Ostensibly exploring the practice of law before the internet. Heck, before good highways for that matter.
Thursday, April 18, 2013
Wednesday, April 17, 2013
Monday, April 15, 2013
It's not an April Fool's joke: Illinois bar exam gets harder; which states have hardest tests? - ABA Journal
It's not an April Fool's joke: Illinois bar exam gets harder; which states have hardest tests? - ABA Journal
Interesting indeed, particularly in light of Wyoming's recent decision to adopt the UBE.
Interesting indeed, particularly in light of Wyoming's recent decision to adopt the UBE.
Friday, April 12, 2013
History through film:
Local announcement. Just sort of interesting:
Natrona County Schools
The last unit that the students will be learning in 9th grade Social Studies this year covers World War II and we are starting this week. We will spend approximately 11 class days (about 1 month) learning and assessing this material.
While we are studying this unit we will be studying the Causes of World War II, The Holocaust, America at Home, Major Battles in both the European and Pacific Theaters, How WWII Ends, and a brief discussion of the start of the Cold War.
We know that this can be a very busy time of year for all of our students. We would really emphasize student attendance and participation during this unit. Some of the materials that we will be using during this unit will include pictures, first-hand accounts/journals, audio, and videos. Some of these materials will be graphic as they depict scenes of war and violence, the Holocaust, Internment camps, etc. We will be discussing with the students that we expect a higher level of maturity during this unit.
There are a plethora of great movies and literature that depict different aspects of this time period. While we will not be showing any feature films during class, they may offer an opportunity for you at home to connect with your student regarding the material. Schindler's List, Saving Private Ryan, Longest Day, Midway, Band of Brothers, The Pacific, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, and many others would be examples of this material.
General Agenda:
Day 1: Causes of WWII
Day 2: Holocaust
Day 3: (Quiz #1) America at Home
Day 4: Japanese Internment
Day 5: (Quiz #2) Early WWII Battles
Day 6: Cont. Battles
Day 7: (Quiz #3) Ending the War/Cold War
Day 8: Test
Day(s) 9-11: Genocide, Hate Groups, Nuclear Proliferation
Please do not reply to this email as it will be sent to an automated and unmonitored inbox.
Natrona County Schools
Starting Friday, April 12, we will be showing some G and PG rated WWII movies at lunch time for any students looking for some enrichment. I can't guarantee that we will be able to stick to this schedule, but we should be close. We will push play at 12:55 most days to give everyone an opportunity to grab lunch and come up. I will let campus security know that this is happening.
4/12-4/16 Friday, Monday, and Tuesday lunches: We will watch "The Great Dictator" starring Charlie Chaplin in a parody of Hitler and Nazi Germany in the late 1930s. Rated G
4/17-4/22 Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday lunches: "Chicken Run" An animated re-make of Steve McQueen's "The Great Escape".
4/22-4/26 Monday, Thursday, Friday lunches: "The Longest Day" a film about the D-Day invasion that features one of the greatest assembled casts of actors in film history. Rated G.
4/29-5/1 Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday lunches: "The Sound of Music"
5/2-5/6 Thursday, Friday, and Monday lunches: "Midway"
5/7-5/9 Tuesday, Wednesday, and Thursday lunches: "South Pacific"
Please do not reply to this email as it will be sent to an automated and unmonitored inbox.
Thursday, April 11, 2013
Not that local. Dairies
Meadow Gold dairy truck. "From local farms to local families."
Some time ago I was hiking from my mechanic's shop down to work, after dropping my truck off to be worked on, and saw this Meadow Gold delivery truck at our hospital.
Now, let me first note that I don't have anything against Meadow Gold milk, etc. At any one time there's a good chance that there's a gallon of Meadow Gold milk in my refrigerator, although I also don't pay all that much attention to what milk brand I'm buying. The big decision in milk purchases here is whether to buy whole milk or 2% milk. My wife buys 2%, I buy whole milk. I do this because I like the way whole milk tastes better and I disregard the whole fat content thing because, well, whole milk tastes better.
I feel somewhat justified in this view, by the way, because a recent study suggests that whole milk wasn't as bad for you as some want to believe, but I mostly feel that way because it validates my desired view. It's part of the same thinking, on my part, that causes me to chuckle a bit in glee with the fact that my coffee addition is turning out to be a good thing. Ha!
But I digress.
What caused me to take this cell phone photograph is the truck's claim that the milt the truck is hauling goes "From local farms to local families." What does that mean?
It doesn't mean that the milk comes from a farm outside of town, that's for sure. In spite of very occasional attempted start ups, there hasn't been a local dairy milk farm here for decades. There was one, or perhaps more than one, at one time, but that's an extremely long time ago.
Dairy farmer in Waterloo Nebraska.
Local dairies were, at one time, the rule nearly everywhere in the United States. At that time there were dairy farmers who did indeed milk a herd of dairy cattle every day, and truck the milk to a local creamery. Casper had a local creamery at one time. But this is very much a thing of the past. There's no local creamery, and there's no local dairy farmers.
Downtown location of the Jersey Creamery in Casper Wyoming, now long gone.
The reasons for this are varied, with some being national in origin, and others being local. Some, seem to me, to be obscure. Locally, truth be known, Natrona County Wyoming was a hard place for a diary to start with. The area is great cattle country, but very poor dairy cow country. Beef cattle, in this region, basically wonder around the vast prairie and are fed in the winter out on the range. Dairy cattle are fed on their farms all year long, and fed a lot, as producing milk is a calorie intensive business. This means that hay farming is an absolute local necessity for a dairy. For beef cattle producers, hay is something we buy for the winter, and we can gauge which type is what we'll buy by need and price. Dairy cattlemen, however, need a constant supply of high quality forage . . and they won't be finding that here on their farms on a year around basis. This may explain why certain Quixotic efforts to start local dairies in the past two decades have rapidly failed.
Another aspect of this, however, is that milk more than other types of
agricultural products, is uniquely suited for mass processing and
delivery. Milk was delivered to people's houses daily up until the
1970s (at least locally), which made a local distributor's economic
viability a little easier, but even as early as the 1940s the large
chain grocery stores would generally only carry their own brands. This
meant that local dairies had to principally rely on home deliveries,
which of course, as noted, they did, also delivering butter in some
cases and also taking specialty Holiday orders.. But its likely that
societal changes slowly did that in. I can't be precise on it, of
course, but there must be some changes that caused the convenience of
home delivery to give way to simply picking milk up at the store. Indeed, as home delivery seems so convenient to me, and lasted so long, I'm struggling a bit to determine what the cause of the demise was, but it may simply have been that people work odder hours, and move around a lot more, than they once did. Other types of home delivery have also fallen off in the past half century too, and it's fairly rare to find a grocery store that will deliver, like they once did.
Milk man delivering milk to transient worker location, 1930s. Note the uniform, which was the norm at the time.
Before I move on from that, for what it's worth, as home milk delivery seems like such an oddity to people who have never experienced it I'll simply note that, when I was a kid, this was done by men who drove around time very early in the morning with a refrigerated van. We kept an insulated box, provided by the creamery, on our back porch and that's where he left the milk. I remember that as I got a bit older if I was awake I could hear him drive up and delivery the milk, which seems to me to have been usually around 5:00 am. In earlier years, however, in most places this same service was done by a man who used a horse drawn wagon. Both of my parents had recollections of milk being delivered in this fashion. In my mother's case, her recollection was that the neighbor's dog hated the milk cart horses and would bark his head off at them. My father remembered milk being delivered this way in Denver in what was probably the 1930s.
Anyhow, home delivery, no matter how convenient, couldn't keep local dairies going, even if I'm not sure why that was. Perhaps the lack of a local source of milk contributed to that. Perhaps also the price of fuel which shot through the roof in the early 1970s had a contributing influence. And, I suspect, a more mobile society in which both men and women were routinely employed probably also had something to do with it.
Man delivering bottles to washed.
Another factor, however, probably is that milk must be processed. Milk, at least commercial milk, is pasteurized and it's no doubt easier to pasteurize a lot of it rather than smaller quantities. As noted, milk is uniquely suited for mass production, in some ways. And milk can pose a health danger if not processed adequately. I suppose that means there is a danger that lurks in large facilities, but if there is, it seems to be pretty minor as milk is very efficiently produced at very low risk to the public.
I suppose given that, I've been very surprised that there's been a movement in the state to allow the local sale of unpasteurized milk. Some ranchers have kept milk cows for their own families for a long time, and some people with small acreages do as well, but this is a bit different. Ranchers with milk cows know cows very well in general, and they know what they're doing. That milk tends to be consumed nearly immediately. I think this is generally also the case with the very few people with small acreages. But having a milk cow as a commercial proposition, or a share in a milk cow, which is another way this has been proposed, seems a very poor idea to me. That concept is part, generally, of the "local foods" movement, and whatever its merits otherwise are, it should be kept in mind that milk's a product that requires special care for safety reasons. Ranchers with milk cows are generally consuming the milk immediately. People who think that they're simply replacing Safeway with a cow, however, may not be, and may be exchanging safety for a loose concept of the product being better which, in the case of milk, might not match reality. There has been, I'd note, at least one milk related illness outbreak in the US in 2012.
I also wonder if people who buy unpasteurized milk are in for a bit of a shock. Most people have never had milk that hasn't been pasteurized and homogenized, and don't realize that unhomogenized milk tastes different and that the cream separates out. I've had it just once, when I was a kid, and still recall that it seemed to taste odd. My wife, whose family did keep a milk cow when she was young, can't stand it, but then she prefers 2% milk, which I don't like.
At any rate, here's another example of something that's really changed, but which we must still look back upon to some extent. There are no more Milk Men, at least there aren't very many, and in a lot of the country, the milk comes from a long ways away. Local milk producers in some places are having a hard time, which is a shame. For an area like central Wyoming, however, local milk production wouldn't make very much sense. Some milk producers, as noted above, are emphasizing that they get their milk locally, but that would seemingly require a little explanation to make sense. Probably what it means is that the milk was local to where it was processed, probably down in Colorado, but not to us here in Wyoming. Nor could it be, really.
Wednesday, April 10, 2013
Tuesday, April 9, 2013
Holscher's Hub: The Blizzard of 13.
Holscher's Hub: The Blizzard of 13.: U.S. Federal Courthouse, April 8, 2013. April 9, 2013. April 9, 2013. Just before I blew the fuze on the windshield wipe...
Sunday, April 7, 2013
The curtain coming down on the Stalinist Theme Park of North Korea.
On June 25, 1950 the army of North Korea rolled south and invaded the Republic of Korean (South Korea, or the ROK). The North Korean Army, equipped and trained by the Soviet Union, looked as if it was about to make short work of the South Korean Army.
South Korean Army band, and military policeman, 1987.
This was not because the North Korean army was so good, as would soon be seen, but rather because the South Korean Army was so very bad. Trained in only a very rudimentary fashion by the US after World War Two, the South Korean Army suffered from the fact that its conscripts were of an overwhelmingly primitive rural background and that the U.S. didn't regard Korea, a former colonial province of Japan, as being particularly important in any fashion. To compound it, after the Second World War, the United States came to the conclusion that all future wars would be nuclear wars, and therefore it didn't really need to train its own Army that much. That reflected itself back on what little we did to arm and train South Korea's army. The ROK army still had horse cavalry in 1950, and some South Korean soldiers lacked shoes of any kind.
The Korean War would be the wake up call.
ROK M48s, 1987.
Stunned by Nationalist China, an Allied power during World War Two, falling to the communist in 1949, the US suddenly regarded the Korean Peninsula as a dagger pointed at Japan, which the US cared about very much. So, contrary to all expectation, when the North Koreans rolled south the US suddenly went in. Fortunately for the US, the negligent neglect of the military would not prove to be fatal, in no small part because the US had a massive reservoir of men who trained and fought in World War Two, which had only been over for five years. The Regular Army was full of men who had trained to fight the Germans and the Japanese who were mixed in with men who had entered the service post war and hardly been trained at all. National Guard units were likewise packed with men who had seen service in the Second World War. The US was able to get by, and get to Korea. Making a stand on the Pusan Perimeter, General MacArthur, serving as the US administrator of Japan, conceived of an end run using Marines at Inchon that resulted in a collapse of the North Korean army. North Korea was saved from defeat only because the Red Chinese came to their aid when the advancing American, UN, and ROK forces came to close to Manchuria. That act, however, significantly came not because the Peoples Republic of China loved the Communist regime in North Korea, but rather because the PRC couldn't imagine having American troops on its immediate border.
The South Korean Army that performed so badly in 1950 was first rate by the 1960s, and was one of the most effective anti communist armies to fight in the Vietnam War. That army remains one of the best in Asia today. It's a modern, effective, army.
South Korean infantry in 6x6 truck, 1987.
The North Korean army, however, is not. It was a poor army in 1950 through 1954, when it took on the anemic South Korean army and nearly beat it in 1950, only to face being rolled up and defeated that same year by a U.S. Army that hadn't reequipped since World War Two, and which had largely stopped training to fight a conventional ground war.. Only the Red Chinese, with an army that had been fighting, in one fashion or another, back into the 1920s, and with a massive manpower reserve, kept North Korea in existence. Frankly, had the US not neglected its own military from 1945 to 1950, and kept an army trained to its 1945 standards, and equipped in way reflecting the lessons of ground combat from 1939 to 1945, the Chinese also would have suffered defeat. The Chinese were mostly able to rely on sheer mass, more than anything else. That work in 1950 to 1954, but in learning the lessons of this war, and applying them to the possibility of a war with the Soviet Union in Europe, the US developed the technology and strategies to cope with fighting a numerically superior foe. By the 1990s, it was pretty clear that the yields of that strategy were so vast, that the American army was incapable of being defeated in a war against a conventional enemy, no matter who that enemy might be. Nuclear war, and guerrilla wars, however, remain different in consideration.
South Korean M38A1 with recoiless rifle, 1987.
The Peoples Republic of China has taken this to heart, but by all appearances, the North Koreans have not. In spite of fielding a few impressive large weapons platforms, they're at best a 1970s vintage Soviet style army in terms of equipment, and a 1920s style Soviet army in terms of the manpower base making up the army. Should the North Korean army actually tangle the with the modern South Korean army, the results would be disastrous for the north. In spite of that, however, the appearances are begging to suggest that they really don't know that.
South Korean army compound, 1987.
Prior to the fall of the USSR, the North Koreans had been able to rely upon the Soviets and the Red Chinese to back them up, both economically and militarily. In other words, the economic impact of a completely failed system was relatively minimal, given the subsidization of the other two major Communist countries; and there was little risk of the North having to really pay militarily for any blunders it might make. Economically, however, that day is long gone. With the collapse of the USSR, North Korea is having to more or less pay its own way in the world. It still gets some help, but only some, from the PRC, which was never completely comfortable with North Korea in the first place, as it seemed a little too close to the USSR in some ways. Economically, the Chinese aren't helping the north much, in spite of the fact that an economically depressed North Korea is creating a Korean illegal immigrant problem in Manchuria, as desperate North Koreans cross the Yalu into China.
And the China of 2013 isn't the China of 1953. Communism fell in the USSR, where it got its start, in 1990. In China, it morphed. This may be hugely significant for how this story might play out.
China of 1953 was a Maoist state, not quite Stalinist, but no better and varying only, really, in that it was lead by a different brutal Communist dictator. In some ways, the People's Re public of China remained more communist, longer, than the USSR, but like the unnaturally Communist Slavic empire to its north, the unnatural Communist state to its south no longer is really a Communist state. It's not a nice regime either. It's a dictatorship of a type, but not really a Communist one. It more closely resembles the clerical dictatorships (dictatorships of clerks, i.e., professional bureaucrats) that broke out in some European states mid 20th Century. And China is open for business. Indeed, China is dictating business. It's not really capitalist, but it isn't Communist either.
The dictatorship in China will fall, ultimately, but for the time being its politburo is a ruthlessly pragmatic, expansionist, entity. And it doesn't benefit from a nuclear armed Stalinist state being next door. It doesn't benefit from the U.S. having a military presence on the Korean Peninsula either. And it sure wouldn't benefit from the resumption of the Korean War.
It would, however, benefit from a reunited Korea, as long at that Korea was friendly to it, and open to business for it. It likely doesn't care what kind of government that Korea has either.
South Korea, for that matter, would still like to reunite with the north, although that view is passing as a generation of South Koreans raised in peace and prosperity looses connections with their cousins to the north. For those who would reunite Korea, that era is passing, and the best time to accomplish it is now. Otherwise, the disparity in economics and, more significantly, culture may have grown too great for a younger generation of South Koreans to really look upon reunification with much enthusiasm.
Finally, truth be known, the US would probably be happy to leave South Korea, if it could. Indeed, we came close to doing so once before, during the Carter Administration, but Congressional reaction kept it from happening, probably wisely. Since that time, in fact, we've had to act on more than one occasion to make it plain that we would come to South Korea's defense, if the North attacked.
Only Japan really has a strong interest in keeping the United States on the Korean Peninsula. Neither the Chinese or the Koreans like the Japanese, and the US presence there is comforting for Japan, which is pretty nervous about recent developments on the Asian mainland as it is.
That's all why I suspect that not only are the North Korean threats childish bluster, or more accurately a childish tantrum, but that this may work out in short order.
We'll see, but my suspicion is that China will act to replace the Korean leadership shortly. That could happen in any number of ways, but if I were the "Dear Leader" I'd be nervous about accepting any invitations to visit Beijing in the near future. At any rate, it'd be an easy matter for the PRC to send Kim Jong-un into retirement, followed by a the rise of a friendly military dictatorship. That dictatorship would likely be prearranged to be very brief, with the leaders looking forward to retirement at some plushy villa in southern China. Prior to that, they'd be the heroes by opening the border and indicating that the days of Korean division were over, and that the ROK could come in and take over. That my sound farfetched, but we saw it with Germany, in which the Communist East Germany folded itself into the Federal Republic of Germany. Soon after such a reunification, we'd likely go home, our presence no longer needed or desired.
From that, China would get a neighbor that wasn't run by a nuclear armed baby, and it'd get a neighbor with a robust free market economy. South Korea would reunify with the north prior to developments making that undesirable, and the United States could end a lengthy expensive overseas commitment that serves only a singular goal, rather than a global strategic goal. China would also get us off the Asian mainland, which it'd likely like to have done. It would amount to sort of the Finlandization of Korea, but I suspect that everyone, except Japan, would be happy to have that occur.
China of 1953 was a Maoist state, not quite Stalinist, but no better and varying only, really, in that it was lead by a different brutal Communist dictator. In some ways, the People's Re public of China remained more communist, longer, than the USSR, but like the unnaturally Communist Slavic empire to its north, the unnatural Communist state to its south no longer is really a Communist state. It's not a nice regime either. It's a dictatorship of a type, but not really a Communist one. It more closely resembles the clerical dictatorships (dictatorships of clerks, i.e., professional bureaucrats) that broke out in some European states mid 20th Century. And China is open for business. Indeed, China is dictating business. It's not really capitalist, but it isn't Communist either.
Tank retriever of HHB, 3d Bn, 49th FA, Wyoming Army National Guard, 1987.
The dictatorship in China will fall, ultimately, but for the time being its politburo is a ruthlessly pragmatic, expansionist, entity. And it doesn't benefit from a nuclear armed Stalinist state being next door. It doesn't benefit from the U.S. having a military presence on the Korean Peninsula either. And it sure wouldn't benefit from the resumption of the Korean War.
It would, however, benefit from a reunited Korea, as long at that Korea was friendly to it, and open to business for it. It likely doesn't care what kind of government that Korea has either.
Bus garage, Seoul, 1987.
Seoul, 1987.
Only Japan really has a strong interest in keeping the United States on the Korean Peninsula. Neither the Chinese or the Koreans like the Japanese, and the US presence there is comforting for Japan, which is pretty nervous about recent developments on the Asian mainland as it is.
Howitzer battery, U.S. Army, South Korea, 1987.
8in Howitzers of the 3d Bn, 49th FA, Wyoming Army National Guard, in South Korea, 1987.
8in howitzers of the 3d Bn, 49th FA, in a cabbage field, South Korea, 1987.
That's all why I suspect that not only are the North Korean threats childish bluster, or more accurately a childish tantrum, but that this may work out in short order.
We'll see, but my suspicion is that China will act to replace the Korean leadership shortly. That could happen in any number of ways, but if I were the "Dear Leader" I'd be nervous about accepting any invitations to visit Beijing in the near future. At any rate, it'd be an easy matter for the PRC to send Kim Jong-un into retirement, followed by a the rise of a friendly military dictatorship. That dictatorship would likely be prearranged to be very brief, with the leaders looking forward to retirement at some plushy villa in southern China. Prior to that, they'd be the heroes by opening the border and indicating that the days of Korean division were over, and that the ROK could come in and take over. That my sound farfetched, but we saw it with Germany, in which the Communist East Germany folded itself into the Federal Republic of Germany. Soon after such a reunification, we'd likely go home, our presence no longer needed or desired.
From that, China would get a neighbor that wasn't run by a nuclear armed baby, and it'd get a neighbor with a robust free market economy. South Korea would reunify with the north prior to developments making that undesirable, and the United States could end a lengthy expensive overseas commitment that serves only a singular goal, rather than a global strategic goal. China would also get us off the Asian mainland, which it'd likely like to have done. It would amount to sort of the Finlandization of Korea, but I suspect that everyone, except Japan, would be happy to have that occur.
Your humble blogger, in South Korea, in 1987.
Friday, April 5, 2013
Railhead: Arminto Wyoming
Railhead: Arminto Wyoming: This is what is left of the sidetrack at Arminto Wyoming, and of a hotel along the rail one, which was located where the grove of trees stands.
I've just linked in two threads from my companion blog, Railhead, dedicated to railroad topics, which depict some things long gone by. This is one of them. This thread depicts Arminto Wyoming.
Arminto is a very small town in Natrona County Wyoming. So small in fact that I once had the odd experience of talking to a FedEx tractor trailer driver who stopped when he saw my me and my brother in law herding cattle north of Arminto. He was trying to deliver something to Arminto, and had driven right through it, not knowing what it was. People driving through this area today probably have next to no idea that this very tiny town is a town, or that it was ever economically significant.
But it in fact once was.
Arminto was the busiest sheep shipping railhead in the world in the first half of the 20th Century. More sheep were sent to market through Arminto than any other place on the globe.
I suppose the partial lesson in that is that economic endeavors that seem so significant at one point can certainly evaporate. Arminto's economic significance certainly has. Sheep no longer are shipped from its railhead. The railhead itself lacks pens. There is no longer hotel, which there once was. The small busy little bar burned down in the 1980s. The Sheepherders Fair, a really well attended local sheep based rodeo was moved to Powder River, and last year the last Sheepherders Fair was held. Ironically, sheep prices are up.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Updated Entry:
The post on Railhead has brought a number of interesting replies, including one viewer, Ray Galutia, who very generously provided his own photos. As these are so interesting, and historically valuable, I'm reposting the entire Railhead entry here, and posting Ray's additional photographs here.
This is what is left of the sidetrack at Arminto Wyoming, and of a hotel along the rail line, which was located where the grove of trees stands.
While now it would almost be impossible to tell, this location once shipped more sheep per year than any other spot on earth. It was the epicenter of the local sheep industry, and the busiest sheep shipping point on earth. It remained a significant sheep town well into the second half of the 20th Century, but the railhead fell into disuse when trucking took over in livestock transportation, and ultimately the collapse of the sheep industry following the repeal of the Defense Wool Incentive in the 1980s completed the town's decline. The famous local bar burned down in this period, and today the town is a mere shadow of its former self.
More on the history of this location can be found on the entry on this topic at Lex Anteinternet.
______________________________________________________________________________
Ray Galutia very generously provided us with photos depicting Arminto in the 1940s from his personal collection I'm going to link these photos, which are historically valuable, in here, and also over at Lex Anteinternet, in those instances in which the topics aren't on railroads. There will be more of those interesting linked in photos posted there.
I'm also going to repost this entry as a new current one, given that it's been updated to such an extent.
I've just linked in two threads from my companion blog, Railhead, dedicated to railroad topics, which depict some things long gone by. This is one of them. This thread depicts Arminto Wyoming.
Arminto is a very small town in Natrona County Wyoming. So small in fact that I once had the odd experience of talking to a FedEx tractor trailer driver who stopped when he saw my me and my brother in law herding cattle north of Arminto. He was trying to deliver something to Arminto, and had driven right through it, not knowing what it was. People driving through this area today probably have next to no idea that this very tiny town is a town, or that it was ever economically significant.
But it in fact once was.
Arminto was the busiest sheep shipping railhead in the world in the first half of the 20th Century. More sheep were sent to market through Arminto than any other place on the globe.
I suppose the partial lesson in that is that economic endeavors that seem so significant at one point can certainly evaporate. Arminto's economic significance certainly has. Sheep no longer are shipped from its railhead. The railhead itself lacks pens. There is no longer hotel, which there once was. The small busy little bar burned down in the 1980s. The Sheepherders Fair, a really well attended local sheep based rodeo was moved to Powder River, and last year the last Sheepherders Fair was held. Ironically, sheep prices are up.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Updated Entry:
The post on Railhead has brought a number of interesting replies, including one viewer, Ray Galutia, who very generously provided his own photos. As these are so interesting, and historically valuable, I'm reposting the entire Railhead entry here, and posting Ray's additional photographs here.
This is what is left of the sidetrack at Arminto Wyoming, and of a hotel along the rail line, which was located where the grove of trees stands.
While now it would almost be impossible to tell, this location once shipped more sheep per year than any other spot on earth. It was the epicenter of the local sheep industry, and the busiest sheep shipping point on earth. It remained a significant sheep town well into the second half of the 20th Century, but the railhead fell into disuse when trucking took over in livestock transportation, and ultimately the collapse of the sheep industry following the repeal of the Defense Wool Incentive in the 1980s completed the town's decline. The famous local bar burned down in this period, and today the town is a mere shadow of its former self.
More on the history of this location can be found on the entry on this topic at Lex Anteinternet.
______________________________________________________________________________
Ray Galutia very generously provided us with photos depicting Arminto in the 1940s from his personal collection I'm going to link these photos, which are historically valuable, in here, and also over at Lex Anteinternet, in those instances in which the topics aren't on railroads. There will be more of those interesting linked in photos posted there.
I'm also going to repost this entry as a new current one, given that it's been updated to such an extent.
Diesel train taking siding for a steam engine at
Arminto, 1947-1949.
The
location of this photograph, from 1947-1949, is actually quite close to
the ones posted immediately above, except it's from a different angle
looking back on the town.
Additional photographs uploaded only here:
Parents of Mr. Galutia.
Depot and Harpers Store.
Harper's Store.
Mr. Galutia and his father on the playground of the Arminto school, which no longer stands.
Snow plow in a much more active era for Arminto.
Pumping water to a train.
Mr. Galutia and his mother.
Mr. Galutia and his father on Arminto water tower.
Building sets where Harper's Store was located.
Water tower and treatment plant foundation.
Foundation of the Big Horn Hotel.
"
My car sets approximately where
one of the section houses sat ....and the clump of tree has two old
foundations and on the hill behind the trees is where the water tower sat
....my folks section house sat directly across the tracks from the trees
Water tower foundation.
Holding tank location.
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
Trout fishing on the North Platte
My father was a great fisherman.
My father and I, at a fish hatchery, in about 1966 or 1967.
And by "great," I mean great in every sense. He was very good at fishing. He was patient teaching fishing (a hard thing to do). And he loved fishing. The one and only time I ever recall him writing to a politician followed an oil spill in the North Platte, when he felt that the Governor we had at the time was failing to do enough to have the company that caused the spill be held responsible for the situation.
My father liked to hunt as well, but fishing was a greater passion for him. I like to fish, but hunting is much more of a passion with me. As I grew older there were plenty of instances in which I rode along with him in the fall, so that I could hunt while he fished, and then later there were some instances in which he rode with me so that he could fish, while I hunted. This is not to say that we didn't do both, but the strong nature of the mutually shared interests was slightly reversed in our personalities.
I fished pretty regularly up until I went to college. At that time, living in Laramie, I fished much less as Laramie, at 7,200 feet in elevation, is not great fishing country. I fished a bit in the Laramie River, but never with much success. And I fished a bit with a friend of mine in the Snowy Range, which was much better, even if the season was pretty short, given the high altitude. Waterfowling was better around Laramie, although it's not ideal with that. Of course, quite a few people go big game hunting in the area.
When I came back from Laramie, after going there in two blocks, once for my undergraduate degree from the University of Wyoming, and once for my JD I started fishing in the mountains once again. I didn't resume fishing the river, like my father had done, however, in this immediate area. I'm not sure why, but it's probably because I mostly fly fish. All this is by way of introduction to note that I went fishing on Good Friday with my daughter out in one of the locations that my father had frequented.
I'm pleased to note that the fishing was pretty good. We were bait (worm) fishing, and she caught a very nice Rainbow Trout. I caught a lesser Rainbow, and added to the Rainbow that she had caught ice fishing last month, we had three very nice fish for our Good Friday dinner. They were excellent. So, I have no complaints about the conditions of that part of the river over the intervening 25 or so years that I'd fished there.
I also will not claim, as posts of this type are so often inclined to do, that the area had been somehow ruined in the quarter century by the infusion of a lot of extra people. Frankly, I had expected to have a hard time finding a spot to fish, given that it was a day that a lot of people have off (one of the very few non civil holidays that is frequently observed as a day off). There weren't that many people fishing from the side of the river at all. Only one party was in the immediate vicinity, and that would have been normal at any time that I've fished it.
What did catch me way off guard, however, was the incredible volume of drift boats.
Drift boats either didn't exist, or they didn't exist locally to much of an extent, when I last frequented the river. Indeed, "fishing guides" didn't exist either. Now they do in profusion. For that matter, "catch and release" didn't exist as a local concept either. Up on the mountain streams, where I normally go, they don't exist to me, as I don't run into hardly anyone, so all that was an introduction into the evolution of modern fishing. For lack of a better word, and without meaning to insult, I might note that its sort of the yuppiefication of fishing, or perhaps the gentrification of fishing.
When I learned to fish as a boy, fishing wasn't a "sport" as people sort of imagine it now. Indeed, neither hunting or fishing were, or frankly at their essence now, are "sports." They're activities of a much deeper nature than that. When a person hunts or fishes, they're really engaging in a type of work that's the most basic and natural for humans, of which there are a bare few. That's probably what drives the impulse in people to do them, and for those who do not, there remains, in spite of what they might want to tell themselves, the same basic instinct, for which they find some, probably inadequate, substitute.
Because of that, in this locality, at that time, there was something much more primeval, and perhaps much more genuine, about fishing. People were happy to catch a nice fish, but we ate them. Indeed, people let fish go, but they were generally small fish that were too small to eat. The entire catch and release thing that some people engage in now didn't exist, and to me it still seems very strange.
The idea of a guide for fishing also seems very strange to me. Fishing would be something that people would know how to do, and not need a guild for. While we were fishing the other day, the kids and I observed as a party of fishermen with a guide went by, with the guide offering casting advice. They noted that a fish jumped up right behind them, unobserved by them all, while they were being so guided, which they found amusing. I do not begrudge the guilds their occupation at all, it just seems odd to me.
My rude primitiveness is probably reflected in my gear at that. I haven't bought any new fishing gear for myself in at least 30 years. My father had a lot of nice fishing stuff, but not massively expensive stuff, and I'm still using it. What we would have regarded as "nice" would probably horrify some now. Indeed, I went through a store a few months back to look at rods and was stunned by the price. Granted, these were in a store featuring Orvis rods, but still, I was amazed. A person can, however, get much cheaper ones that are still quality.
And they are very nice too, I might add. I have bought rods and reels for my kids, and they're great compared to the old stuff I've been using. I was using a fiberglass rod that was first rate when my father bought it, probably 30 or more years ago, but it's not anywhere near as nice as the carbon rod I bought my son for a quite reasonable price. I may need to go out and upgrade. Indeed, I'll apparently have to, as I found over the weekend that I couldn't find my spinning rod. I think I may have actually broken it last year, but at any rate, I have no idea where it is, if I still have it. The reel was pretty busted up and the rod pretty darned old, so this is really no great loss. I'll be looking at buying an Ugly Stick, which is what my son's nice rod is, which I used on Good Friday and really liked.
Anyhow, my point is not to complain about the evolution in fishing, or about the guides. Actually, I'm glad that the river is now seen as an important resource of that type, and I'm happy that there are people who can make a living from fishing. And I have no doubt that much of the new gear is pretty darned good, and that my old rods and reels are antiquated and now in need of some updating. The disappearance of my spinning rod (or actually rods) is probably a blessing. But I am a bit concerned about the gentrification of something that's so basic in origin. At some point, that's bad.
Fly fishing in particular seems to have acquired a certain snottiness in some quarters. I have no idea how that occurred. This wasn't the case, at least locally, when I was younger, and frankly I don't recall it being the case in general until after the move A River Runs Through It. That film is a great film, but it seemed to ironically inspire a certain class of fishing elitist. I note that its a true irony, as the fly fishing culture depicted in the film was simply the rural culture of the entire West well into the 20th Century, and frankly in a lot of it right up to now. The film, after all, depicts two brothers from modest means for whom fly fishing (the only kind of fishing depicted in the film) is a major activity. Lots of people from around here, of all backgrounds, experience the very same thing. But following the film there came to be a certain high end fly fishing "sport" view that is a bit snobby about other types of fishing. There's even at least one local lodge that offers fly fishing tours for out of state fishermen.
That sort of Balkanization and elevation of the elite, in an endeavor such at this, is a bit disturbing. The older generation of fishermen, myself included, did every kind of fishing. I have always preferred fly fishing, but that's because I like mountain streams. My father was a great fly fisherman, but he was a great fisherman in general. We also used spinning reels with bait (worms) and lures. One of my uncles, another great fisherman, always had boats and it was a great treat to go out on the lakes with him in the summer and troll. In other words, fishing, like food, is for everyone. Or at least it should be.
Monday, April 1, 2013
Today In Wyoming's History: April 1
Today In Wyoming's History: April 1: 1918 It was reported that by this day, for a period dating back to December 1, 1917, Wyoming's revenue's from oil royalties had increased 74%, an impact, no doubt, of World War One.
Riding in, in Yellowstone, in 1933.
305228_615777081770983_2135914111_n.jpg (JPEG Image, 709 × 397 pixels)
The Yellowstone River begins outside of the park to the southeast where the North Fork of the Yellowstone and the South Fork of the Yellowstone meet. The North Fork is the larger of the two and begins on the slopes of Younts Peak in the Absaroka Mountains southeast of the park. This man sits on this slope in September of 1933.From the Yellowstone National Park Facebook page.
Saturday, March 30, 2013
Territorial Farriers in the Royal Artillery, World War One
269362_301724679957138_385232645_n.jpg (JPEG Image, 960 × 613 pixels)
Critical support troops during the First World War, I wonder how many of these farriers occupied this vocation in civilian life as well?
And, I wonder where they were 20 years later, say in 1938?
Related Threads:
Working With Animals.
Working With Animals.
Critical support troops during the First World War, I wonder how many of these farriers occupied this vocation in civilian life as well?
And, I wonder where they were 20 years later, say in 1938?
Related Threads:
Working With Animals.
Working With Animals.
Friday, March 29, 2013
Tuesday, March 26, 2013
A matter of prospective
Observation by Army officer Thaddeus H. Stanton, about the Powder River Basin, in April 7, 1876, as published in The New York Tribune:
The country lying east of the Bighorn Mountains, along the Rosebud, Tongue and Powder Rivers, is extremely uninviting. It is generally a badlands country, with high buttes of indurate clay and sandstone, attaining almost the magnitude of mountains. But in this entire region there are no auriferous strata, and no rock harder than that above described. I feel compelled to make this statement in opposition to the statements of many maps of that country which are being scattered throughout the land, upon which gold is represented as among the minerals to be found in the Panther and Wolf Mountains (the highest badlands buttes above described), and where there is not only i no gold, but where the country has not a single gold-bearing strata or feature. The Bighorn range of mountains, one of the finest on the continent, doubtless is rich in precious metals and this region is large enough to give room for a large mining population. The Black Hills country does not compare with it in extent, and probably not in the amount of concealed treasure. But between the Black Hills and the Bighorn Mountains there is no gold, and no gold-bearing country. Neither is there any land that would bear the hardiest grain or vegetable. There is no timber worthy of the name; and water is scarce and of bad quality usually, and grass is poor and thing. Altogether, nearly the entire region lying south and east of the Yellowstone River, from the Bighorn range to the Black Hills, is utterly worthless.Major Stanton's opinion seems a bit harsh.
Sequestration and the courts
From this morning's Denver Post:
Sequestration was supposed to be the hammer that was to keep Congress from ending in a budgetary impasse, but it didn't work. Lots of pre deadline Executive Branch commentary, which frankly was overdone, failed to move very many people and the public reacted with a big yawn. So far, much of the commentary has been on nobody really noticing, but here's something that some people will notice to be sure. It's odd to even think of a weekday closed to criminal proceedings. I'm a bit skeptical that they'll be actually able to hold to that, given the probably resulting delays, but this is definitely a noticeable item.
U.S. District Court in Denver won't hold hearings and trials in criminal cases on Fridays between April 26 and Sept. 30 this year because of furloughs made necessary by sequestration budget cuts.My goodness, what an odd development.
Sequestration was supposed to be the hammer that was to keep Congress from ending in a budgetary impasse, but it didn't work. Lots of pre deadline Executive Branch commentary, which frankly was overdone, failed to move very many people and the public reacted with a big yawn. So far, much of the commentary has been on nobody really noticing, but here's something that some people will notice to be sure. It's odd to even think of a weekday closed to criminal proceedings. I'm a bit skeptical that they'll be actually able to hold to that, given the probably resulting delays, but this is definitely a noticeable item.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)