Jump to content
  • Member Statistics

    17,502
    Total Members
    7,904
    Most Online
    Weathernoob335
    Newest Member
    Weathernoob335
    Joined

Met Fall 2021 Banter.


HoarfrostHubb
 Share

Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, tunafish said:

I think that and "Mass profits at Maine's Expense" were the big ones people were drawn too.  And I think the pro-corridor campaign adding in the retroactive law aspect did more harm than good.

The question wording was a mess, too, which didn't help. 

"Do you want to ban the construction of high-impact electric transmission lines in the Upper Kennebec Region and to require the Legislature to approve all other such projects anywhere in Maine, both retroactively to 2020, and to require the Legislature, retroactively to 2014, to approve by a two-thirds vote such projects using public land?"

This article did a good job breaking it all down, unbiased IMO.  

https://www.mainepublic.org/politics/2021-10-22/what-maine-voters-should-know-about-question-1

The link is the best explanation I've read on the issue.  However, its discussion of the Public Lands portion failed to go back far enough.  In 1993 Constitutional Amendment 164 was approved by 73% of those voting in a citizen referendum.  Among other things this amendment reads that any such lands "...may not be reduced or its uses substantially altered except on the vote of 2/3 of all the members elected to each House."  I've not read the decision on Black v. Cutko by the Superior Court judge, but my guess is that he agreed that changing commercial timber land to a powerline corridor met that "substantially altered" language.  Question 1 language includes the (obvious to me) statement that things like powerline corridors, RR rights-of-way and airport runways are substantial alterations of use on the Public Lands.
(Trivia note:  The impetus for that amendment came when the Bureau of Public Lands [since re-named Bureau of Parks and Lands] sold 2 acres of "scarce S. Maine public land) to NWS for its new office, sited a couple hundred feet from its NEXRAD facility, which facilitated replacing the totally inadequate office and WW2 radar at the jetport.)

The linked article also confirms that Maine was chosen over some other options because it was a cheap date, at least when the not-performed EIS was left out of the equation.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, tamarack said:

The link is the best explanation I've read on the issue.  However, its discussion of the Public Lands portion failed to go back far enough.  In 1993 Constitutional Amendment 164 was approved by 73% of those voting in a citizen referendum.  Among other things this amendment reads that any such lands "...may not be reduced or its uses substantially altered except on the vote of 2/3 of all the members elected to each House."  I've not read the decision on Black v. Cutko by the Superior Court judge, but my guess is that he agreed that changing commercial timber land to a powerline corridor met that "substantially altered" language.  Question 1 language includes the (obvious to me) statement that things like powerline corridors, RR rights-of-way and airport runways are substantial alterations of use on the Public Lands.
(Trivia note:  The impetus for that amendment came when the Bureau of Public Lands [since re-named Bureau of Parks and Lands] sold 2 acres of "scarce S. Maine public land) to NWS for its new office, sited a couple hundred feet from its NEXRAD facility, which facilitated replacing the totally inadequate office and WW2 radar at the jetport.)

The linked article also confirms that Maine was chosen over some other options because it was a cheap date, at least when the not-performed EIS was left out of the equation.

And now our location is totally inadequate with trees growing up around and blocking the radar from land we don't own and can't alter, never mind the dried up well and non-potable water (we've since fixed the airborne radon issue). :bag:

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

If you assume that Maine logs 500,000 acres which is what I saw...correct me if I am wrong...145 miles by 150' is a lot less square footage of trees removed. So there is that. Now it does seem like Maine tries to plant trees after logging which is good...but that is a lot of timber removed. 

Maine forest managers plant relatively few acres, as most of the state's high timber value species are adapted to regenerate naturally.  Yale Silviculture Professor emeritus David Smith called it the "Magic Forest" due to that ability.  The difference between the 500k and the 2500+ acres of the corridor is that the 500k will be managed for forest products while the corridor will be kept clear of anything that might get tall/thick enough to approach the lines or hinder maintenance access.

I'll add that I was also disappointed by passage of Question 3, which I opposed due to its incomplete pig-in-a-poke (perhaps literally) language.  Will the good folks on Munjoy Hill (PWM) be happy when the folks next door start raising pigs?  Will this amendment create issues for addressing animal abuse?  The bill made no attempt to cover those and related topics. 

  • Like 2
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, OceanStWx said:

And now our location is totally inadequate with trees growing up around and blocking the radar from land we don't own and can't alter, never mind the dried up well and non-potable water (we've since fixed the airborne radon issue). :bag:

Have you (GYX) contacted BPL recently.  A well planned timber harvest could remove the taller trees while leaving the land's use unchanged, just with younger/shorter ones. a solution that would be temporary but the Bureau would be able to repeat it as needed.  Beyond that, would NWS propose a purchase of sufficient acreage on the hill to avoid the treetop issue, as the importance of the site would IMO have a good chance of gaining the necessary 2/3 supermajorities required.  Since 1993 there have been many land transactions thus approved, including the sale of several hundred acres just north of your facility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, tamarack said:

Have you (GYX) contacted BPL recently.  A well planned timber harvest could remove the taller trees while leaving the land's use unchanged, just with younger/shorter ones. a solution that would be temporary but the Bureau would be able to repeat it as needed.  Beyond that, would NWS propose a purchase of sufficient acreage on the hill to avoid the treetop issue, as the importance of the site would IMO have a good chance of gaining the necessary 2/3 supermajorities required.  Since 1993 there have been many land transactions thus approved, including the sale of several hundred acres just north of your facility.

I think the primary issue is too many land owners in the problem areas around the radar. Also someone in their infinite wisdom in 1993 decided that a half height tower would be fine in a stand of trees. Now that they're all grown up we're going to have to spend millions to raise the tower to full height. But that may not be until 2023 or 2024 at the earliest.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, OceanStWx said:

I think the primary issue is too many land owners in the problem areas around the radar. Also someone in their infinite wisdom in 1993 decided that a half height tower would be fine in a stand of trees. Now that they're all grown up we're going to have to spend millions to raise the tower to full height. But that may not be until 2023 or 2024 at the earliest.

Too many smart people fail to recognize that trees grow, and that the growth offers both opportunities (for people like me) and problems.  :o

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, CoastalWx said:

The same people trying to stop it are the ones with cars rotting in the front yard, dumping oil and other shit in the woods or burning it, while riding around in a diesel pick up truck doing rolling coal rallies. Such environmentalists. 

I will be vacationing to Maine in my rented hummer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@dendrite or @tamarack What’s the best tree for a swampy area roughly 100ft from the house? Weeping Willows are nice looking so I am hedging to it but are disease prone amongst a few other other cons. I don’t want a tree that will grow tall either or drop acorns. I just need something that will soak up some standing water that tends to form into a smallish pond in a monsoon season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

32 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

@dendrite or @tamarack What’s the best tree for a swampy area roughly 100ft from the house? Weeping Willows are nice looking so I am hedging to it but are disease prone amongst a few other other cons. I don’t want a tree that will grow tall either or drop acorns. I just need something that will soak up some standing water that tends to form into a smallish pond in a monsoon season.

I would nix the weeping willow, they're filthy, messy bug ridden trees.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, STILL N OF PIKE said:

Bought some LTC coins on coinbase 

some EOS , ETC, XLM

 

 

Solana and Polygon will track ETH.   BTC is the bellwether for the mid-term.  
LTC, ATOM and LINK are the bets that should be the solid plays for alt season.  XLM loves to tease.   
Now is the time for the BTC consolidation and launch.   The others I mentioned will follow. Those are the safe 2X moves. There are certainly projects out there that will 5 or 10x  but I can’t afford to risk their potential rapid descent. 
There are a lot of great Blockchain and NFT projects out there but the least risk will be the big, non-shitcoin,market caps. 

 


 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, dryslot said:

The other dumb referrendum that got defeated, Dendrite would not have been able to raise his chickens here if this passed, And lol at that last line....:rolleyes:

Maine voters agree: Food is a basic right

The right to food won rave reviews Tuesday from Maine voters, who passed the nation's first guarantee for people to grow, harvest and eat according to their own wishes.

The Maine ballot measure was one of several in states seeking to create new constitutional rights touching on an array of issues. Some were a response to policies put in place during the coronavirus pandemic, including a pair of Texas proposals limiting restrictions on religious gatherings and nursing home visits.

Maine's unique measure declares individuals have an “unalienable right to grow, raise, harvest, produce and consume the food of their own choosing.” It passed comfortably.

“It’s always a good idea to secure and protect an individual right in the world we live in. Food is life,” said Democratic state Sen. Craig Hickman, a supporter of the proposal. “I don’t understand why anyone would be afraid of saying so out loud in the constitution.”

Opponents had worried the measure might lead some people to try to raise cattle in cities.

Reading that I thought it was an Onion article...satire.

I don't completely understand as I always assumed people could grow what they want on their own property.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Cold Miser said:

Reading that I thought it was an Onion article...satire.

I don't completely understand as I always assumed people could grow what they want on their own property.  

I'm not familiar with the Maine issue but if I were to hazard a guess, at least some of it must have been driven by stories like this.  There have been many instances of companies patenting seeds and then suing farmers who save seeds from crops they've grown for re-use.  

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/12/monsanto-sues-farmers-seed-patents

Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Cold Miser said:

Reading that I thought it was an Onion article...satire.

I don't completely understand as I always assumed people could grow what they want on their own property.  

You could, They wanted to stop you from being able too, I believe it had more to do with raising animals in urban areas.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

@dendrite or @tamarack What’s the best tree for a swampy area roughly 100ft from the house? Weeping Willows are nice looking so I am hedging to it but are disease prone amongst a few other other cons. I don’t want a tree that will grow tall either or drop acorns. I just need something that will soak up some standing water that tends to form into a smallish pond in a monsoon season.

How about birch?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, dryslot said:

You could, They wanted to stop you from being able too, I believe it had more to do with raising animals in urban areas.

I’ve always wanted a black panther. We have 4acres and private but my trashy nosy neighbor might take issue when the cat takes a plunge in their pool during HH summer days. 
 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Baroclinic Zone said:

How about birch?

Yea I researched the river birch a bit, I think that would work and they look nice. I’ll need one tree for the pondish area and maybe a smaller shrub like specie for where some runoff occurs. The wife is pretty pissed at me though because I just chopped down about 10 huge trees, those skinny but tall bastards, that hovered over or too close to the house and regrading the area to make a bigger backyard…she thinks I’m nuts. But when finished we can move the kids playground area from the side yard to the back, she’ll get my madness then…hopefully. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

Yea I researched the river birch a bit, I think that would work and they look nice. I’ll need one tree for the pondish area and maybe a smaller shrub like specie for where some runoff occurs. The wife is pretty pissed at me though because I just chopped down about 10 huge trees, those skinny but tall bastards, that hovered over or too close to the house and regrading the area to make a bigger backyard…she thinks I’m nuts. But when finished we can move the kids playground area from the side yard to the back, she’ll get my madness then…hopefully. 

Yeah....I'm gonna say she won't :lol:

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, mreaves said:

I'm not familiar with the Maine issue but if I were to hazard a guess, at least some of it must have been driven by stories like this.  There have been many instances of companies patenting seeds and then suing farmers who save seeds from crops they've grown for re-use.  

 

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/12/monsanto-sues-farmers-seed-patents

Yeah. At first I thought it was some Monsanto, big ag related thing, but the way that paragraph was written, it didn't seem so.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

@dendrite or @tamarack What’s the best tree for a swampy area roughly 100ft from the house? Weeping Willows are nice looking so I am hedging to it but are disease prone amongst a few other other cons. I don’t want a tree that will grow tall either or drop acorns. I just need something that will soak up some standing water that tends to form into a smallish pond in a monsoon season.

Willows as a species  are notorious for dropping branches and twigs in all seasons, and weeping willows are infamous for invading sewer pipes and septic systems.  Red maple can tolerate fairly wet conditions but not if the ground is i=under water much of the growing season.  RM is one of the most colorful trees in fall, and on a swampy site maybe you would have the earliest color.  Swamp white oak might be another option though I'm not sure if nurseries stock it.  Northern white cedar tolerates wet feet but you're too far south of its native range for it to be a good prospect.  A reliable nursery staff could offer more detailed advice.

GYX got a new office? Nice to see they aren't abandoning WFOs with all of the new offices being built in recent years (e.g. CTP, BOX).

Nope - only the original one for GYX as the WSO used to be next to the Portland Jetport.  A couple hundred yards from where the airplanes began their take-off roll is not conductive to good working conditions.  Plus the radar at PWM was WW2 vintage and NWS wasn't going to put $$$ worth of NEXRAD at 50' elevation when there was a nice hill a dozen miles NW.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, HIPPYVALLEY said:

Solana and Polygon will track ETH.   BTC is the bellwether for the mid-term.  
LTC, ATOM and LINK are the bets that should be the solid plays for alt season.  XLM loves to tease.   
Now is the time for the BTC consolidation and launch.   The others I mentioned will follow. Those are the safe 2X moves. There are certainly projects out there that will 5 or 10x  but I can’t afford to risk their potential rapid descent. 
There are a lot of great Blockchain and NFT projects out there but the least risk will be the big, non-shitcoin,market caps. 

 


 

 

 

Grabbed 500$ in CRO before I went to sleep 

looks like that could easily top .50 in the next 3-4 weeks

Got into Link and Atom as well in similar fashion. Atom chart looks great 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, tamarack said:

Willows as a species  are notorious for dropping branches and twigs in all seasons, and weeping willows are infamous for invading sewer pipes and septic systems.  Red maple can tolerate fairly wet conditions but not if the ground is i=under water much of the growing season.  RM is one of the most colorful trees in fall, and on a swampy site maybe you would have the earliest color.  Swamp white oak might be another option though I'm not sure if nurseries stock it.  Northern white cedar tolerates wet feet but you're too far south of its native range for it to be a good prospect.  A reliable nursery staff could offer more detailed advice.

GYX got a new office? Nice to see they aren't abandoning WFOs with all of the new offices being built in recent years (e.g. CTP, BOX).

Nope - only the original one for GYX as the WSO used to be next to the Portland Jetport.  A couple hundred yards from where the airplanes began their take-off roll is not conductive to good working conditions.  Plus the radar at PWM was WW2 vintage and NWS wasn't going to put $$$ worth of NEXRAD at 50' elevation when there was a nice hill a dozen miles NW.

The invasion wouldn’t be a problem for me but I did read the invasion is a little overblown, one expert’s opinion anyway. What about a bald cypress?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, RUNNAWAYICEBERG said:

The invasion wouldn’t be a problem for me but I did read the invasion is a little overblown, one expert’s opinion anyway. What about a bald cypress?

Bald cypress could certainly handle the wet and I think there are varieties that would be cold-hardy in most of CT (frost pockets excluded) but the natural range of the species is way south - Dismal Swamp in S.VA may be the farthest north for significant numbers.  A reliable nursery staff is your friend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...