to do charting?"
Pay for a medical scribe, nationwide, averages $12.33 an hour. Casey hopes that the new crop of specially trained scribes, with the promise of greater health records accuracy, will merit $16 to $17 an hour, she said.
Which begs the question: With higher pay, will scribes still be desirable as an investment returner?
That is one of the questions not answered yet, said Dr. Ralph Didlake, associate chancellor for academic affairs and chief academic officer.
Another: Is there a shortage of people available to do the work of a scribe?
Didlake
What is known: "The need for this function is out there," Didlake said. Apparently, that means everywhere: The American College of Medical Scribe Specialists estimates 20,000 scribes were at work by the end of 2014, a number it expects to balloon to 100,000 by 2020.
At UMMC, it was Dr. Jessica Bailey, the dean of SHRP, who helped Didlake appreciate the need for a formal training course.
"She was the primary driver of the idea to start a medical scribe program," he said, "and made a very strong case for it." Didlake became a "strong supporter," then remained one after he realized how the course touches all three Medical Center missions, not just education.
The health care mission is satisfied because graduates will be able to go to work immediately, including at the Medical Center.
Regarding research: "The program provides opportunities for us to test how these graduates function in a real clinical environment," Didlake said. Those findings will be part of a pilot study, which Casey believes will take a couple of years as it measures productivity, patient and doctor satisfaction and more.
It should also answer those hanging questions about scribe shortages and investment returns, said Didlake. And for anyone wondering if an official definition for "medical scribe" is forthcoming, the answer to that is "yes – once the clinical world expresses an interest in it," Didlake said. "We have a high confidence it will."
There is confidence also that the creation of the Medical Scribe Specialist Program represents a new blueprint for breeding other education courses, Didlake said.
"It's only the Medical Center's second project developed from a workforce need." The first, also a SHRP objective that blossomed at Bailey's behest, was a histotechnology program, which graduated its first trainee in 2018.
"This is how we anticipate other positions will be created in the future," Didlake said. The medical scribes training program allows a "certain segment of the workforce to advance themselves into a meaningful role in the clinic.
"It can provide a career ladder for much of our workforce."
In the meantime, Glover is "trolling" for a potential replacement for McCoy. She knows of a drug rep's daughter who may fill the opening, word of which spread rapidly.
"It's a network," Glover said. "Scribes beget scribes." And so it was written.


text:
Is equipment really to blame for the distance problem in golf?
Adam Crawford
It's 2018, we're more than a quarter of the way through Major Season, and there are 58 players on the PGA Tour averaging over 300 yards off the tee. Trey Mullinax is leading the PGA Tour through the Wells Fargo Championship with an average driving distance of 320 yards. Much discussion has been had about the difficulty such averages are placing on the golf courses across the country. Sewn into the fabric of the distance discussion are suggestions by current and past giants of the game to roll back the golf ball.
In a single segment on an episode of Live From The Masters, Brandel Chamblee said, "There's a correlation from when the ProV1 was introduced and driving distance spiked," followed a few minutes later by this: "The equipment isn't the source of the distance, it's the athletes."
So which is it? Does it have to be one or the other? Is there a problem at all?
Several things of interest happened on the PGA Tour in the early 2000s, most of which were entirely driven by the single most dominant athlete of the last 30. First, we saw Tiger Woods win four consecutive majors, the first and only person to do that in the modern era of what are now considered the majors. Second, that same athlete drew enough eyeballs so that Tim Finchem could exponentially increase the prize money golfers were playing for each week. Third, but often the most overlooked, Tiger Woods ushered in fitness to the mainstream of golf. Tiger took what Gary Player and Greg Norman had preached their whole careers and amped it up like he did everything else.
In 1980, Dan Pohl was the longest player on the PGA Tour. He averaged 274 yards off the tee with a 5-foot, 11-inch and 175-pound frame. By 2000, the average distance for all players on the PGA Tour was 274 yards. The leader of the pack that year was John Daly, who was the only man to average over 300 yards. Tiger Woods came in right behind him at 298 yards.
Analysis of the driving distance stats on the PGA Tour since 1980 show a few important statistics: Over the last 38 seasons, the average driving distance for all players on the PGA Tour has increased an average of 1.1 yards per year. When depicted on a graph, it looks like this:
The disparity between the shortest and the longest hitter on the PGA Tour has increased 0.53 yards per year, which means the longest hitters are increasing the gap between themselves and the shortest hitters. The disparity chart fluctuates considerably more than the average distance chart, but the increase from 1980 to 2018 is staggering.
In 1980, there was 35.6 yards between Dan Pohl (longest) and Michael Brannan (shortest – driving distance 238.7 yards). In 2018, the difference between Trey Mullinax and Ken Duke is 55.9 yards. Another point to consider is that in 1980, Michael Brannan was 25. Ken Duke is currently 49 years of age.
The question has not been, "Is there a distance problem?" It's been, "How do we solve the distance problem?" The data is clear that distance has increased — not so much at an exponential rate, but at a consistent clip over the last four decades — and also that equipment is only a fraction of the equation.
Jack Nicklaus was over-the-hill in 1986 when he won the Masters. It came completely out of nowhere. Players in past decades didn't hit their prime until they were in their early thirties, and then it was gone by their early forties. Today, it's routine for players to continue playing until they are over 50 on the PGA Tour. In 2017, Steve Stricker joined the PGA Tour Champions. In 2016, he averaged 278 yards off the tee on the PGA Tour. With that number, he'd have topped the charts in 1980 by nearly four yards.
If equipment was the only reason distance had increased, then the disparity between the longest and shortest hitters would have decreased. If it was all equipment, then Ken Duke should be averaging something more like 280 yards instead of 266.
There are several things at play. First and foremost, golfers are simply better athletes these days. That's not to say that the players of yesteryear weren't good athletes, but the best athletes on the planet forty years ago didn't play golf; they played football and basketball and baseball. Equipment definitely helped those super athletes hit the ball straighter, but the power is organic.
The other thing to consider is that the total tournament purse for the 1980 Tour Championship was $440,000 ($1,370,833 in today's dollars). The winner's share for an opposite-field event, such as the one played in Puerto Rico this year, is over $1 million. Along with the fitness era, Tiger Woods ushered in the era of huge paydays for golfers. This year, the U.S. Open prize purse will be $12 milion with $2.1 million of that going to the winner. If you're a super athlete with the skills to be a golfer, it makes good business sense to go into golf these days. That wasn't the case four decades ago.
Sure, equipment has something to do with the distance boom, but the core of the increase is about the athletes themselves. Let's start giving credit where credit is due.
Pick three golfers to build the ultimate scramble team. Who you got?
Golf swing videos: What you absolutely need to know
Adam Crawford is a writer of many topics but golf has always been at the forefront. An avid player and student of the game, Adam seeks to understand both the analytical side of the game as well as the human aspect - which he finds the most important. You can find his books at his website, chandlercrawford.com, or on Amazon.
Just give them old equipment and let them try it out..
There is a video about it on youtube.(probably more)
Adam, here is a random selection of players with driving averages 20 years apart – 1997 and 2017 (from PGA Tour and Champions Tour)
Vijay Singh 281y and 289
Kenny Perry 277 and 294
Ernie Els 272 and 285
Phil Mickleson 284 and 294
Scott McCarron 284 and 292
Jespet Parnevik 266 and 287
Woody Austin 267 and 283
Jeff Sluman 267 and 277
Jeff Maggert 264 and 281
Kevin Sutherland 266 and 290
Do you really think these guys are better athletes (faster, stronger, more flexible) now than they were 20 years ago?
Dave Tutleman and others are "spot on"- forgive the pun. Rolling back both the COR and MOI on Drivers used on the tour would be a great improvement for fans interested in seeing shot making returning as a more significant factor on the tour-as well as in both Opens.
WOW!!!! 65+ comments revealing the 'secrets' to acquire more distance. 300 yards here I come … 😀
What would be interesting to know is how 42 players are averaging a smash factor of over 1.50 this season? The best average in 2014 was 1.485, which is now 141st in the rankings.
Law Prof
Used to be, back in the days of persimmon woods less than half the size of today's hi-tech drivers, you had to throttle back on your swing, swing smoothly, or you might miss the ball altogether. The hi-tech clubs are driving the fast, ripping swings. But of course, it's always been that way. The swings changed when the game went from feathery balls to gutta percha, and from gutta percha to the wound ball (and Vardon complained bitterly that all the technique was out the window) and from hickory to metal, and so on.
Gary Raymer
Why doesn't someone just take some old equipment and some modern equipment and put it on one of those robotic swing machines and compare the results?
But it's clearly not just the equipment, because just by watching videos its clear the current golfers swing noticeably harder than the golfers of 40-50 years ago.
They can swing harder because the equipment allows them to.
kirk clements
If you need to swing at a certain speed to take advantage of the face flexing then the distance advantage goes to those capable of flexing the face – get rid of the face flexand we will be fine.
Jurren
Comparing 1980 pro's with 2018 pro's results is not proper a/b testing. Like others have said, there were extremely fit professionals in the 60ies that would make most of todays pro's look lazy and fat, and vice versa. Also, no one ever said "Look at John Daly, my wife wants me to be as fit and work out like him". John Daly who led driving distance for a long time, so being fit does not automatically translate to longer drives, of not being fit would outrule you from hitting long drives.
Point I think is that todays equipment enables players to hit their drives at 100% without any fear of major misses, where in the past most people would hit their persimmon driver a bit more carefull (80-90%), which would translate a little bit into a slight loss of distance, but more important: Distance has become so much of a benefit in todays professional game, that the people that hit furthest stand a better chance to succeed than those that don't, where in the past being long was usually offset by one or two misses per round (and hence much less of an advantage).
Very astute comment Jurren about the equipment having greater tolerance on mis-hits, ie tighter dispersion, than the older equipment. The same is probably true of the balls that have less spin off the driver. So yes, players today can swing at near 100% effort without fear. Very good point!
What a lot of nonsense to suggest it's athleticism that causing modern golfers to be so much longer.
Has the author heard of, for example, Arnold Palmer who had the strength and physique of a Rocky Marciano. Yet, if this silly and uninformed article is to be believed, Palmer is much shorter than today's golfers because he's not nearly the athlete of the likes of Dufner, Lowry, etc.
Yes some modern golfers are athletic. But the big difference, making them all hit the ball much further, is obviously equipment. As well as making golf courses of necessity much longer and golf much slower modern equipment has also reduced the premium on skill that was one of the joys of watching great golfers.
"…distance problem…"?!! No, it's the "…distance promise…" built into the newest equipment designs that drives the golf industry. The pros prove to gullible golfers that there is a 300 yard driver at the big box golf store…. for $450 or more. All pros are equipment salesmen… so obvious
Adkskibum
Yeah, sure, it's all about the new breed being athletes, BS. Marc Leishman, Patrick Reed, Jason Dufner, Pat Perez, etc, as if they're great physical specimens. Heck, even Phil called himself middle aged and overweight and he hits it as far as ever. The new breed may keep themselves in better shape, work out more, but that doesn't explain the 30+ yard jump in driving distance. Jack, Arnie, Watson, Snead, Weiskopf, were all good athletes, hitting persimmon drivers and balata balls. It's 80 to 90% the equipment and course manicuring.
Hey Adkskibum, I think you hand-picked a group of players that wouldn't fall into the category of "physical specimens", but if you go through the list of the top 100 players in the OWGR, you'll find that the overwhelming majority of them are in top shape. And it's not just that golfers are in better shape, all athletes are in better shape. The advancements in sports medicine even in the past quarter-century are astounding. I'm not saying that it's the athletes are 100% responsible for the increase, but it's a variable we seem to ignore too frequently in this discussion.
Ray Bennett
The equipment didn't help Tiger – distance wise. He could hit it further when he was an amateur using a small headed metal Cobra driver with a heavy 43″ steel shaft than when he was gym fit using a modern driver. During the final of his last US Amateur he carried a bunker 325 yards off the tee to set up a mid iron to the par 5.
Hi Ray, exactly.
Greg V
No, that just shows that he lost distance when he tried to build his body to be a Navy Seal.
I think Chamblee is right about his point that the modern era of players are just better athletes. But there are other factors too that I think have led to more distance I feel:
1) FAST COURSE CONDITIONS: I think Chamblee may have touched on this (or Nobilo) but the courses are set-up to reward distance and not accuracy now days. Though I do not feel the pros should be playing in major-like rough on wayward drives, they should not be having their drives runout almost 60yds on modern fairways either. Courses play way too fast now days, here in Hawaii where it is more damp than in other places on the continent + common course conditions, you are lucky if your ball rolls out 10-15yds. Now thats a 20-40yd difference than the pros experience. This I feel has had a negative effect on distance and can be controlled.
2) CLUB FITTING: I think clubs are so closely tailored to fit modern players so precisely that players have equipment that just works better for them on a consistent basis. From launch monitors, computerized fitting machines, interchangeable shaft hosels, club companies, shaft companies, etc. You cannot tell me that players in the 1980s were able to verify their distances, "spin rates", try different shafts the way everyone down to the weekend warrior can today. Not to mention club fitting accuracy is so much much better and more accurate than before. This is where "technology" I feel has changed the game, the ability to so closely spec out perfect equipment for an individual and players should benefit from this understandably.
"Along with the fitness era, Tiger Woods ushered in the era of huge paydays for golfers. This year, the U.S. Open prize purse will be $12 milion with $2.1 million of that going to the winner. If you're a super athlete with the skills to be a golfer, it makes good business sense to go into golf these days. That wasn't the case four decades ago."
I don't think this is very valid. Tiger's on course earnings are about $111 million. Derek Jeter? $265 Million. ARod? $400 million. Peyton Manning? $244 million. Eli Manning? $187 Million. Kevin Garnett? $334 million. Kobe Bryant? $323 million.
Yes, Tiger made golf wealthier. But professional golfers still aren't going to make as much in prize money as similarly situated pros in the big three sports.
One thing that I think doesn't get mentioned as much as the club and ball is trackman. Merely knowing how to fit a driver to a player to produce the most distance for a player is huge, especially for the longer guys.
Agronomy is better, too.
I understand what you are saying about the salary but how many 5'8″-6'2″ athletes that you know that are physically capable of doing what the athletes you just named did, who are all 6'3″ 195+lbs and above? The money was one of the biggest reasons there was such a draw for people to do pro golf. The athletes you named are salary athletes, but remember, golf is an entrepreneur sport. You can make a training aid and get rich by exposure, you don't have to play the game to get rich, you can organize events, you can teach, you can market and network to make money in golf. Tiger may have only earned $111 million on course but he is the second billionaire athlete ever and the first to reach that mark while competing in his craft.
So which would you do if you were an average sized person? Would you thrash your body until you can't walk from being hit by guys that can run 4.5 40s at 260-330 lb(see Jerome Bettis) and make about $75 million in a 8-10 year career or play a sport where you walk and acreage to put a ball in a gopher hole with a chance to win $1 million every week and if you win, you get companies throwing money at you to use your name and face to market their products and you can do this for 20+ years?
I think the answer is obvious
Any idiot can see that lengthening golf courses merely plays into the hands of the big hitters. If anything, we should make the courses shorter but trickier and bring everyone into it. Problem solved.
yep….basically todays players have decided to its better to hit 320 and 60% of the fairways than 280 and 75% of the fairways…..instead of choosing to use an 8-100gram shaft they choose to use 55-70 gram for the distance…back in the day there wasnt much of a choice for a stable lightweight shaft…..now there is….and the players have decided the loss of accuracy isnt as important as the loss of distance…..raise the rough…
Golf is not what 2K professionals play. It's what 25M recreational golfers play. When we all start hitting our 485-yard par 5s in two with a driver and a 7-iron, then something would be wrong. Until then, I don't see anything needing to be done about distance.
GD Alumni
Not too sure who has the real problem here. Mostly, it's the golf establishment and the good old boy network of the USGA and R&A along with Jack and some similar types that have their panties in a bunch.
The sport is viable as a commercial venture because it is an entertainment vehicle. Go ahead and kill that if you dare.
The USGA and the R&A have steadfastly refused to "bifurcate" for a wide variety of reasons, not the least of which is the influence of big businesses who sell products to golfers.
The professional game is a different game and the refusal to accommodate that and adjust conditions of competition is ridiculous. Baseball, football, hockey and many others have rules or equipment regulations that recognize the differences between amateurs and professionals. It's time for golf to do the same.
CharlesB
If I recall my golf history correctly, at one time bogey was "Par", and then there was Par which replaced bogey. What we now need is a new definition of Par, call it Subpar.
When I was in high school (1992) the Donald Ross course we played had a bunker about 280 left I could sometimes hit into. From the tees we used in high school (which were the back tees but are now the white tees as a new set of back tees were added) now at the age of 44 I can occasionally fly drive over that bunker. I am the same person/athlete and hit the ball and drivers of today 20 yards farther. Senior tour players now hit the ball much farther than their prime. They are NOT bigger and faster and stronger. It is the ball and equipment of today. Period.
Tourgrinder
Wow! Time for another revisionist history article written by someone probably younger than 40, with some incorrect perspectives. Lesson 1: You simply can't separate the fitness issues and the equipment issues. Yes, I'll agree that overall fitness has definitely improved. No doubt. But so has equipment and agronomy and 'pool table' fairways. You can't separate the distance stats into categories. If you took Dan Pohl out of 1975 or 1980 by way of my time machine, I'll bet you he'd be right up there with Mullinax and all the other big hitters, Koepka and DJ. If you put Tony Finau in 1980 with a 43″ long MacGregor persimmon driver with a heavy steel shaft and a balata Titleist on a fairway that looks like today's roughs, his drives would be right there with those of 1980 Dan Pohl. Every era has its long hitters and short hitters. In my time machine again, I could take a George Bayer from the late 50s or early 60s and put him into 2018 and I'll bet Adam Crawford, or anyone else, a $1 million that he'd be outdriving DJ, Finau or Mullinax. Go ahead — google George Bayer, read about him and his record. And take a look at his fitness. Likewise, I could take the fat and out of shape John Daly or Colt Knost and they'd fit right in with the "lack of fitness" good golfers of yesteryear. Frankly, for flexibility and being limber, I'll still take a 25- or 30-year-old Sam Snead over DJ's flexibility any day. Tiger Woods didn't re-invent fitness for golfers, he just spread the popularity due to his success. Gary Player didn't re-invent it either. There are always going to be fit guys like George Bayer or Gary Player or Dustin Johnson…and there are always going to be guys who prefer to put their feet up and have a drink, such as Jimmy Demaret, John Daly or Pat Perez.
Dave Tutelman
From Brandel Chamblee: "There's a correlation from when the ProV1 was introduced and driving distance spiked." Chamblee was smart enough to say 'correlation', but the context of his remarks implied causation. But something else happened at the same time that is much more arguably causation.
In 2000, Titleist introduced the ProV1. In 1998, the USGA ratified the rule-breaking that had been happening for a few years, by setting the limit on COR at .83. From a perfectly rigid face, the balls at the time would have had a COR of .77. So from somewhat before the ProV1 to somewhat after, we could expect a spike just due to the rapid increase of driver COR in the hands of Tour players. An increase in COR will demonstrably increase distance. Crawford's graph shows a slope (spike?) from 1995 to 2005 of 2.6 yards per year, more than twice the 1980-2018 average.
Let's look at the clubface, not the ProV1, Mr Chamblee.
BWJ
It's mostly equipment. I'm 62 and hit it farther now than I did when I was a mini tour pro in my 20s. USGA/R&A dropped the ball on this. It's like putting aluminum bats in major league baseball. Also, it has reduced the requirement of the true shotmaking dimension of the game as far as I'm concerned. So it's not apples to apples record comparisons like other sports enjoy that set their equipment standards 50 or 100 years ago. Let Ams play the hot gear. Pros should be using wood and balata.
Tucsonsean
Just a couple random observations beyond the ones already made. I'm not bothered by the pros hitting it so much farther than me. They're the top .001 percent of all golfers (according to Frank Thomas); I expect superior performance. But a closer look at some statistics reveal that they often hit little over 50% of their fairways. Also, when CBS used ShotTracker for tee shots this week, even the longest carry was usually less than 270 yds.–there's a lot of roll in those 300+ yard drives. Forget legislating the equipment or the ball. Simply make the courses more challenging, accuracy-wise, with challenging rough and less tightly mown fairways. In 2013, Merion was predicted to be no match for the pros at the Open, and no one–including the winner–broke par.
Myron miller
It truly is a lot of factors, but remember for close to 20 years now, the USGA has tested golf balls for maximum speed hit off the tee with a robot. All golf balls are limited to a given velocity off the tee at a given swing speed (which if i remember correctly was 110mph). That works to a max distance of just under 260 yards. And at one time, that was pretty much the average swing speed for the tour. And this distance limit supposedly if we believe the USGA has held true since then. So the ball speed off the face hasn't changed in over twenty years. yet, the distance amounts have grown noticeably. Why, well, consider the fairways cut way shorter. Average swing speed is closer to 118 -120 mph now with the max hitters over 125-130. no penalty for rough, rough shorter and USGA grooves rule clearly did not do what they said.
Also remember the experiment in Denver a few years ago where they in a practice session provided people with a replica of a persminon wood similar to Arnies that he used in the final round to drive the green on the first hole. Rory of all the players came the closest to driving the green (they could use their own golf balls). And he was about 15+ yards short. Now if it was the golf balls, Why when they were using their own golf balls, couldn't they hit the green if it was entirely the golf ball? Golf driver technology has advanced tremendously since the persimmons. Why has everyone gone to the new metal drivers (even davis love gave up after a few years). they just are that much better. And the biggest difference is NOT distance, but accuracy. Mishits go almost as far and seriously farther than persminnon. Even pro's don't hit it perfectly all the time. But they are close and a metal driver prvoides enough error correct that close is good enough.
Also as he indicates, many players today are ripped from working out. Not many look like the Walrus any more. They all spend so much time in the workout trailers. And that really can make a difference, especially as they age.
PGA Tour average driver swing speed is 113mph (Trackman).
Adam Crawford makes a bunch of good points based on data from 1980 to 2018. I don't know if there was a corresponding increase from 1968 to 1980. But it's probably safe to say that, if there was an increase, it certainly wasn't faster than 1980-2018. In the esteemed 1968 book "Search for the Perfect Swing", Alastair Cochran cites the COR for a hard drive as 0.67. Today it is 0.83, based on control in the Rules of both the ball and the club. Let's see what distance this would account for JUST DUE TO THE EQUIPMENT-BASED COR CHANGE.
I ran some trajectories using TrajectoWare Drive software (which is based on a modern golf ball's aerodynamics). For tour-style clubhead speeds of 115-125mph, this is worth 30 yards of carry distance. If we prorate this distance to just the 1980-2018 interval, using Crawford's straight line, that is still a difference of 23 yards — due entirely to equipment, just an improvement in COR. And that is roughly half of the difference of 44 yards total improvement that Crawford's straight line has between 1980 and 2018.
Tom Philbeck
It's not just the COR change from .67 to .83(which is big), it's also the change in the effect of missing the sweet spot-gear effect. IMO this is just as big a factor as the COR change- grip it and rip it just wouldn't work back in the day.
As for a personal taste, I prefer to see skill shots to the green become a bigger factor once again on the outcome.
I don't think we should overlook the fact that modern grooves on wedges contribute to the so-called "bomb and gouge" methods of touring pros. PGA players no longer fear the rough as modern wedges an still spin the ball when it hits the green — a trait pretty much limited to really low-handicap and tour players, thereby widening the gap to mid and high handicap golfers. With no or little fear of roughs (outside of US Opens) PGA players can swing for the fences.
OK, distance has increased. But everybody (apparently including the author) equates this with a problem. I'm not so sure. I tend to agree with Justin's comment that people watch professional golf to ooh and aah over what they do — especially hitting the ball so far. Don't kill the goose that lays the golden eggs. Distance does not threaten golf for the average player, not at all. Distance enhances revenue to the golf industry when we're talking about tour distance. And remember, distance doesn't threaten golf, it just threatens par — a distinction that seems to be lost on the USGA.
Hi Dave, I actually don't think it's a problem. I addressed this deeper last year in this piece (http://www.golfwrx.com/435236/how-golf-can-learn-from-the-nbas-3-point-line/). I think that it could become a problem if courses continue to change to the game by getting longer. I don't think longer courses is good for anyone (pros or ams) and I think if you look at the scores on tour (and from conversations I've had with multiple tour players) that some of the toughest courses are the ones that play around 7,000 yards. Thanks for your comment!
Sideshow Rob
When I started golf in 1978 I was a pretty long hitter for the time. I could hit it 300 a few times a round and that was considered long. In fact I played tournament golf for years and never met anyone who hit it longer. Now here I am at age 55 and I can hit it at least 30 yards further than I could at age 20 when I could really send it compared to everyone else. Bigger stronger faster and better athletes??? Give me a break! I have played through this entire era and I can assure you I'm not a "better athlete". It's equipment. Period.
@LivenearPar_Golf
And yet *CRICKETS* when it comes to these guys getting 60 yards of roll? Come on WRX you on the pga payroll now too? #redherringgolfballs
The Law Prof
I don't doubt the athletes are better conditioned; as the money has increased in all professional sports, making them a more lucrative option vis-a-vis other jobs, it has driven a fitness revolution. Additionally, fitness techniques have advanced over the recent decades, so it's natural that this would affect golfers at the highest levels.
But some of the reasons the author gives to support his case are either poorly thought out or not explained at all. First, he gives no explanation why the gap between longest and shortest hitters would DECREASE if it were purely driven by equipment. Wouldn't the longest hitters also benefit from equipment advances? Perhaps long hitters would benefit MORE from certain types of equipment advances–who can say? Mr. Crawford just makes this statement and leaves it standing without explanation or a logical rationale. That's poor reasoning and sloppy journalism. Second, Mr. Crawford explains that golf is a more desirable professional sport versus football, basketball and baseball because golf salaries have increased "exponentially", thus attracting top athletes today. While it's probably not technically true, actual exponential growth in the mathematical sense, OK, I'll give him some journalistic license and go with it, so let's call it exponential. He cites the enormous increase in purses. OK, fine, there's been an increase. I looked up some numbers, though. The median point for PGA tour golf winnings, for the top 125, was about $1.7 million last year. This is a huge number, but would it be driving the finest athletes in the world into golf? The average NFL salary is $1.9M, the average MLB salary is $3.2M, and the average NBA salary is $5M! Crawford needs to admit that the potential to hit it big in golf did not occur in a vacuum, it occurred in a society where other sports were increasing as well–and in many cases, a good sight more than professional golf!
I'm a 53-year-old man, relatively sedentary, who has not lifted a weight in 25 years. I gave up the game entirely for two decades and recently took it up again when a teenage son got the golf bug. I was a good (but not great) golfer back in the day, low single digits in the 80s and 90s, but plagued by short-hitting, at my golfing peak averaged maybe 230 yards in the days of 200cc persimmon woods. I was in excellent shape back then in my 20s and 30s (the 230 yard driving days) and a former college athlete (not golf). The last round of golf I played last week, as a middle-aged mediocrity still not swinging as well as I once did, on the final hole, I decided to reach back and hit my huge titanium, graphite-shafted driver a little harder: it went somewhere between 280 and 290 yards. There is no way I could've hit a shot like that back when I was in great shape, no way I could've even swung that hard with those clubs and expected to hit the ball that well. You can swing these clubs HARD and still hit the ball reasonably well, and the balls just WILL NOT hook and slice as wickedly as the old balatas did. There's an enormous difference in tech, just take it from me, a golf time capsule from the 80s. It's huge, the equipment difference.
Hi Law Prof, thanks for the comment. I don't disagree that the multi-talented athletes could make more money in other sports like basketball, football, and baseball. The main difference with other sports for a prospect who has the potential to be a top golfer is that the career in golf has the potential to be half a century. No other sport can say that.
That's true, golfers at the top, who can keep it rolling, the real elites or the late bloomers, like Rocky Thompson back in my day, could earn big bucks for 30, 40, maybe 50 years. And that is very different from virtually any other sport. Only one I can think of that comes close is motorsports, where a handful of people have managed to push a career at the elite level into their 50s (though the last person who did that with any success died doing it: Dale Earnhardt, Sr.) So point granted, at least regarding longevity of the career.
By the way, what did you mean by the gap between shorter hitters and longer hitters necessarily decreasing with equipment advances? What am I missing? Because for all my snottiness, I admit you may well know a lot more about such a phenomenon than me, as I know nothing about those sort of statistics. Why would this be so?
The logic is that if equipment was truly the main and most dominant variable, then driving distance for the previously shorter hitters would increase faster or more significantly than the longer hitters because, in theory, they are getting the most help from the equipment. A possible counter point is that the gap has increased because players are having longer careers. Ken Duke is in his late forties where as Michael Brenan (shortest hitter in 1980) was considerably younger.
No, in fact with the higher COR of today's drivers, the longer guys are even longer as compared to the shorter. The higher COR has made them exponentially longer.
Combination of factors. Would take a combination of solutions to reign in distance if the tour sees it as a problem.
Better athletes? Probably, but that's a long down the list. At the top is definitely equipment, specifically the ball, which completely changed with the pro v1. Much lower spin, much straighter. That allowed players to totally change their technique and approach with driver. They could launch it up, because they didn't have to worry about keeping the flight down. Young players today are all very aware and trained in optimising launch angle to max out yardage. Less spin also allows players to swing more or less 100%, especially when combined with modern driver technology. The approach is no longer about swinging within yourself and putting the ball in play, but about hitting hard as you can. That's why they can swing faster-not simply because they're better athletes. Also rarely mentioned but a big factor is course set ups and faster fairways. A lot of the newer courses are set up to encourage long hitting, unlike many classic courses where placement of tee shots was important. So better athletes? Swing speed average is still 113mph, which is fairly unimpressive given the long drive guys are 140-150mph.
It's NOT just the ball.
Driver heads are now 460cc. Made of Titanium and other materials made to be light, thin, and springy. Yes there is a rules limit on COR and CT, but the speed is there, compared to a 250cc Persimmon head, or even compared to a 250cc steel head.
We also have graphite shafts. And these shafts, coupled with the lightweight 460cc heads, are at anywhere from 44 to 46 inches average on most drivers. Driver of the 80's, before the metal wood revolution, were all mostly 43 to 44 inches. So the length of club adds a bit more to the distance.
The ball is longer, fore sure, with multiple layers and materials. But it helps the average joe.
You can't take way the internet and the iPhone from people now, so you can't take away the golf technology we have.
If the Tour is worried about distance and too many rounds breaking course records – it needs to stop advertising "Live Under Par" as the game was not about just scoring low, it was just about who came out on top. So the Tour should make the courses more difficult by leaving the rough very thick and keeping the fairways soft and not let them run out like this.
There is nothing wrong with our equipment. The guys are bigger, stronger, fitter than they have ever been before. People say they all look like linebackers and giant pitchers – well, there's a reason why they called Jack the Golden BEAR – because he was a chunky big dude when he started tearing up the Tour at the beginning of his career, and that has not changed. It's just that there are many of them like that now.
So leave the equipment alone. If you take away the equipment now, average joes will quit the game in droves, and where will the industry be then?
Jack grew up in Columbus, Ohio, and graduated from Upper Arlington High School-home of the ever feared Golden Bears-a perennial powerhouse in all Ohio sports. This is the derivation of the moniker.
But he did play football, and he was built. Not a slender guy by any stretch of the imagination, as can be seen from the footage of his early days
All have a valid point here but driver and a wedge isn't interesting golf.The course isn't much of a challenge as it once was, 21 under isn't fun either. Make the course tougher !!!!! Don't let it be overpowered . More bunkers,trees,narrower fairways ,tall thicker grass, smaller greens with more contour and more water. Golf should be about shot making!
I'm not giving away any secrets but my new driver is giving me an extra 25-30 yards, turning 7 iron approaches into wedge approaches. Nothing has changed about me except I'm getting older every day. And my technique might be a little better.
Mike R
If that is the case, then your old driver was ill-fitted for your game. A club cannot be 25-30 yards longer than a previous model (unless your previous was 15+ years old). You are more optimized, the ball speeds shouldn't be all that much different on centered shots.
If you are going to prevaricate, make your story a little more believable.
Prevaricate. Now there's a good word you don't hear every day. Thanks.
My "new" driver is actually 8 years old and I immediately gained 20 yards with that. Just recently I purchased a new "new" driver and, after going through various shafts, have settled and picked up an additional 10 yards. But I will admit, sadly so, that I have never been fitted, neither 8 years ago nor a few weeks ago.
I'd be fitted but I don't want to antiquate the golf courses I play. 🙂
Very hard to believe your story. For it to be true, you had ill-fitting equipment and now stumbled upon something that works or you went from hitting an iron off the tee to finding a driver you could hit. Either way, I am calling shenanigans.
Let's face it, seeing the pros hit the ball a mile is what draws most people. Even the commentators ooh and ahh over it. It's all about money. The PGA is a business. They could easily make the fairways tighter, rough taller, and greens firm and fast. But who wants to see them bogey or shoot par to win other than the serious golf fan.
Brett Weir
Driver COR and golf ball speed were at their USGA max years ago yet golfers are still getting longer and longer. Must be the conditioning (and a little help with launch monitors too)…
juststeve
Give a well trained athletic golfer my old persimmon driver and a wound golf ball and see how far he hits it. In this case it is the arrow, not the Indian.
I happen to believe that the equipment enables these modern golfers to hit all out, all the time. Sure, they are more golf athletic, but give them persimmon and balata and let's see what they can do with that.
In any event, separating equipment from the player is difficult. As you show, average distance has increased significantly, and the length of modern tour courses has not kept pace. The question is: what do we do about it?
Greg Keller
The article is spot on, it's not one thing, there are better athletes, the ball is better, equipment is better, trackman, etc. The problem is that there is no way you can roll back all of that stuff. Maybe a ball rollback would bring classic courses back into play. I'm interested to see how Shinny plays in a couple weeks. This is a course that I would hate to see fade into the sunset.
I think that the biggest thing, and maybe this will change as the times change, is that the shots that we remember as "great shots" in the history of the game all were long iron shots. Nicklaus's 1 iron at the '72 Open, Hogan's one iron at Merion in '50, shoot, even Tiger's 6 iron from the bunker at the Canadian open in 2000. Are we going to revere massive drives that set up 9 irons into par 5's the way we do those classic shots? Is there going to be a plaque at Augusta where Sergio hit a great 192 yard second into the 15th to win in '17 after a 330 yard drive the same way there is for Sarazens 235 yard 4-wood on the same hole? I think we all know how hard it is to hit those long second shots into tight targets and that's why they have the aura around them. I just don't think we are going to have those any more with 460cc drivers, solid-core balls and trackman coupled with fitness guru's and courses that are wide open and 8000 yds.
Hi Greg, thanks for your comment. Right, I don't think it's one thing in particular but the narrative lately has been that it's all the equipment (the ball, the clubs, the course, etc.).
First, Athlete conditioning in ALL sports has dramatically increased in the past 30 years.
Second, the golf ball is dramatically longer than the old balata.
Third, driver technology is much better than the persimmon.
That being said, look at the length of most pros irons today, most use blades so technology takes a back seat there
Tom Newsted
I couldn't agree more with this story. Tiger's lasting legacy on the game may not be his amazing number of tournament and major wins but how he brought fitness into the game. The "I am Tiger Woods." commercials influenced many of today's best players. If we were to ask Rory, Day, Johnson and many others if trying to be like Tiger influenced there game they would all say yes. In addition to that we can point to some technology improvements in ball, club head and shafts but that doesn't mean we need the USGA, PGA and the RNA dictating what should and should not be legal.
The answer to this issue is the course not the player. Right now many of the courses that are used on the PGA tour have long fairways with some slight bend to them. Even with the layout of Shinnecock Hills this year the fairways are open and long hitters have these nice runways to land their tee shots on. The key is divided fairways. Take the area between 290 -340 yards of each fairway and make it an area you don't want to land in. In the case of Shinnecock let the wild grasses grow across that area. In the case of courses in water tight areas like the southwest use zero scaping to create the same effect. (Make sure your boulders are big enough to keep Tiger's gallery from moving them.) By doing this you take the big stick out of the players hands and force them to be more creative. Players like Johnson, Watson and Day will be forced to hit 3-wood and lay up.
The argument that comes up would be cost but I think in the case of most courses it wouldn't be that much. You re introduce the native grass to the area in question and go from there. These would make holes much more challenging and exciting. The hazards and the risk reward give each hole character. Holes like #12 at Augusta or 17 at TPC Sawgrass create great drama and they are par 3 holes. Despite what Tiger says we don't need 8000 yard courses to keep things interesting we need course designers to step up their game and meet the challenges of the 21st century.
The athletes are better, the driver is way better but the ball is a lot straighter and more aerodynamic. Great for enthusiasts but it's dulled down what always separated the tour from everybody else. Their command of spin and flight control. It's taken some bite out of some iconic tournaments and relegated impressive "talent" to splitting fairways at 350 yards. "Distance issue" really is not about distance at all. It's about the death of spin control and artistry needed to win with it. 350 will be average in a few years, I've seen Joe's at the range doing it with control, so tell me, how exactly does driver /wedge golf make the game more interesting in the long term? Folks credit Tiger for all this but what is always ignored is that he's probably the best iron player ever and used spin control to great effect. The tour learned the wrong lesson, it's John Daley's tour now not Tiger's.
scott g
Bernard is dead on the mark. The technology has changed to the point where the pros leave nothing in the bag. They are not penalized for swinging as hard as they can. Most work out which gives them additional strength and swing speed. They play courses that seldom restrict the "bomb and gouge" game professional golf has become. If I had a dollar for every article in a golf magazine that proclaimed how to gain 10 yards, I'd have retired years ago. Let's face it, this sells equipment, not the game. If these guys (pros) are really that good, they should welcome a test of their skills. Bring back the spinny ball, deaden the ball, shorten the courses, shorten the time it takes to play a round, lower the cost of course maintenance. Recent articles have purported that the average golfer has not made any gains in distance. The problem is they have spent thousands on new equipment and they would be better off improving their swing and ball contact (lessons). Just because something sells doesn't mean its good for the game.
Davewn
The author neglected to mention modern mowers, agronomy and golf course setup's roles in driver distance. They claim "firm and fast" conditions test the players, but there is no reason to cut fairways shorter than the average muni green and roll them to make them play like green, fuzzy blacktop. These guys don't need "speed slots" and 50 yards of roll. If you want to see spin control and accuracy rewarded, water and/or grow the grass on the fairways, recreate the "flier lie" in the first cut of rough, and simultaneously play the greens firm and fast. After the players' tears dried, I'm sure you'd see more of a premium placed on accuracy and less on bomb and gouge. The question is, does the average golf fan want this?
100% agree with Davewn! In summary the pros are not "hitting" it 340-360yds, maybe they are carrying it longer on average, BUT the ball is rolling out to 330-370yds on a weekly basis which is absolutely absurd. And yes agreed their fairways are playing faster than most of the greens we golf on. I do not see how fast/firm fairways is a test of skill, but I see that on the greens.
From an equipment stand point, i do not feel "rolling back" anything is necessary. As someone playing sports, you are always looking for the equipment to achieve your best, why should you be penalized for finding that? You cannot help the fact that modern brains/machines have allowed that to happen, its the world we live in. ESPECIALLY from a fitting perspective!
Hi Davewn, thanks for taking the time to comment. While I didn't address mowers and course conditions in this piece, I did address it in another distance study I wrote last year (you can find that story here: http://www.golfwrx.com/435236/how-golf-can-learn-from-the-nbas-3-point-line/). I think course conditions have a TON to do with the increase in distance. The fairways on the PGA Tour are likely the same speed as the greens that Hogan putted on in his U.S. Open victories. But we can't argue that the athletes have a lot to do with the increase.


Limestone karsts are biodiversity "arks" containing an extremely high number of species found nowhere else in the world. In particular, organisms that are not adept at long-distance dispersal such as plants and many invertebrates are forced to adapt to the extreme conditions of either the karst surface or subterranean environments. Despite their incredibly rare biodiversity, the karst landscapes of Vietnam and Cambodia are significantly understudied, unprotected and largely unexplored.
Biodiversity experts have identified the unique limestone karst hills in the Kien Luong District in southern Vietnam as home to one of the highest concentrations of threatened endemic species, higher than any other habitat of comparable size on Earth. In particular, the karst hills in the region are of immense global conservation value for invertebrates, such as endemic snails, scorpions and millipedes. The area also hosts numerous threatened plants and the Indochinese Silvered Langur, an Endangered primate.
Meanwhile, a recent rapid survey of the nearby Kampot Karst Hills in Cambodia found over 100 species of plants in just four days, and has already revealed at least three plant species new to science. Two recent studies have identified a new species of sand fly and other cave-dwelling invertebrates.
Because the region's karst hills are under severe threat from quarrying and habitat degradation, the establishment of protected areas is absolutely necessary to save these endemic species from otherwise certain extinction. It is for these reasons that Rainforest Trust is working with IUCN-Vietnam and IUCN-Cambodia to support the creation and initial management of two protected areas. The 1,422-acre Kien Luong Karst Hills Nature Reserve in Vietnam and the 774-acre Kampot Karst Hills Conservation Area in Cambodia will ensure that these irreplaceable biodiverse karst hills can be protected from the imminent threat of mining.
The karst hills of Southeast Asia support a great concentration of species that are highly range restricted; some are even limited to just one or two hills.
This extraordinary concentration of endemic wildlife is a result of the adaptation of species to the harsh conditions of limestone and the caves that dot the landscape. Experts believe that many hundreds of species that are unknown to science are still likely be found here. An IUCN Red List workshop in February 2016 concluded that the karst hills in the proposed protected area in Vietnam contain the world's entire populations of at least 31 threatened species (six of which are already classified as Critically Endangered). The world's largest known population of the Indochinese Silvered Langur, an Endangered primate whose numbers have drastically declined due to habitat loss and hunting pressure, is also found in the proposed protected area. Multiple new species have been discovered at the proposed protected area, including five species of Endangered and Critically Endangered snails (Notharinia sp. nov., Sesara sp. nov., Cyclophorus sp. nov., Macrochlamys sp. nov. and Microcystina sp. nov.), an Endangered springtail (Ceratophysella sp. nov.) and an Endangered woodlouse (Burmoniscus sp. nov.). In the absence of extensive surveys conducted in the proposed Cambodian protected area, it is not known how many globally threatened species are present. However, there is good reason to believe that the number will be comparable to that found in the nearby karst systems of southern Vietnam, as this biogeographic region is all part of the Mekong Delta Limestone Hills Landscape.
The most immediate and detrimental threat to the karst landscape is quarrying of the hills for cement and aggregate by mining companies.
Resource extraction is an ongoing challenge that threatens species, as it results in outright habitat destruction as well as habitat fragmentation and subsequent isolation of some populations. It is abundantly clear that uncontrolled mining could cause the extinction of large numbers of unique species in a very short period of time.
There are no human settlements inside the proposed protected area in Vietnam, but the surrounding region is densely populated.
The majority of the community members practice rice farming and shrimp aquaculture, while some households provide tourism services for the nearby Hon Chong beach and cultural and spiritual tourism at Chua Hang pagoda. Some community members are partly dependent on the resources within the proposed reserve for small-scale extraction such as firewood, medicinal plants and animals. These are activities which will be addressed in the newly developed protected area management plan. Local communities around the proposed Cambodian protected area depend chiefly upon seasonal rice farming and small-scale cash crop farming. Several Theravada Buddhist monasteries are located in close proximity to the karst hills and their associated religious sites. These monastic communities will be sought out to play an important role in both education and preservation of the natural habitat. Local community members are involved in ongoing botanical surveys and are supportive and eager to participate in management and ecotourism activities.
By working with local stakeholders and government agencies, Rainforest Trust's local partner IUCN-Vietnam plans to ensure the 1,422-acre Kien Luong Karst Hills Nature Reserve is officially incorporated into Vietnam's protected area system.
Then, a protected area management board will be established by the Kien Giang People's Committee. This board will employ community teams of rangers who will be legally responsible for law enforcement at the site, such as detecting infringements, educating violators and informing relevant agencies such as district rangers and police. Rainforest Trust and IUCN-Vietnam will work with the management board to prepare patrol plans and protocols, ensuring the sustained protection of these immensely biodiverse karst hills. The Cambodian Ministry of Environment has identified the country's karst hills area as a priority for protection. Capitalizing on the Ministry's interest, this collection of karst formations in Kampot Province will become the 774-acre Kampot Karst Hills Conservation Area to be integrated into the government system as a Protected Landscape. A regulated amount of public access will be allowed for education and tourism to religious and cultural sites, while patrol teams consisting of four local community members will guard the areas to prevent inappropriate use. Strategically placed signage will be installed around the perimeters to clearly demarcate boundaries and to inform the public of restricted and prohibited activities.


The mysterious monster from Cloverfield will be available as a toy.
Though the look of the Cloverfield monster is a closely guarded secret, Hasbro has begun taking orders for a toy version that will ship September 30, 2008. Though no image is provided, some think NBC may have planted a spoiler in Kenneth's dream journal on 30 Rock.