Maslow

HBR Blog Network

Four Major Changes in Global Prosperity

by Nathan Gamester  |   1:00 PM October 30, 2013

 

It was Abraham Maslow who gave us that famous observation — “when the only tool you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”  We all understand the implication: Anyone attempting to solve an ambiguous problem should start out in possession of a broad set of tools.

It is curious, then, that we continue to fall into the trap of reaching for one dominant tool for measuring the success of nations –- a narrow gauge of economic growth — and believing that the fixes it suggests are the one way to achieve progress.

Of course economic success is important –- most obviously in providing citizens with the things that make life better (healthcare, education, etc.) -– but only up to a point. Wealth alone does not make for a happy and successful society. Measuring success based solely on wealth, therefore, misses the many nuances of human wellbeing. National prosperity should be defined as much by human freedom, sound democracy, vibrant society, and entrepreneurial opportunity as it is by a growing economy.

Over recent years, governments too have increasingly begun to realize that focusing on GDP growth alone does not necessarily lead to improvements in living standards of their citizens. Put simply, what’s good for increasing GDP may not be good for the long-term betterment of society. The outcome of this is the realization that what we measure needs to catch up with what we value.

Over the last seven years, the Legatum Institute has been at the forefront of this “beyond GDP” discussion. Our annual Prosperity Index –- the 2013 edition of which we released yesterday –- measures national prosperity based on eight core pillars that combine “hard” data with survey data. The result is the most comprehensive assessment of national prosperity of its kind.

This year the Prosperity Index offers five consecutive years of comparable data. The world has changed a lot over the last five years, and events have occurred that changed the course of history for millions of people — the financial crisis of 2008, the Arab Spring, and the ongoing civil war in Syria, to name just a few.

In assessing national prosperity, considering trends over five years of data allows us to step back from the twists and turns of specific circumstances and, instead, consider the general direction of travel. And so what do we observe from this vantage point? Here are four observations that stand out.

Global Prosperity is Rising. Despite the tumultuous events of the last five years, global prosperity is actually still on the rise. This is driven by big technological advancements, as more and more people gain access to infrastructure vital for commerce and entrepreneurship to thrive. Also driving global prosperity are huge advancements in global health (especially across sub-Saharan Africa). For example, life expectancy in sub-Saharan Africa has risen by more than three years just since 2010.

Latin America is Rising. The Prosperity Index shows that Latin America is a region on the rise, demonstrating steady economic growth. Countries such as Mexico, Brazil, Chile, and Panama perform well on economic measures. In fact, in the last five years, every single country in Latin America and the Caribbean (with the exception of Jamaica) has improved its economic performance in the Index.

Europe’s Loss is Asia’s Gain. The trend from Latin America adds to a wider observation that a new economic order is emerging. As many Western countries – predominantly European countries – have fallen from being among the top-performing economies in the world, they have been replaced at the top by Asian countries. Malaysia, China, and Thailand now rank among the top 15 countries on economic measures, occupying rankings that, five years ago, were held by countries such as Denmark, Finland, Netherlands, and Ireland.

Asia Rising, Europe Falling Graphic

Bangladesh overtakes India. For the first time, Bangladesh has overtaken India, ranking 103rd overall, compared to 106th for India. The two countries have been moving in opposite directions since 2009. India has fallen down the rankings on six of the eight pillars of prosperity, while Bangladesh has improved its position on six of the eight. India has declined most dramatically in Safety & Security, the Economy, and Governance. The data show that Bangladeshis live longer, healthier, and safer lives than their Indian counterparts.

Using a broad framework for measuring success allows for a clear-eyed understanding of the factors that both promote and restrain prosperity. This – to borrow Maslow’s terminology – provides the policymaker with tools beyond just a hammer with which to fix problems.

The path to prosperity for nations is complex. The history of human progress reveals a wide array of factors that combine to propel nations forward on their journey of development. The precise combination and ordering of these elements may be debated and questioned, but the truth remains: national progress – much like human progress – is comprised of a complex blend of different factors.

The Prosperity Index, much like Maslow’s most famous contribution (the hierarchy of needs), attempts to provide a framework to understand and measure some of the most important factors that drive progress and development.

More blog posts by 

Aquifers in BC

The original is a great PDF. But complex. This is only here in case they take down the original.

WHICH IS HERE: http://www.forrex.org/sites/default/files/publications/articles/Streamline_Vol13_No1_Art3.pdf

10 Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009

Understanding the

Types of Aquifers in

the Canadian Cordillera

Hydrogeologic Region to

Better Manage and Protect

Groundwater

Mike Wei, Diana Allen, Alan Kohut, Steve Grasby, Kevin Ronneseth,

and Bob Turner

Peer-reviewed Synthesis Article

Introduction

G

roundwater is often viewed as

a mysterious and challenging

resource to manage as it is hidden

underground. Generally, the only

obvious sign of groundwater to the

public is water flowing from a spring

or from a well. Where and how the

groundwater got to the spring or

well and how much is available are

questions of interest when trying

to protect the resource. Extending

knowledge of groundwater and

aquifers

—permeable, water-bearing

geological formations or deposits that

transmit and store groundwater—to

communities and land and water

resource decision makers has been a

challenge in British Columbia because

of the general lack of comprehensive

studies in many areas. If similar types

of aquifers have similar characteristics,

it may be reasonable to extrapolate

knowledge from well-studied areas to

predict properties of a specific aquifer

where little is known. Although this

inferred knowledge does not replace

actual testing and assessment of the

local aquifer, it can be useful, as a first

step, to develop a working hypothesis

about the local aquifer, especially in

sparsely studied areas. This article

describes a system of categorizing

aquifers in the Canadian Cordillera

Hydrogeologic Region (first described

by Halstead [1967] and here referred

to as the “Region” or “Cordillera”)

based on general hydrogeological

characteristics (Figure 1). Categorizing

aquifers promotes increased general

knowledge and understanding of

the characteristics of local aquifers in

this Region, and thus supports the

management and protection of local

groundwater resources.

The Canadian Cordillera Hydrogeologic

Region occupies the

mountainous region that covers

much of British Columbia (except

the Peace River country), as well

as the Rocky Mountain foothills of

southwestern Alberta, the southern

part of the Yukon Territory, and

part of the Northwest Territories;

it is the westernmost of Canada’s

hydrogeologic regions (Figure 1;

Sharpe et al., in press). Aquifers in the

Region supply water to an estimated

1 million persons for drinking water,

as well as for irrigation, aquaculture,

and industrial processing needs. The

Region is physiographically diverse,

comprising massive mountain ranges,

highlands, foothills, plateaus, basins,

and lowlands, with a total relief of

over 4000 m (the greatest in Canada)

and covering over 1 million km

2. The

Region’s climate varies widely from

Mediterranean conditions along the

southwest coast to polar conditions

Figure 1. Hydrogeologic regions of Canada (Source: Rivera, in press; reproduced with

permission of the Geological Survey of Canada).

Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009 11

Continued on page 12

at high mountain elevations and in

the north. Mean annual precipitation

generally decreases from west to

east across the Region (following the

general movement of the weather

fronts), ranging, for example, from

3306 mm at Tofino on the west coast

of Vancouver Island to 293 mm at

Kamloops and 472 mm at Banff,

Alberta. Annual precipitation also

generally increases with elevation due

to orographic effects.

Seasonal climatic variations control

the annual quantity and form of

precipitation, thereby affecting the

timing and amount of runoff to

streams and recharge to aquifers

in the Cordillera. Coastal areas

experience highest precipitation

during the winter months, with much

of it falling as rain, except at higher

elevations where it may fall as snow.

In these coastal areas, groundwater

recharge mostly occurs during the

winter months when the rate of

evaporation and transpiration are at

their seasonal lowest. Consequently,

the natural groundwater levels in

coastal areas show a seasonal high

during winter or early spring, and

decline from spring to late fall (see

Figure 2a). In contrast, interior areas

have their highest precipitation

during the summer months, but

much of this is evaporated or

transpired and does not normally

contribute to groundwater recharge.

In the interior, snow accumulations

during the winter months, and at

higher elevations, are important for

recharge during the spring and early

summer when snowmelt occurs.

Thus, groundwater levels in the

interior generally are at a seasonal

high in late spring or early summer

and then decline over the summer

and early fall. The groundwater level

generally reaches a seasonal low

during the winter months, when

precipitation at the land surface is

frozen (see Figure 2b).

Glacial history, surficial and bedrock

geology, and tectonic history

greatly influence the occurrence,

distribution, and characteristics of

aquifers in the Region. Most surficial

or unconsolidated aquifers are formed

by deposition of sand and gravel in

moving water under a fluvial or, if by

moving water during glacial times, a

glaciofluvial environment related to

the last period of glaciation. Glaciofluvial

sand and gravel aquifers formed

during ice advance tend to be overlain

by till or glaciolacustrine clay and

silt, and are lithologically confined.

Glaciofluvial sand and gravel aquifers

formed during the melting of the

Figure 2a. Average monthly precipitation at Nanaimo (coastal setting: the blue bars represent

rainfall and the grey bars represent snowfall). The mean annual precipitation at Nanaimo

is 1163 mm. Also plotted (dark blue line) is the average monthly groundwater level from

Observation Well No. 228. Groundwater level in the aquifer is recharged by rain falling during

the fall and winter months (November to February).

Figure 2b. Average monthly precipitation at Cranbrook (interior setting: the blue bars

represent rainfall and the grey bars represent snowfall). The mean annual precipitation at

Cranbrook is 411 mm. Also plotted (dark blue line) is the average monthly groundwater level

from Observation Well No. 291. Groundwater level in the aquifer is recharged, not from the

relatively high precipitation in May–June, but rather from snowmelt from the preceding winter

months (November to March).

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Precipitation (mm)

Groundwater level (m)

OW 228

0

40

80

120

160

200 3

4

5

6

7

8

9

Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Precipitation (mm)

Groundwater level (m)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

10

11

12

13

14

9

OW 291

12 Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009

Continued from page 11

ice are commonly unconfined. The

bedrock geology of the Cordillera is

extremely varied and complex due

to the Region’s geologic, tectonic,

and volcanic history. Holland (1976)

generalized the bedrock geology of

the Region into six main bedrock

types:

1. intrusive igneous rocks;

2. flat-lying lava, and some

sedimentary rocks;

3. flat or gently dipping sedimentary

rocks;

4. folded sedimentary rocks;

5. folded and faulted volcanic and

sedimentary rocks; and

6. foliated metamorphic rocks of

various ages.

Despite the presence of different

types of bedrock in the Cordillera,

bedrock permeability exists mostly

as a result of development of

fractures or faults from tectonic

forces or, in limestone, from

development of dissolution cavities

(karst). In the Cordillera, fractures

and faults developed in igneous

intrusive, foliated metamorphic,

and folded and faulted volcanic

and sedimentary rocks, give these

types of rocks sufficient secondary

permeability to form aquifers. The

permeability, however, is often

anisotropic

1 because the fractures or

faults are discrete and have specific

orientations in the bedrock. The

porosity and

storativity 2 of fractured

or faulted bedrock are also very low

(e.g., porosity of less than a few

percent). Extensive areas of central

British Columbia are underlain by

relatively unaltered, flat-lying lava

of Tertiary age (e.g., the Cariboo-

Chilcotin area). These are mostly

basalts and individual flows that

can be hundreds of metres thick.

This lava forms an important aquifer

because groundwater typically

occurs in joints, and in fractured and

weathered contact zones between

the lava flows.

The Province of British Columbia

and the Canadian Government

(through the Geological Survey of

Canada and Environment Canada)

have conducted groundwater studies

in the Region since the 1950s. The

Province of British Columbia has

also been mapping and classifying

developed aquifers in the Region

since 1994 (for background on the

BC Aquifer Classification System, see

adjacent sidebar and Berardinucci

and Ronneseth 2002). This work, and

the resulting inventory, has enabled

the identification of aquifer types

within the Region and improved

our understanding of their general

hydrogeologic characteristics.

Major Aquifer Types in

the Canadian Cordillera

Hydrogeologic Region

In the Cordillera Hydrogeologic

Region, aquifers generally fall into the

following six categories (refer also to

Figures 3a and 3b).

Unconsolidated Sand and

Gravel Aquifers

1.

Unconfined 3 fluvial or glaciofluvial

aquifers along river or stream

valleys

a. Aquifers along major higherorder

rivers, where the potential

of hydraulic connection with

the river exists,

b. Aquifers along moderate-order

rivers, where the potential of

hydraulic connection with the

river exists, or

c. Aquifers along lower-order

(< 3–4) streams in confined

valleys, where aquifer thickness

and lateral extent are more

limited

2. Unconfined deltaic aquifers

3. Unconfined alluvial fan or colluvial

aquifers

4. Aquifers of glacial or pre-glacial

origin

a. Unconfined glaciofluvial

outwash or ice contact aquifers,

b.

Confined 4 aquifers of glacial or

pre-glacial origin, or

Continued on page 14

c. Confined aquifers associated

with glaciomarine environments

Bedrock Aquifers

5. Sedimentary rock aquifers

a. Fractured sedimentary bedrock

aquifers, or

b. Karstic limestone aquifers

6. Crystalline rock aquifers

a. Flat-lying or gently-dipping

volcanic flow rock aquifers, or

b. Crystalline granitic,

metamorphic, metasedimentary,

meta-volcanic,

and volcanic rock aquifers

The categories of aquifer types are

based on geologic and hydrologic

properties, as well as on practical

considerations, such as data

availability. The main geologic

factors are the origin and type of the

geologic deposit that comprise an

aquifer (e.g., sand and gravel aquifer

forming a delta at the mouth of a

river or a plutonic granitic fractured

bedrock aquifer). The origin and type

of geologic deposit often governs an

aquifer’s hydraulic properties, such

as the nature of the porous medium

(porous sand and gravel, or fractured

bedrock) and ability to transmit and

store water. Another consideration is

the hydraulic connection between an

aquifer and a river, stream, or lake.

A direct hydraulic connection can

be advantageous for potential well

yields because pumping could induce

infiltration of surface water into those

aquifers. A practical consideration,

particularly for unconsolidated

aquifers buried at depth, is that it is

often difficult to identify the origin

of these buried unconsolidated sand

and gravel aquifers based on very

limited well record data. Buried

unconsolidated sand and gravel

aquifers are grouped into confined,

unconsolidated sand and gravel

aquifers of glacial or pre-glacial

origin (Type 4b). Descriptions of the

aquifer types are presented directly

below; many of the aquifer types are

illustrated in Figures 3a and 3b, which

represent aquifers in a coastal and

interior setting, respectively.

Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009 13

T

he British Columbia Aquifer Classification System was developed in 1994

(Kreye and Wei 1994). Its objective was to interpret raw data (primarily well

records and geologic mapping) to identify and classify aquifers, and thus:

provide a framework to direct detailed aquifer mapping and characterization;

provide a method of screening and prioritizing management, protection,

and remedial efforts on a provincial, regional, and local level;

identify the level of management and protection an aquifer requires;

build an inventory of the aquifers in the province; and

increase public knowledge and understanding of their local aquifer.

The aquifer classification system has two main components (Figure A-1):

a. classification component

b. ranking value component

The

classification component classifies an aquifer on the basis its level

of development and its vulnerability to contamination. The classification

component categorizes an aquifer based on its current level of groundwater

development and vulnerability to contamination (categories A, B, and C for

high, moderate, and low vulnerability, respectively). The level of development

(categories I, II, and III for high, moderate, and light development, respectively)

compares the amount of groundwater withdrawn from an aquifer (demand)

to the aquifer’s inferred ability to supply groundwater for use (productivity).

The level of vulnerability (categories I, II, and III for high, moderate, and low

vulnerability, respectively) of an aquifer is based on whether or not an aquifer is

confined.

The combination of the three development and three vulnerability categories

results in nine aquifer classes. The nine aquifer classes have an implied priority

from a general management and protection standpoint, from IIIC, which is the

lowest priority, to IA, which is the highest (Figure A-2).

The

ranking value component assigns a number value to indicate the relative

importance of an aquifer. Assigned values are derived from the following

criteria:

1. aquifer productivity;

2. aquifer vulnerability to surface contamination;

3. aquifer area or size;

4. demand on the resource;

5. type of groundwater use; and known documented

groundwater concerns related to:

6. quality; and

7. quantity.

The ranking value is determined by summing the points for each criterion

(Figure A-3): the lowest ranking value possible is 5, and the highest ranking

value possible is 21. Generally, the aquifer with the greater ranking value has

the greater priority. Figure A-3 shows the ranking values applied for each

criterion.

The classification and ranking value components are determined for the aquifer

as a whole, and not for parts of aquifers.

To promote the appropriate use of the aquifer classification system, a guidance

document was produced to assist users in interpreting and using the aquifer

maps. This document can be found at:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wsd/plan_protect_

sustain/groundwater/aquifers/reports/aquifer_maps.pdf

The aquifer maps and other hydrological information are also available online

at:

http://www.env.gov.bc.ca/wsd/data_searches/wrbc/index.html

The BC Aquifer Classification System

Figure A-1. The British Columbia Aquifer

Classification System (Source: Rivera, in press;

reproduced with permission of the Geological

Survey of Canada).

Figure A-2. Aquifer classes (Source: Rivera,

in press; reproduced with permission of the

Geological Survey of Canada).

Figure A-3. Criteria and points for aquifer

ranking value (Source: Rivera, in press;

reproduced with permission of the Geological

Survey of Canada).

14 Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009

Type 1 –

This category covers sand

and gravel aquifers that are generally

shallow, unconfined, and occur

along river or stream valleys. Often

both fluvial and glaciofluvial sand

and gravel deposits form an aquifer

along the river or stream valley

bottom. Therefore, shallow sand and

gravel aquifers underlying river or

stream valleys—whether of fluvial or

glaciofluvial origin—are categorized

as the same general aquifer type. This

category is further subdivided into

the following three sub-categories.

Type 1a – Aquifers found along

major higher-order rivers with

potential hydraulic connection to

the river. These rivers are generally

of low gradient and the depositional

energy is relatively low to

cause deposition of mostly sand,

silt, some clay, and some gravel

(e.g., the Chilliwack-Rosedale

aquifer along the Fraser River near

the City of Chilliwack).

Type 1b – Unconfined sand and

gravel aquifers found along

moderate-order rivers with

potential hydraulic connection to

the river. These rivers have higher

gradients compared to rivers of

higher stream orders and the

depositional energy is relatively

high to cause deposition of mostly

sand and gravel (e.g., the fluvial

sand and gravel deposit along

the Cowichan River on the east

coast of Vancouver Island near the

community of Duncan; the fluvial

and terraced glaciofluvial sand and

gravel deposits along the Kettle

River at the Southern Interior

community of Grand Forks).

Type 1c – Sand and gravel aquifers

found along lower-order (< 3–4)

streams in confined valleys with

floodplains of limited lateral

extent, where aquifer thickness

and size are more limited (e.g.,

fluvial or glaciofluvial deposits

along a mountain stream).

Type 2 –

This category covers sand

and gravel aquifers that are shallow,

unconfined, and which form deltas

Figure 3b. Schematic diagram showing some of the different types of aquifers in the Region

in an interior setting (Source: Rivera, in press; reproduced with permission of the Geological

Survey of Canada).

Continued from page 12

Figure 3a. Schematic diagram showing some of the different types of aquifers in the Region

in a coastal setting (Source: Rivera, in press; reproduced with permission of the Geological

Survey of Canada).

at the mouth of rivers and streams

(e.g., the Scotch Creek aquifer at

Shuswap Lake). Older deltas buried at

depth below till, glaciolacustrine, or

glaciomarine deposits have not been

included here because it is generally

difficult to identify buried sand and

gravel as deltas based on limited

data. These buried aquifers would be

categorized under sand and gravel

aquifers of glacial or pre-glacial origin

(i.e., aquifer Type 4b).

Type 3 –

This category covers sand

and gravel aquifers that form alluvial

fans or are of colluvial origin near the

land surface. As with Type 2 aquifers,

this category excludes older alluvial or

colluvial aquifers buried at depth. The

Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009 15

Vedder River Fan aquifer at the City

of Chilliwack is an example of this

type of aquifer.

Type 4 –

This category covers known

glaciofluvial sand and gravel aquifers,

as well as other sand and gravel

aquifers identified in well records

as occurring at depth, underneath

till or glaciolacustrine deposits, and

glaciomarine sand, sand and gravel

aquifers. This category is further

subdivided into the following three

sub-categories.

Type 4a – Unconfined glaciofluvial

outwash or ice contact sand

and gravel aquifers, generally

formed near or at the end of

the last period of glaciation. The

Abbotsford-Sumas Aquifer is

perhaps the most well-known and

studied aquifer of this type in the

Cordillera Region.

Type 4b – Confined sand and

gravel aquifers underneath till,

in between till layers, or

underlying glaciolacustrine

deposits. The Quadra Sand,

which occurs in the Georgia

Depression on the east coast of

Vancouver Island and along the

southern mainland coast, is an

excellent example of a confined

glaciofluvial sand and gravel

aquifer consisting of sand and

gravel deposited as the glacier

advanced south along the Georgia

Depression. Other confined

glaciofluvial sand and gravel

aquifers occur between till layers,

which is indicative of deposition

during glaciation. Still other

confined sand and gravel aquifers

may be fluvial, alluvial, or colluvial

deposits from a time prior to

glaciation (and therefore lie

underneath till or glaciolacustrine

deposits). Unless a confined sand

and gravel aquifer has been well

studied, it is often difficult to

determine its geologic origin and

geomorphology based on limited

data. Therefore, any waterbearing

sand and gravel occurring

underneath till, in between till

layers, or under glaciolacustrine

deposits is included in this

sub-category.

Type 4c – Sand and gravel aquifers

that occur underneath known

sand, silt, and clay deposited

under a marine environment near

the coast. Most of the few known

aquifers in this category occur

in the deep marine sediments at

depth in low-lying areas in the

Fraser Lowland, in Surrey and

Langley, east of Vancouver.

Type 5 –

This category is further

subdivided into two sub-categories:

(a) fractured sedimentary rocks

and (b) karstic limestone rocks.

The Nanaimo Group of fractured

and faulted sedimentary rocks in

the Gulf Islands and east coast of

Vancouver Island is a classic example

of the former sub-category. The

limestone formations in the Rocky

Mountains are an example of the

latter sub-category. For fractured

sedimentary rocks, groundwater

flow occurs mostly along joints and

in fractures and faults. Although

this classification may also apply

to karstic limestone, the major

difference is that groundwater may

flow in open dissolution channels

and large cavities in karstic limestone

aquifers.

Type 6 –

This category is subdivided

into two sub-categories: (a) flatlying

to gently dipping volcanic flow

aquifers and (b) fractured crystalline

rocks. Groundwater flow in flat-lying

to gently dipping volcanic rocks can

be through joints and fractures, but

also in broken, weathered zones

between flows. The large volcanic

flow bedrock aquifer in the Central

Interior of British Columbia near

70-Mile House is an example of this

type of aquifer.

Groundwater flow in fractured

crystalline rocks is mostly along

joints, fractures, and faults. This

sub-category includes igneous

intrusive or metamorphic rocks

(such as the fractured granodiorite

aquifer underlying the Saanich

Peninsula, north of Victoria). The

meta-sedimentary, older volcanic,

and meta-volcanic rocks are most

similar in hydrogeological properties

to granitic and metamorphic rocks

and, therefore, have been included

in this sub-category.

General Aquifer

Characteristics

A summary of some of the

characteristics for each category or

sub-category of aquifer is presented

in Table 1, including size, reported

well depths and yields, representative

transmissivity

5 values, and potential

hydraulic connection to surface

water. The summary information in

Table 1 was compiled from available

well records, attribute data associated

with the classified aquifers, and

available groundwater reports.

Generally, sand and gravel aquifers

(Types 1–4) are of limited size (<

1 km

2 to over 100 km2, with average

sizes of a few to 10s of square

kilometres). Their limited size reflects

the variable topography and relief

of the Canadian Cordillera Hydrogeologic

Region. Bedrock aquifers can

be larger, but even so, aquifers in the

Cordillera are not typically considered

“regional” aquifers.

Table 1 also shows that unconfined

sand and gravel aquifers (Types 1,

2, 3, and 4a) are generally shallower

(inferred from the well depth) than

confined sand and gravel aquifers

(Types 4b and 4c) and bedrock

aquifers (Types 5 and 6). The

shallower, unconfined sand and

gravel aquifers (Types 1, 2, 3, and

4a) are considered highly vulnerable

to contamination whereas the

generally deeper, confined sand and

gravel aquifers (Type 4b and 4c)

are considered to have a moderate

to low vulnerability. In the Region,

widespread nitrate contamination

from human activities is found in

unconsolidated, unconfined aquifers

(Types 1b, 2, 4a) where intense

agricultural activity occurs or a high

density of on-site sewerage systems

and shallow water tables are present;

these are the most vulnerable aquifers.

Continued on page 17

16 Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009

Table 1. Summary of hydrogeologic characteristics of the major aquifer system types in the Cordillera

Hydrogeologic Region (Source: Rivera in press; reproduced with permission of the Geological Survey of Canada).

Aquifer type

Range;

average

size (km

2)

Average

range;

average

median

well depths

(m)

Average

range;

average

median

well yields

(L/s)

Range;

geometric

mean

transmissivity

(m

2/d)

Hydraulic

connections

with surface

water?

Examples of aquifer types

1. Unconfined aquifers of fluvial or glaciofluvial origin along river valley bottoms

a. Aquifers along

higher-order rivers

< 1–140;

27

12–83;

23

2–17;

3

350–22 000;

4500

Common

Agassiz, Chilliwack-

Rosedale

b. Aquifers along

moderate-order rivers

< 1–120;

15

11–53;

22

2–41;

6

1–36 000;

1300

Common

Grand Forks, Duncan,

Chemainus, Nechako,

Merritt

c. Aquifers along

lower-order streams

< 1–23;

7

9–43;

19

1–22;

4

160–240;

200 (based on

two values)

Cache Creek, Little Fort

2. Unconfined deltaic

aquifers

< 1–19;

4

5–27;

12

2–15;

6

960–2390;

1500

Common Scotch Creek near Chase

3. Unconfined

alluvial, colluvial fan

aquifers

< 1–54;

5

13–47;

24

2–23;

4

25–5600;

710

Common

in aquifers

adjacent to

surface water

Vedder River Fan at

Chilliwack

4. Aquifers of glacial or pre-glacial origin

a. Unconfined glaciofluvial

aquifers

< 1–90;

8

12–59;

24

1–22;

3

2–89 000;

690

Common

in aquifers

adjacent to

surface water

Abbotsford, Langley,

Hopington

b. Confined glacial or

pre-glacial aquifers

< 1–330;

13

20–83;

39

0.8–12;

2

1–120 000;

250

Quadra Sand aquifers

in the Georgia Basin,

Okanagan and Coldstream

valleys

c. Confined glaciomarine

aquifers

2–190; 32

23–180;

61

0.1–14;

0.6

45–410;

150

Limited

Nicomekl-Serpentine in

Surrey and Langley

5. Sedimentary rock aquifers

a. Fractured

sedimentary rock

aquifers

< 1–700;

24

22–140;

56

0.1–3;

0.3

0.1–480;

4

Limited

Nanaimo Group aquifers

in the Gulf Islands and east

coast of Vancouver Island

b. Karstic aquifers

2–36;

11

35–130;

75

0.1–1;

0.3

N/A

Unknown,

but possible

Limestone aquifers in the

Central Canadian Rockies,

Sorrento, Fort St. James

6. Crystalline rock aquifers

a. Flat-lying volcanic

flow aquifers

< 1–6500;

420

21–130;

62

0.1–3;

0.3

11–47;

23 (based on

three values)

Limited

Aquifer classification #124

around 70 Mile House

b. Fractured

igneous intrusive,

metamorphic,

fractured volcanic, or

metavolcanic aquifers

< 1–540;

31

28–150;

71

0.1–5;

0.4

0.2–400;

9

Limited

Saanich granodiorite,

granitic aquifers along

Sunshine Coast, metabasalt

aquifer at Metchosin near

Victoria

Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009 17

 

Although some nitrate is also

found in confined unconsolidated

aquifers (Type 4b), windows may

be present in the confining layers

in those aquifers; nitrate found in

Type 4b aquifers is usually isolated

or localized. The vulnerability of

bedrock aquifers (Types 5 and 6) in

the Region is variable and depends

to a large degree

on the nature

and thickness

of overlying

unconsolidated

materials.

Shallow, unconfined

sand and

gravel aquifers are

also expected to

have the greatest

potential of

hydraulic connection

to surface

water. Public water supply wells

completed into shallow Type 1, 2,

and 3 aquifers have the potential to

draw in surface water during pumping

and may require an assessment

to determine whether disinfection

of the well water is required before

distribution and use.

The productivity of aquifers, as

reflected by the reported well yield

and transmissivity, is generally

greater for sand and gravel aquifers

than bedrock aquifers. Despite their

limited size, the sand and gravel

aquifers in the Cordillera are actually

some of the most productive in

Canada (e.g., well yields of up to

several 10s of litres per second and

transmissivity values of up to 10s of

thousands of square metres per day).

The productivity of bedrock aquifers

is generally lower, but bedrock can

also be a viable source of domestic

water supply where sand and gravel

aquifers are not present.

Conclusions

Knowledge of local aquifer

characteristics is key to managing

the local groundwater resource.

Continued from page 15

To support local management and

protection of groundwater, however,

it may not be practical to conduct

detailed aquifer characterization

studies for each of the more than

900 developed aquifers known to

exist in the Canadian Cordillera

Hydrogeologic Region. Therefore, if

an aquifer’s type can be categorized

through simpler assessment

techniques such as

interpretation of

local well records

and surficial and

bedrock geologic

mapping, then it

may be possible

to ascertain

some general

characteristics of the

local aquifer (e.g.,

local extent, shallow

or deep, expected

productivity,

potential connection

to surface water, confined/

unconfined) based on similar types

of aquifers studied elsewhere.

Understanding and categorizing a

local aquifer’s general characteristics

may allow decision makers to start

developing broad management and

protection strategies. For example, it

may be important for a drinking water

officer to recognize the need to assess

the potential connection between

surface water and groundwater and

to establish disinfection requirements

for the operation of a public water

supply well that is drilled into a Type

1, 2, or 3 aquifer. Where Type 1,

2, 3, and 4a aquifers exist and are

relied upon as a water supply source,

a local government may want to

consider the use of more detailed

vulnerability mapping to identify

areas of high vulnerability or high

risk to aid in planning or zoning land

use. Finally, local governments may

want to consider establishing more

stringent pumping test requirements

under water servicing by-laws for

new subdivision developments where

the source of water supply is from

a fractured rock aquifer (Type 5b or

Type 6 aquifer).

Acknowledgements

This work was funded by the

Geological Survey of Canada and BC

Ministry of Environment. This article

is based on Chapter 9 (Wei et al., in

press) from the Geological Survey

of Canada’s,

Groundwater Resources

in Canada

(Rivera, in press). All

figures and tables in this article are

reproduced with permission of the

Geological Survey of Canada.

The authors would also like to

acknowledge the constructive

comments of T. Redding and two

anonymous reviewers.

Endnotes

1

Anisotropic means physical

properties of an aquifer or a

geologic formation, such as

permeability, is not the same in

all directions.

2

Storativity means the amount

of water an aquifer will release

or yield from its pores when the

groundwater level is lowered as,

for example, during pumping.

3

Unconfined means the aquifer is

not overlain by a low permeable

geological formation or deposit,

such as clay or till

4

Confined means the aquifer is

overlain by a low permeable

geological formation or deposit,

such as clay or till.

5

Transmissivity is the ability of an

aquifer to transmit groundwater

and is a product of the aquifer’s

hydraulic conductivity and

thickness.

For further information, contact:

Mike Wei

BC Ministry of Environment,

Victoria, BC

Tel: (250) 356-5062

Email: Mike.Wei@gov.bc.ca

Diana Allen

Simon Fraser University

Email: dallen@sfu.ca

Alan Kohut

Hy-Geo Consulting

Email: apkohut@telus.net

Continued on page 18

Understanding and

categorizing a local

aquifer’s general

characteristics may

allow decision makers

to start developing

broad management and

protection strategies.

18 Streamline

Watershed Management Bulletin Vol. 13/No. 1 Fall 2009

Steve Grasby

Geological Survey of Canada

Email: Steve.Grasby@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca

Kevin Ronneseth

BC Ministry of Environment

Email: Kevin.Ronneseth@gov.bc.ca

Bob Turner

Geological Survey of Canada

Email: Bob.Turner@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca

References

Berardinucci, J. and K. Ronneseth. 2002.

Guide to using the BC aquifer classification

maps for the protection

and management of groundwater.

BC Ministry of Water, Land and Air

Protection, Victoria, BC.

Halstead, E.C. 1967. Cordilleran

Hydrogeological Region.

In

Groundwater in Canada. I.C.

Brown (editor). Geological Survey

of Canada, Ottawa, ON. Economic

Geology Report No. 24, Chapter 7.

Holland, S.S. 1976. Landforms of British

Columbia: A physiographic outline.

BC Department of Mines and

Petroleum Resources, Victoria, BC.

Bulletin No. 48.

Kreye, R. and M. Wei. 1994. A proposed

aquifer classification system for

groundwater management in

British Columbia. BC Ministry of

Environment, Lands and Parks,

Water Management Division,

Hydrology Branch, Groundwater

Section, Victoria, BC.

http://www.env.gov.

bc.ca/wsd/plan_protect_sustain/

groundwater/aquifers/

Aq_Classification/

(Accessed

August 2009).

Rivera, A. (editor). [2009]. Groundwater

resources in Canada. Geological

Survey of Canada, Ottawa, ON.

In press.

Sharpe, D., D.R. Russell, H.A.J. Dyke, S.

Grasby, Y. Michaud, M.M. Savard,

M. Wei, and P. Wozniak. [2009].

In

Groundwater resources in Canada.

A. Rivera (editor). Geological

Survey of Canada, Ottawa, ON.

Chapter 8. In press.

Wei, M., D.M. Allen, S.E. Grasby, A.P.

Kohut, and K. Ronneseth. [2009].

Cordilleran Hydrogeological

Region.

In Groundwater resources

in Canada. A. Rivera (editor).

Geological Survey of Canada,

Ottawa, ON. Chapter 9. In press.

Continued from page 17

AAPL. Graphics: sizzle

The new 64 bit CPU makes a difference–with other upgrades. Techy, but interesting. And if you like camera details=—check out this. http://www.engadget.com/2013/10/12/camera-showdown-iphone-5s-vs-iphone-5-tested-in-the-wilds-of-p/

 

TOM SHAUGHNESSAY

Overview:

My good friend and I were addicted to building computers and seeing how vibrant games like “Battlefield 2 Special Ops”, “Battlefield 3” and the “Command and Conquer” series popped off of the screen. At the time we had the Intel (INTL) core 2 duo 2.66 GHZ processor, two gigs of ram and a 512 mb graphics card by Nividia (NVDA). When the news broke regarding Apple’s (AAPL) drive to double the speed of the iPhone 5 with the iPhone 5S and to include a 64-bit processor, I was blown away. The first thing that went through my mind was the ability to now play powerfully real games that would be groundbreaking on a mobile device – and let me tell you, I was surely amazed.

Tech Specs:

It is no surprise that the 5S has a lead over the 5 under the hood, sporting the new 64-bit A7 chip compared to the older 32-bit A6 chip.

(click to enlarge) (Source)

Everyone is aware of the differences in specifications, although how does this compare over to the actual experience of the user? Below are two benchmark tests that demonstrate the graphics differences between the iPhone 5, the iPhone 5S and some industry peer devices such as the Samsung (OTC:SSNLF) Galaxy S4.

(click to enlarge) (Source)

(click to enlarge)

As we can see from the two above benchmark tests, the iPhone 5S crushes the iPhone 5 and earlier models with regard to graphics. The first test is an extremely intensive GPU test to see how the device’s graphics card holds up, a competition the 5S won easily. The second test shown is a heavy game simulation test, where the iPhone 5S crushes, is able to deliver smooth game-play at 35fps (frames per second) – being the first device to crest the 30fps barrier.

Enough of the Specs, Get To The Games:

I don’t blame you, looking at charts gets annoying – unless you are using the new Numbers, Keynote or Pages applications that ship with each new iPhone. These apps are so powerful that functions can be used in Numbers, full presentations can be created in Keynote and Pages is reminiscent of Microsoft (MSFT) word. You can even track changes with these apps, share your work through mail or messages or use templates. I was skeptical at first, thinking that the screen would be too small to create projects, although these applications are user friendly with features such as the disappearing text bar, zoom and other creative features.

Now For The Real Game: Right on Apple’s website, it boasts the new A7 chip alongside a picture of a game called “Infinity Blade 3“. At first I was shocked at the graphics power conveyed by the image, although I wanted to take a look deeper into the game and see the real graphics processing power. Even though there are screen-shots available on the company’s website, I have been in contact with the company and have been allowed to post my own screen-shots from the game.

(click to enlarge)

Going from the bright outdoor environment, to the darker ones – the graphics in “Infinity Blade 3” are simply amazing on a mobile device.

(click to enlarge)

The fighting scenes in the game are truly compelling, but even better is the fact that the game is easy to play on a mobile device and you do not miss having a controller.

(click to enlarge)

The amazing part of all of this is the mixture of the iPhone 5S’s extreme computing power coupled with the insane craftsmanship in the available applications.
What Else Does The iPhone Pack?

The iPhone is a very advanced device. Honestly, I was angered by some people’s viewpoints that the device was not an advancement or that users did not enjoy the device. Below are some other facts that I would like to compound – that I have come across while using the device:

  • The fingerprint scanner is not only fast, it is very accurate. You can even purchase apps on the app store through the device.
  • The new camera is amazing. The two flashes feature a possible of 1000 combinations of the flash for the best picture possible. The sensor on the 5S has been increased to 1.5 microns along with a f/2.2 aperture to allow more light in. Engadget has an amazing comparison as well on this topic.
  • The 5S also has a 120 fps slo-motion video mode.
  • The new line of real leather colored cases compounds the premium feel of owning an iPhone. Personally, I would have thought the new Burberry Executive addition to Apple would have been the one to present this idea.

What Does This Mean

As a dear friend led me to the concept, the new capabilities in the iPhone 5S are tangible. The user can hold Apple’s innovation and experience the next generation of mobile power that is only available on an iPhone 5S – another foothold gained by Apple’s brand power. Articles can come about attacking Apple’s future and the advancements of its competitors, although one thing is now A7 clear – Apple is the one setting the bar on mobile devices. Personally, I had an iPhone 5 and an iPhone 5S in addition to a string of Android devices and even BlackBerry phones a while ago, and I have to say I am again amazed at the iPhone 5S. Although this article focuses mostly on the graphics power of the new iPhone 5S, there are many advancements that can not be seen through a game – such as the increased LTE bands for connectivity that can all be found on Apple’s website.

Source: The iPhone 5S’s Graphics Are Insane

Additional disclosure: This article is meant be informational, do not execute any trades before talking to a financial professional to make sure an investment/trade is right for you.

AAPL and INTEL: CHIPS and CHIP POWER

OCTOBER 15th INTEL INTC

On the earnings front, Intel Corporation (NASDAQ: INTC) reported fiscal third-quarter results that exceeded expectations while revenue came in flat from a year ago. The chip maker’s EPS came in at 58 cents a share, earnings excluding items, on revenue of $13.48 billion, compared with a profit of 58 cents a share on revenue of $13.46 billion a year earlier.

Wall Street had expected the company to issue quarterly earnings of 53 cents per share on revenue of $13.47 billion, according to analysts polled by Reuters.

Shares of Intel fell 2.44 percent to $22.82 per share in extended-hours trading.

MICROSOFT MSFT

For the second straight quarter, Microsoft witnessed a growth in its business segment, which was in line with analysts’ expectations. In its earnings call, Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT)’s CFO, while sharing his thoughts on the PC market, said that the segment has seen some improvement, more than expected.  Also, management is witnessing stabilization in the business segment with growth in two straight quarters, and expect a balanced growth outlook for quarters ahead. For the quarter, Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT) posted a profit of $5.2 billion or 62 cents per share, which is an increase of 17% over $4.5 billion, or 53 cents for the corresponding quarter of the last fiscal period.

AAPL

On September 10, 2013, Apple (AAPL) brought its latest iPhone 5S to market. Immediately upon launch, hipsters, teenage girls, and celebrities were abuzz with chatter regarding the merits of new iOS 7 features, which were made complete with fingerprint recognition and Touch ID button.

Meanwhile, technology geeks were eagerly deconstructing the potential of the A7 processor driving this latest iPhone installment. The A7 is unofficially hailed as the first 64-bit chip to be installed within a consumer smart phone. Competitors, such as Anand Chandrasekher, former Chief Marketing Officer at Qualcomm (QCOM), immediately circled the wagons to haughtily dismiss the A7 chip as a “marketing gimmick.” According to Chandrasekher’s thesis, the consumer smart phone market will have no need to leverage the full capacity of a 64-bit chip. Interestingly, Qualcomm promptly changed Chandrasekher’s role at the company following said commentary.

Enter Intel (INTC), which in actuality, stands to lose the most from the expansion of this A7 chip rollout. Firstly, Intel is desperate to emerge as a real player within the mobile chip market. Secondly, Apple has already marketed its A7 processor as “desktop class.” Going forward, it would appear inevitable that the advances of A-Series chip technologies threaten and replace Intel’s current position as supplier to the Mac, at the same time that the desktop computer market slogs through secular decline. The Apple A7 is but an opening salvo declaring this latest war between awkward Silicon Valley rivals and partners. Certainly, Apple “haters” are well aware of the fact that BlackBerry executives once ripped the original iPhone as “amateur hour.” Intel is dead money.

Apple A7 Specifications

The Apple A7 64-bit system-on-a-chip (SoC) line is based upon ARM (ARMH) architecture. Apple has designed its 1.3 GHz dual-core Cyclone CPU around the ARMv8-A instruction set. In terms of battery power, the A7 can run the iPhone 5S for 10 hours worth of 3G talk-time, and for 250 hours during stand-by mode. The Apple A7 chip is produced through a 28 nm manufacturing process at Samsung (SSNLF). The A7 gate pitch, or distance between each transistor, is now 114 nm, in comparison to the 123 nm mark of the A6 chip. Apple executives claim that the A7 is twice is fast as its A6 predecessor.

The ARM business model alongside the emergence of Apple as a chip designer now threatens Intel’s profitability within the mobile space. ARM collects royalty payments off chips manufactured according to its architecture and intellectual property. According to the Company Overview, ARM based technology has already been installed within more than 95% of all global smart phones. Qualcomm and Apple are the most powerful component parts of the ARM ecosystem. Qualcomm is most notable for its Snapdragon 800 chips that are packaged with a 2.3 GHz Quad Krait CPU. The Snapdragon is the go-to engine to drive premium Android, BlackBerry (BBRY), and Windows handsets.

Former Intel CEO Paul Otellini highlighted his company’s “mobile edge,” within his 2012 letter to shareholders. At the time, Otellini projected that Intel would be ready to ship 22nm process Atom chips by the end up 2013, before stepping up the manufacturing technology to 14nm through 2014. Last May, Brian Krzanich took up this CEO mantle, and Intel assembly mechanics are now one step ahead of what Apple is now paying for out of Samsung. Still, the Apple A7 chip measures up quite favorably to the Intel Z3700, or Bay Trail, line. One review out of Anandtech benchmarked the Apple iPhone 5 and A7 processor at 514, while awarding a score of 513 to an Intel Bay Trail device running Windows 8.1.

Intel Mobile Product Line Up

Smartphones with Intel Inside include the bargain bin Acer Liquid C1, Motorola RAZR I, and Safaricom Yolo, which are currently available in Thailand, Brazil, Mexico, and Kenya. On October 2, 2013, Lenovo (LNVGF) announced that it was actually dumping Intel Atom, in favor of Qualcomm chips, to power its K900 handsets. The week prior, on August 29, 2013, Virtual Matrix ran a battery life test pitting the Lenovo K900, then powered with an Intel Atom chip, against the Google Nexus 4 and its Snapdragon technology. The Snapdragon chip significantly outperformed the Intel offering, 380 minutes to 170 minutes, in terms of battery life, while running Google (GOOG) Maps. The Intel tablet lineup is largely associated with Windows 8.1. Bay Trail tablets are expected to begin at $350 heading into this holiday season. The Intel Haswell processor powers the up-market Surface Pro 2 tablet, which retails for between $899 and $1,799. The Surface Pro 2 is in direct competition with both the Apple iPad and MacBook Pro at this price point.

On October 4, 2013, research firm comScore released its report for August 2013 U.S. smartphone subscriber market share. The report actually presented averages of data taken from the June 2013 to August 2013 calendar quarter. The comScore information did confirm that Intel has largely been shut out of the mobile market. If anything, the “marketing gimmick” that is the A7 chip will draw sales and attention towards Apple. During this latest quarter, Android and iOS systems operated respective 52.4% and 39.2% shares of the U.S. smartphone subscriber market. Apple actually tacked on 1.5% in additional market share upon a quarter-to-quarter basis through the summer months.

A calendar Q2 2013 tablet shipment report out of IDC presented Windows tablet results that Microsoft critics have already ripped as “pathetic” and “disastrous.” According to IDC, the Windows operating system accounted for 2 million in shipments during the second calendar quarter of 2013. This performance represented 4.5% of the tablet market. For the sake of comparison, Apple iOS generated 14.6 million shipments for a 32.5% share of the tablet market, according to unit shipments. Taken together, iOS and Android operating systems have dominated between 95% and 98% of the tablet market over the past two years. Going forward, improvements upon the A-Series chips will only crowd out Intel further outside of solid mobile profits.

The Bottom Line

On July 24, 2013, Apple released its Q3 2013 financial report for the period ended June 29, 2013. The Mac generated $15.9 billion in revenue upon 11.8 million units sold during the first nine months of this fiscal 2013. In terms of unit shipments, Mac sales have declined by 11% through the past three quarters, upon a year-over-year basis. Going forward, a transition out of Intel Haswell and into A-Series chips may reenergize excitement for the Mac line while also slashing costs of goods sold. Apple engineers will build out their moat larger at the expense of Intel.

Intel typically classifies its businesses according to PC Client, Data Center, Software and Services, and Other Intel Architecture operating segments. The Other Intel Architecture umbrella category does include smartphone, tablet, and netbook chip sales. PC Client Group sales generally account for two-thirds of total net revenue at Intel. Alternatively, Other Intel Architecture has, on average, generated a mere 8% of annual Intel revenue over the past three fiscal years that do largely coincide with calendar years at the company. All recent data out of research firm Gartner have confirmed the secular contraction of the personal computer market. According to Gartner, global PC shipments declined by 8.6% through calendar Q3 2013, upon a year-over-year basis.

On October 24, 2013, Intel stock closed out the trading session at $23.78 per share. This performance did calculate out to roughly $120 billion in market capitalization. Intel may close out this 2013 year with $10 billion in earnings on the books, which would mean that the stock is now trading for 12 times earnings. This valuation is too high a price to pay for a business lacking prospects for real growth. Going forward, Intel share prices will stagnate, while the company returns larger and larger percentages of capital back to investors in the form of stock buy backs and dividends. Intel deserves a sell rating.

 

GOLD and SPY

Itinerant

For most of this year so far it seems that sentiment has been increasingly risk and yield seeking which has favoured the stock market over gold. Low interest rates in combination with generously supplied liquidity has led to a stock market rally to new previously unexperienced highs, and a gold price correction that has turned bugs into bears.

It seems that it has almost become common knowledge that the gold price must go down as long as the stock market is going up. Forgotten are the times when gold and stocks have marched in lock-step, be that up or down. And now our data indicates that the recent strong inverse correlation between the stock market and the gold price is in the process of breaking down again. It may just be that gold is swinging back in line with the general stock market again.

In the following we shall use the SPDR Gold Trust ETF (GLD) as a proxy for the price of gold. The daily price data can be readily downloaded from Yahoo.com all the way back to its inception in 2004. And for better or worse we shall use the SPDR S&P 500 Trust ETF (SPY) as a proxy for the performance of the stock market. Again, the daily price data can be downloaded from Yahoo.com.

We used this data and correlated the daily closing prices of the two funds. The chart below shows the price performance of GLD and SPY respectively, plus the 100 day moving correlation between the two.

To be clear: every point on the blue line gives a reading for the correlation between the S&P 500 and GLD for the 100 days preceding this point. Correlation is measured on the secondary right axis of the chart, while share prices for GLD and SPY are measured on the primary left axis. We shall consider values of greater than +0.8 as a strong correlation, and values less than -0.8 as a strong inverse correlation. The areas shaded in grey on our chart below indicate these areas.

(click to enlarge)

In this chart we can observe 5 periods of time since 2005 with a strong correlation between GLD and SPY, and only 3 periods with strong inverse correlation. The most recent period of inverse correlation is clearly visible at the right hand side of the chart. However, we also observe that this inverse correlation has broken down and correlation between the GLD and SPY for the past 100 days has been almost exactly zero.

Consider the next chart below showing the same 100 day moving correlation again in blue, plus the red line for a moving correlation period of 200 days. As could be expected, the 200 day line is a little more sluggish in its moves. We also observe that if the 100 day line crosses zero correlation from a previous peak the 200 day line usually follows. And this is what seems to be happening at the moment.

(click to enlarge)

If performance of the past nine year can serve as a template then we can expect GLD and SPY moving in parallel again shortly. In other words: if our reading of this correlation analysis proves correct, then we need to start looking to the SPY for clues on GLD.

During the past couple of weeks we have pointed to our observation of fewer and fewer stocks participating in the rally as a possible sign of an impending stock market reversal. This concern has all but evaporated during the past week. Sentiment seems high and we are expecting new highs in the S&P 500 in coming weeks.

If both our calls are correct, then we would expect the stock market dragging gold higher in coming months, which would be a nice and long awaited change for gold bugs.

AAPL: The Reformation

REFORMED BEAR: Terrier Investing

For a long time, I’ve been an “Apple hater”. I’m unashamed to admit that I’m a PC/Android guy. I like being able to customize things, I prefer those OSes for computers and phones respectively, and especially for computers, I don’t like paying Apple’s premium margins when I can get an otherwise equivalent machine (with an OS I like better) for a lower price. A year or so ago, I was convinced that anyone standing in line to buy an Apple (AAPL) product on the day of release was somewhere on the spectrum between crazy and delusional. From an investment perspective, I believed that Apple’s margins and revenues might be unsustainable as the “Apple fad” faded and former fanboys opted for cheaper, equally-featured products from competitors.

However, several recent events have caused me to reevaluate my position, which is why I found a recent article entitled “Apple is in Deep Trouble: A Reformed Bull Speaks Out” to be curious. In the article, the author (Josh Arnold) discusses many of the same points I used to think about – commoditization of smartphones, waning of brand loyalty, etc.

I think those arguments certainly still have some merit, and should be considered by anyone considering a position in the stock. But as anyone who read my previous two articles has probably gathered, I tend to believe that for investors, qualitative analysis is as important as (if not more important than) quantitative analysis. Why is that? Well, as several of my professors used to say, there are lies, damned lies, and statistics. My statistics professor obviously disagreed. Nonetheless, the concept is probably valid, and applies to financial models as well. Garbage in, garbage out, as they say – if you really want a stock to be undervalued, all you have to do is tweak the discount rate and assume a few basis points extra margin and revenue growth (things that nobody will really object to) and boom, there you go. Conversely, if you really want to convince yourself a stock is overvalued, discount their cash for repatriation and jack up the discount rate and be extra-conservative in modeling growth and margins, and pretty soon you get to an ugly target price.

For these reasons, I believe models are primarily useful to help you A) understand how the business looks, operates, and is valued under different conditions and B) give you an idea of what sort of price you’re paying for it.

But even if I model a company and it looks like the stock is a screaming buy, I will refuse to invest in it if I don’t understand the story, the qualitative reasoning behind why this is a good investment. Markets are inefficient, yes, but often not brutally so, especially if we’re talking about a mega-cap that gets analyzed to death. If you think a company has drifted from its intrinsic value by a double-digit percentage, then you’d better have some justification for your variant view. If you don’t have that justification solidly backed up by your analysis of the situation, then who are you to say your numbers are better than the Wharton guys who get paid the big bucks to do this for Goldman and Credit Suisse and David Einhorn?

So Apple, obviously, looks cheap as an investment. Low P/E, lots of cash, etc. I don’t need to get into the details because ten million people (probably literally) have already done that and I’m not adding any value to your day by waxing on about something that everyone already knows. And see, that’s the problem – everyone knows Apple’s cheap on all the traditional valuation metrics. It’s been that way for a while, even when it was growing at a gangbusters pace. When everyone knows something, it’s not a variant view. If it’s not a variant view, how are you going to achieve above-average investment returns? You’re just doing what everyone else is; if you’re doing what everyone else is, you can’t do better than them. It’s impossible by definition.

Where am I going with all this? I agree with Josh on so many of his points – I do think that Apple will struggle to maintain margins if they try to expand beyond ultrapremium products or if their brand loyalty fades. I think most people agree the 5C didn’t work out so hot, etc.

Yet at the same time, while I used to call Apple a fad and laugh at the fact that Apple users’ brains light up like it’s their religion, I also came to the realization that some of the smartest people in my life are Apple devotees. A friend retired from a very lucrative career in management consulting has been an Apple user from day 1; a very smart hedge fund manager has as well. My friend and fellow tech enthusiast Ashraf Eassa called the 5S “gorgeous” after switching from Android and has been raving about the new lineup of MacBooks. There are others (though I know plenty of brilliant PC/Android guys as well).

Quite honestly, I still don’t get it, though perhaps my new MacBook (property of my employer – I’m still not a convert!) will change my mind. I’m open to it – in fact, the more I think about it, the more I realize that 90% of my computer time is spent in Microsoft (MSFT) Word, Excel, PowerPoint, or an internet browser. My experience in those programs should be largely the same as it is now, with a few buttons moved around at the most. Will I become an Apple devotee? I doubt it, although it is kind of amusing to ask Siri where to hide a body whenever I get my hands on my friends’ iPhones. (Between that and a few other joke requests, I can only imagine what the NSA thinks of my friends now.)

Anyway, if someone as anti-Apple as me can grow warm to the products, and if many people I really respect are as in love with their iPhones as the next guy, then perhaps my initial perceptions were wrong, and Apple’s not a fad. Maybe it really is the next brand as persistent as Coke (KO), and it’s not the next Motorola (MSI) or BlackBerry (BBRY).

I still don’t understand Apple, so I won’t invest in it, despite the fact that it certainly looks cheap on many metrics. However, in my reformed position, I cannot fully agree with Josh either – signs I would have taken as “deep trouble” a year ago now look more like continuation of an enigma.

If there’s one thing you should take away from this article, it’s this: know what you don’t know. I’m no longer overtly bearish on Apple, because there seems to be something I’ve been missing in this story. (Please note: I have never been short Apple. I was bearish on the stock but did not take a position.)

Like Josh, I’m willing to admit when I believe I may have been wrong. In this case, however, we seem to have reversed positions (to an extent – I’m not “bullish”, I’m just not bearish anymore). Apple certainly has strengths – I’m amazed, for example, that a laptop shipping out from China a night or two ago is apparently slated to arrive on my doorstep tomorrow afternoon. That takes a lot of supply chain tuning. Plus, Apple’s recent A7 chip is a very competitive offering. Apple clearly has plenty of smart people in their organization; I can’t claim to predict what they can or can’t come up with.

A brief postscript explaining my decision to hold a position in Microsoft but not Apple, despite the former’s continuous and egregious attempts to make investors shake their heads. While I’m not confident enough in Apple’s business model to invest in it, the one thing I am confident in is that enterprise will continue to remain a strength for Microsoft; Apple will also likely not sacrifice margins to compete in the low end of the market, leaving plenty of room for other players.

Ultimately, while knowing something isn’t enough to invest in it, you should only invest in it if you do know it, if that makes sense. If you get Apple and think it’s a rock star investment, then I won’t disagree with you. If, like me, you don’t get it, then that’s fine too – plenty of other fish in the investing sea. And if, no matter who you are, you read a point of view you disagree with – whether on Apple or another stock you have a position in – then you should read it with a clear head and determine if there’s any validity to the argument. After all, it’s your money on the line; why let emotion or pride set you up for a fall?

REFORMED BULL Josh Arnold

Let me preface my remarks here by coming clean about my past views on Apple (AAPL). In the last year or so I penned a number of bullish pieces on the Cupertino giant because I believed the growth expectations from analysts. I believed that innovation wasn’t dead at Apple. I believed that the company could continue to be great without Steve Jobs. I’m here now saying none of those things came true and that Apple is in serious trouble.

The much ballyhooed event that occurred earlier this week was supposed to be something of a game changer for Apple. Instead, what we got was more incremental improvements in its existing product lines. Yes there was a new OS, yes the iPad Air is neat and yes the retina display on the Mini looks great. However, none of these things address the concerns I (and other investors) have regarding Apple’s long term future. How long can it continue to sell the same devices year after year? How long will people settle for the same products that have existed in virtually their current forms for years? The answer, if market share is any indication, is not long.

In 2011, Apple had something like 65% of tablet market share. Last year, that number dropped to 54% and this year, Gartner expects Apple to be below 50%. Before you point out that one company owning 50% of a market the size of tablets is still amazing, you’re right, it is. However, the amount of customers voting with their feet and buying Android is staggering. Where is the bottom in terms of market share for Apple? We don’t know but this looks a little like BlackBerry (BBRY) did several years ago; “Yeah we’re losing market share, but so what?” could probably be heard in the halls of the corporate campus of BBRY in years past. The fact is there are far too many very good competitors for Apple to maintain a 50% market share over the long term in my view and it looks like we’ll see the market share number continue to fall as Apple clearly has no intention of innovating in the space any more. Making an existing product lighter is great but it’s no reason to run out and buy one (not to mention the ridiculous premium one is charged for the Air model). Where are the new features that blow our collective minds? I don’t see them in new iterations of the iPad and I think it’s because Apple is out of ideas.

The company also came out with the retina display for iPad Mini, which, again, is great (and 100% telegraphed prior to the event) but it’s no reason to run out and buy an iPad that you weren’t already planning to buy. There were also the usual processing power and battery life upgrades but all of these things are evolutionary, not revolutionary, and we’ve seen it all before. I don’t think Jobs would have settled for this long with Apple’s current product lineup and incremental change after incremental change. Maybe we’re all too spoiled by Apple’s rise from a nearly defunct computer manufacturer to the largest company in the country but there is nothing to be impressed by anymore.

Perhaps even more disturbing, Apple cut prices on a version of its iPad Mini. This coming from the company that historically discounts sparingly and is notoriously strict with its retail partners in terms of ensuring the premium for Apple products is respected. Apple’s margins have been falling for several quarters now due to a confluence of factors including lower ASPs and lower sales. In fact, for the first time ever, Apple sold fewer iPads in the June quarter this year than last year. The point is that the lack of innovation is catching up to the company’s operating results and shareholders should be concerned.

When Apple has tried something new, the iPhone 5C, for instance, it hasn’t worked. Yes, the 5S is apparently selling like hotcakes in relation to the C but I suspect Apple only had to raise its builds for the S because it was cannibalizing C sales. And besides, the C is just another iteration of the iPhone; it once again isn’t innovative or disruptive, it simply seeks to compete in a slightly different way. I acknowledge the formula Apple has worked with for years has succeeded like no other and made it the largest company in the country. However, tech companies, particularly hardware suppliers like Apple, always have to innovate or they will go by the wayside eventually. Is Apple the next BBRY or Nokia (NOK)? Maybe, time will tell. But the company is well on its way with its lack of innovation and new products.

With EPS expected to have fallen a whopping 11% for fiscal 2013 to just under $40 per share, Apple shareholders experienced a violent revaluation of shares in the past year or so. This company went from constantly destroying estimates to suddenly missing them and then to declining earnings. Given Apple’s inability to gain traction with the 5C and the marginal changes to the entirety of the iPad lines, I just don’t see how the company will be able to post the 10% earnings growth that is expected for next year. You have a company with declining margins, falling ASPs, a stale product line and its competitors taking market share in tablets and phones every day. Where is the growth coming from? With iPad sales numbers declining YoY and the iPhone 5C clearly a bust, I suspect there is decent downside risk to analyst estimates at this point. Even if Apple can somehow manage to hit its revenue estimates, margins are declining so rapidly that EPS would likely still be light.

Apple looks cheap at only 12 times next year’s earnings. In fact, 12 times earnings for a company with a declining customer base, declining margins and no catalyst for growth in the near to medium term is probably too generous. The fact is Apple gets the vast majority of its revenue when it sells a device; it doesn’t have the luxury of a recurring revenue stream like Oracle (ORCL) or IBM (IBM), which, by the way, sell for only 10 and 9 times next year’s earnings, respectively.

If you were fortunate enough to own Apple over the past three months you should take what the market has given you and get out. With declining market share, falling margins and no catalysts on the horizon, I think Apple could (and should) trade down to a multiple of 9 or 10. And given that I think there is a decent possibility for an earnings miss on next year’s $43+ EPS estimate, fair value for Apple is likely in the $380 to $420 range based on $42 in FY2014 EPS and my PE range of 9 to 10. That is a long way down from where we are now (shares saw $700 last September and by April, were languishing below $400, so it could happen) but Apple is currently receiving a multiple it doesn’t deserve and I think that the company will struggle to reach $43 in EPS next year without some kind of transformational new product. But given that Apple clearly has no imagination left whatsoever, I’m not holding my breath.

made to accuracy or completeness. I am long the companies mentioned in the disclosure and may change my position at any time without notification. Please see the full disclaimer in my profile, and do your own due diligence before making any investment.

Kernza: seeds are now a third the siize of wheat seeds, byt have perenniality.

Scientists at the Land Institute have been working for decades to develop new perennial grains that approach the yields of traditional annuals.

Wes Jackson is one of the leaders. headshot_WJackson_110w WES JACKSON-LANDORG

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TcfUn36WpLY

 

 

 

NEW YORK TIMES

A few weeks ago at the annual Prairie Festival in Salina, Kan. — a celebration, essentially, of true sustainability — I sat down with Wes Jackson to drink rich beer and eat delicious, chewy bread made from the perennial grain Kernza. The Kernza we ate was cultivated at the Land Institute, the festival’s sponsor and the organization Jackson founded here 37 years ago.       

 
Opinion Twitter Logo.

  

Connect With Us on Twitter

For Op-Ed, follow @nytopinion and to hear from the editorial page editor, Andrew Rosenthal, follow @andyrNYT.

Fred R. Conrad/The New York Times

Mark Bittman                           

Readers’ Comments

Readers shared their thoughts on this article.

At 77, Jackson is a big man with big ideas. Clearly he was back then as well, when he became determined to change the face of agriculture from being dependent upon annual monoculture (that is, planting a new crop of a single plant each year) to one that includes perennial polyculture, with fields containing varieties of mutually complementary species, planted once, harvested seasonally but remaining in place for years.       

Jackson has a biblical way of speaking: “The plow has destroyed more options for future generations than the sword,” he says. “But soil is more important than oil, and just as nonrenewable.” Soil loss is one of the biggest hidden costs of industrial agriculture — and it’s created at literally a glacial pace, maybe a quarter-inch per century. The increasingly popular no-till style of agriculture reduces soil loss but increases the need for herbicides. It’s a short-term solution, requiring that we poison the soil to save it.       

Annual monoculture like that practiced in the Midwestern Corn Belt is one culprit. It produces the vast majority of our food, and much of that food — perhaps 70 percent of our calories — is from grasses, which produce edible seeds, or cereals. For 10,000 years we’ve plowed the soil, planted in spring and harvested in fall, one crop at a time.       

In an essay he published 26 years ago, called “The Worst Mistake in the History of the Human Race,” Jared Diamond theorized that this was essentially our downfall: by losing our hunter-gatherer roots and becoming dependent on agriculture, we made it possible for the human population to expand but paid the price in the often malnourishing, environmentally damaging system we have today.       

That’s fascinating, and irreversible; barring a catastrophe that drastically reduces the human population, we’ll rely on agriculture for the foreseeable future. But if we look to the kind of systems Jackson talks about, we can markedly reduce the damage. “We don’t have to slay Goliath with a pebble,” he says of industrial agriculture. “We just have to quit using so much fertilizer and so many pesticides to shrink him to manageable proportions.”       

Perennial polysystems are one way forward, because they allow us to produce grains, legumes, oils and other foods with a host of benefits. Gesturing across the road from where we sat, Jackson said to me: “That prairie — a prime example of a self-sustaining system — doesn’t have soil erosion, it’s not fossil-fuel dependent, you have species and chemical diversity. If you look around you’ll see that essentially all of nature’s ecosystems are perennial polycultures; that’s nature’s instruction book.” In perennial polycultures, the plants may fertilize one another, physically support one another, ward off pests and diseases together, resist drought and flood, and survive even when one member suffers.       

When Jackson founded the Land Institute, he predicted that a prairie-like system capable of providing food for humans would be viable in 50 to 100 years. About 15 years short of the near end of that spectrum, there is definite progress, most notably in the form of Kernza, which is not yet sold commercially but has been domesticated in Salina and elsewhere.       

Kernza is just the beginning. In addition to domesticating wild food-producing species, the Land Institute staff has taken on a far more challenging task: converting annuals into perennials. Perenniality is a complex trait, controlled by multiple genes. Perennials put more energy into their roots and less into flowers and seeds and greens, they send reserve energy into storage to wake up in the spring and they seldom die.       

To perennialize an annual may take decades or even longer. The work might go faster if Jackson had adequate funding; he’d consider himself fully funded for the next 30 years with about one-third of one year’s federal subsidy for producing ethanol.       

If Jackson’s followers are successful, we could see prairies producing different kinds of foods in commercial quantities with little or no chemical applications, irrigation, annual reseeding, tillage or tending; the work would be maintenance and harvesting. Creating the right plants for these habitats will take time, so much that we may not see the benefits in our lifetimes but, as Jackson says, “If you think you’re going to complete your life’s vision in your lifetime, you’re not thinking big enough.”

 

SALINA NEWSPAPER

Although they expect the research to take decades more, one somewhat symbolic milestone was reached this year.

Perennial pancakes, anyone?

At the Land Institute’s annual Prairie Festival this past weekend, folks who stopped in at the bookstore had an opportunity to buy a 1-pound sack of Kernza, the trademarked name of a type of perennial intermediate wheatgrass developed at the Land Institute.

This marked the first time grains developed at the Land Institute have been available to the public, managing director Ken Warren said.

Over the past couple of years, small amounts of Kernza flour have been available to people working at the Land Institute, who have experimented with it in cookies, cakes and tortillas, said Lee DeHaan, a plant breeder working on perennial wheat development.

The grain has a relatively low gluten content, DeHaan said, so it doesn’t work well in bread unless it’s used with wheat flour.

A different breed

So what is Kernza?

“It’s called ‘wheatgrass,’ it has ‘wheat’ in the name, but it’s no more like wheat than rye is,” DeHaan said. “It’s like Grape Nuts, which don’t have grapes or nuts in them. It’s a different species, but it looks vaguely like wheat.”

And like wheat, it can trace its roots (ha-ha) back to the region that includes Turkey and Afghanistan, DeHaan said.

Decades ago, the USDA collected hundreds of varieties of grasses from that part of the world, bringing them back to the United States intending to test their use as forage for livestock.

The Rodale Institute in Pennsylvania — better known to many for book publishing, including “An Inconvenient Truth” — began sifting through those hundreds of varieties in the 1990s, pursuing its own research into perennial wheat.

Rodale eventually phased out that research, and the Land Institute acquired some of its seed samples.

Rather than trying to turn modern annual wheat back into a perennial, DeHaan explained, he’s working to take an existing perennial grass and turn it into a productive food source.

Genetic diversity

The wheatgrass DeHaan is working with has immense genetic diversity, he said, and that’s quickly obvious walking through a test plot; some plants are taller than others, some have thicker stalks and some have larger seed heads.

It’s quite different from the uniformity of a modern row crop, which DeHaan explains has been through a “genetic bottleneck,” and had most of that genetic diversity stripped away in pursuit of the best yield.

The Land Institute has two experimental plots, with 2,400 Kernza plants in each plot.

Because it’s a perennial and perennials tend to grow more slowly than annuals, DeHaan waits until the second year before evaluating each individual plant for traits such as yield, seed size, resistance to “shattering” and even total mass.

“There’s lots of genetic variation, so it’s easier to make progress,” he said.

In seven years, he’s been through just three generations, and though it might seem working with perennials would be slower than working with annuals, DeHaan said there are advantages, as well.

For example, when he finds a specific plant out of those 4,800 with a trait he wants to carry forward and cross with another plant, he can just go out to the field, dig up part of the clump and bring it into the greenhouse. With an annual, however, he’d have to take the seed from that particular plant, plant it and wait for it to grow up.

By picking plants with the best yields and cross-pollinating them with other high-yielders, the Land Institute has more than doubled the wheatgrass’ seed size in just three generations.

“When I started working with it, the typical seed weighed 3.5 milligrams,” DeHaan said. “Now, our best seeds are 10 milligrams.”

There’s still plenty of room for progress, as a typical wheat seed weighs 35 milligrams.

Of course, plants evolved over millions of years to be the way they are, and doubling the weight at the tip of a long stalk can cause problems.

“The wild plants are very spindly,” DeHaan said. “Besides yield, we’re also breeding them for thicker stalks and reduced height.”

After seven years, DeHaan said, “We’re to the point where I’m getting more plants with good seed size and other traits. Now it’s a matter of putting them together.”

It’s a labor-intensive process.

When the two experimental plots were ready to be cut several weeks ago, DeHaan said, it took eight people more than a week to cut sample stalks from each of the 4,800 plants, record several traits, thresh and weigh the seeds, and so on.

Those plants are already putting up new growth for next year, with green leaves approaching knee-high.

“Until it freezes, they’ll keep growing,” DeHaan said. “They’re also putting out more roots.”

That’s part of the point of the Land Institute’s work; perennial crops would grow year after year, establishing extensive root systems that could tap water much deeper than annuals. At the same time, perennial crops would control soil erosion, reduce water runoff and help keep fertilizer where it was put.

DeHaan hopes to expand the experimental plots to hold 20,000 plants next year.

“Imagine if you were only growing 100 plants — and it’s the 101st that has what you’re looking for,” he said. “If you have 5,000, what if it’s the 5,001st? The more plants you have, the quicker it all happens.”

Proof of concept

The Kernza flour sold at Prairie Festival came from a 27-acre plot on the farm of Charlie Melander, who planted it last year as a test for the Land Institute.

“It came up kind of slow, and he was concerned about weeds taking it over the first year,” DeHaan said. “In the second year, it did fine.”

With a sale price of $10 a pound, it’s really more of a donation to the cause than a real commercial transaction, but DeHaan said he can see it becoming commercially viable someday.

“There’s no reason we can’t have the same yields (as wheat) eventually,” DeHaan said, explaining the crop could be commercially viable even before it can match wheat bushel-for-bushel.

The fact that it can be used as a forage crop would help offset a lower yield; last winter, he said, deer grazed the experimental plots back to ground level, with no apparent effect on the plants come spring.

And, the Kernza wheatgrass produces around 40 percent more above-ground biomass than typical annual wheat, which could be used to produce energy.

Add in the fact that farmers wouldn’t have to buy seed and plant every year, and the economics start looking even better, he said.

He believes, too, that at least some people will pay a premium for the product, because it’s farmed in a sustainable way.

“Lots of people are willing to pay more for organic products,” because they’re better for the planet, he said. “This goes beyond organic.”

The nutrition profile also differs from wheat; it has about double the level of omega-3 fatty acid, more than five times the calcium, and roughly 10 times the folate.

The Kernza also has a protein content of about 20 percent; DeHaan said that’s because the germ is larger proportionally to the rest of the seed. It also has a higher bran content.

Over the next few years, Warren said, the Land Institute plans to grow increasing amounts of the Kernza.

Within 10 years, the hope is to be able to grow enough to begin supplying it to farmers.

“This is a proof of concept,” DeHaan said. “Some people say it can’t be done, but if we can do it with this plant, we can do it with others.”

n Reporter Mike Strand can be reached at 822-1418 or by e-mail at mstrand@salina.com.

– See more at: http://www.salina.com/news/story/wes-wheat#sthash.e9DdSrjv.dpuf

How many Sheep per Acre

Sheep make better use of forage than cattle. Here’s a summary from Purdue. Indiana. USA.

 

Future expansion of the sheep industry in the United States will greatly depend on the ability to use both pasture and harvested forages for feed-stuffs. Sheep are 26 percent more efficient than cattle in converting pasture and forages into marketable products. Thus, sheep become more attractive economically as grain production costs rise or grain export pressure increases.

Forages supply approximately 80 percent of the yearly nutritional requirements for sheep. Sheep are especially efficient in converting forages into protein (in both the wool and meat) and compete less with humans for edible grain crops than other livestock species. Because sheep graze, they take less energy to produce than animals that require harvested and stored grains and forages.

Sheep are in an enviable position because they provide two marketable products–lamb and wool. As the manufacturing cost of petroleum-based synthetic fibers increases, wool is in greater demand and more economically rewarding to produce. Since sheep store protein in wool as well as in meat, both can be used for food. Wool may be stored for long periods of time and then hydrolyzed for its food value.

There is much land in Indiana better suited to growing forage crops than grain crops. When properly fertilized, fenced and managed, this land will produce abundant pastures and forages for sheep. Even on grain farms, there is usually some acreage that should be pasture. Adapted forage crops can reduce feed costs and give good economic return on high-priced land.

The purpose of this publication is to help sheep producers maximize the productive potential of their forage land by proper crop selection and management, and by efficient forage utilization. Discussed are the forages best suited to sheep production, the particular advantages of each forage, and recommended procedures for growing, grazing and/ or harvesting them. Also presented are general management practices for sheep on pasture and an example of how 30 acres of land can be utilized to supply the forage needs of a 100-ewe flock.

 

PASTURE FOR SHEEP

By selecting forages best adapted to your farm’s soil and climatic conditions, a year-long pasture calendar can be developed. The following list shows optimum grazing periods for various forage alternatives; Figure 1 illustrates how these crops can be used in a 12-month program and is based on the number of sheep-days. Each forage is then discussed in some detail below, including its management.

  • 1.Wheat–early fall and early spring grazing.
  • 2.Oats and broadleaf rape–spring grazing prior to turnip seeding.
  • 3.Turnips–October to December grazing (seeded in July).
  • 4.Kentucky bluegrass–spring and fall grazing (dormant in summer).**
  • 5.Tall fescue winter and early spring grazing.**
  • 6.Orchardgrass–spring and fall grazing.**
  • 7.Bromegrass or timothy–early summer grazing (graze 1 week, rest 3 weeks).**
  • 8.Birdsfoot trefoil–mid-summer and early fall grazing in northern Indiana.
  • 9.Lespedeza–mid-summer and early fall grazing in southern Indiana.
  • 10. Sudangrass–temporary mid-summer grazing (supplements wheat).

Grazing Calendar

Figure 1. Grazing Calendar for Sheep<>

Alfalfa and the clovers are not included in the above list because they can cause bloat   if used alone; but, in mixtures with the grasses, these legumes make excellent pasture.   Their greatest value, however, is as harvested forages.

 

Grasses and Legumes

Grasses. Kentucky bluegrass, orchardgrass and tall fescue can withstand considerable grazing pressure because new growth arises from the base of the leaf blade.

Bromegrass and timothy, on the other hand, need more careful management. Bromegrass produces new growth from small white shoots, and timothy produces new growth from haplocorms (small bulblike structures); therefore to keep these grasses from jointing, they should be grazed for 1 week and rested for 3 weeks. If allowed to rest more than 3 weeks, the stems elongate; and if grazed while elongating, the stand persistence may be reduced. The grasses can be grazed without detrimental effects after the stems have fully elongated (6-7 weeks).

Legumes. Lespedeza and birdsfoot trefoil grow well in mid-summer and early fall. They may be used alone or mixed with grasses. In a mixture, they will furnish the nitrogen that the grasses need.

Lespedeza grows well in southern Indiana, especially in combination with tall fescue or other grasses recommended for sheep. Birdsfoot trefoil grows best in the northern half of the state and on limestone-influenced soils in southern Indiana. The variety Empire is recommended for grazing with Kentucky bluegrass in permanent pastures, because it is drought resistant, remains palatable at maturity and does not cause bloat. A specific inoculant to induce nitrogen fixation is needed at seeding, and fertilization should be based on a soil test.

 

Turnip Pasture for Ewes

Purdue University has conducted research to determine the value of purple-top, white-globe turnips (Brassica rapa) as a grazing pasture for flushing ewes during the fall breeding season. Turnip pasture has a greater animal carrying capacity than conventional grass pasture. How the crop was grown and pastured in the Purdue study, and the results experienced are discussed here.

In late July or early August, seed was mixed with 12-12-12 fertilizer and broadcast onto a prepared seedbed at the rate of 2.5 pounds of seed and 50 pounds of fertilizer per acre. A chain harrow was used to lightly cover the seeds to help initiate germination and reduce loss to birds. Within 60 days, the field was ready to graze.

Because the upper part of the turnip taproot grows above ground, sheep will eat both foliage and roots. To minimize waste, the turnips were strip-grazed by limiting the grazing area with an electric netting fence to approximately 0.5 acre at a time. When each area was completely grazed, the fence was moved to expose an additional half acre. Water and a salt-mineral mixture were supplied free-choice.

Using this strip-grazing system, the pasture provided 45 days (October 1-November 1 5) of forage. However, under favorable weather conditions, this could have easily been extended another 15 days to December 1.

From this study, the following management procedures are tentatively recommended for fall-grazing ewes in turnips:

  • 1.Maintain the sheep in approximately 0.5-acre paddocks until turnip foliage and roots    are completely grazed. An electric fence or sheep netting works well in making the    paddocks.
  • 2.Provide salt-mineral mix and fresh water at all times. Since turnips have a high    moisture content, ewes will usually consume less water than on grass pasture.
  • 3.Ewes grazing unsupplemented turnips should gain 0.1-0.2 pound per day, which is    adequate for flushing purposes. Therefore, do not feed additional shelled corn.
  • 4.Consider using an adjoining grass pasture, especially during wet weather, for ewes to    bed down at night. Shade in either the turnip or the adjoining grass pasture should be    provided during hot weather.
  • 5.For a grazing period of 35-45 days, use a stocking rate of approximately 20 ewes per    acre. The grazing period could be considerably longer if weather conditions are favorable.
  • 6.To maximize utilization of land intended for turnip pasture, consider seeding oats and    broadleaf rape in early spring, grazing until July, then reseeding to the purple-top,    white-globe turnips for fall pasture.

 

A forage turnip called Tyfon, developed by crossing a stubble turnip with the Chinese cabbage, has a leaf-to-root ratio of 95:5. It can be either cut or grazed and will have one or two regrowths during the summer. Tyfon turnips should be seeded in the early spring when soil conditions permit by drilling 5 pounds of seed per acre at a depth of 1 inch in rows 7-14 inches apart.

 

Wheat and Sudangrass

Wheat can be used as a supplemental pasture for sheep in October, early November, April and early May, when most grasses are not very productive. If the wheat is not grazed beyond the jointing stage, a grain crop may still be harvested after grazing.

Sudangrass (assumed here to include sorghum-sudangrass crosses) will provide pasture during mid-summer when cool-season grasses are less productive. If rotationally grazed or rested after complete grazing, sudangrass will furnish two or three grazings during the summer or early fall. Any excess growth can be harvested for hay or silage. Seeding sudangrass in 14-inch rows permits the sheep to walk between rows, thus reducing trampling loss. Some improved varieties are lower in prussic acid content and can be grazed to shorter heights than some older varieties.

A combination of wheat and sudangrass utilizes the land better than either crop grown alone, since they will provide forage for sheep or lambs from April to November! To realize the full benefits of a wheat-sudangrass doublecrop pasture, follow this schedule for planting and grazing:

  • 1. Plow and seed winter wheat in late August or early September. Wheat resistant to the    Hessian fly should be sown.
  • 2. Graze the wheat in October and early November as a breeding pasture for    spring-lambing ewes or as a lactation pasture for fall-lambing ewes.
  • 3. Rest the wheat from November 15 to April 1.
  • 4. Graze the wheat again in April and early May as a lactation pasture for    spring-lambing ewes or as a breeding pasture for fall-lambing ewes.
  • 5. Plow or disc the wheat in late May, and seed to sudangrass in 14-inch rows.
  • 6. Graze the sudangrass in late June, July and August with spring-born lambs or with    ewes.
  • 7. Plow or disc the sudangrass and seed to winter wheat in late August or early    September.

 

Tall Fescue for Winter Pasture

Winter pasture reduces the need for more expensive harvested forages and cuts the cost of maintaining ewes over that period. Tall fescue can provide considerable pasture from December through March and is well adapted for winter grazing. Tall fescue develops a sod dense enough to support the weight of the ewe under wet conditions.

In a 2-year Purdue University study, pregnant ewes on tall fescue pasture supplemented with 0.5-0.75 pound of shelled corn daily for 70 and 84 days prior to lambing in March, performed as well as pregnant ewes on alfalfa haylage in dry lot. Their performance also equaled ewes on fescue pasture supplemented with either 1 pound of haylage per day ore lick tank containing liquid urea (32% crude protein). Winter feed costs for ewes grazing the supplemented fescue pasture were reduced from 30 to 50 percent.

Here are the management procedures recommended when using tall fescue as a winter pasture.

  • 1. Graze the early spring growth with ewes and lambs in May and early June.
  • 2. Round-bale or stack the second growth in June and July and store for a reserve source    of feed.
  • 3. Fertilize the pasture with 50 pounds per acre of nitrogen in late August to stimulate    fall growth. Ammonium nitrate is the preferred N fertilizer source for grass pastures. Do    not graze until December 1.
  • 4. Graze as winter pasture from December 1 to April 1, utilizing the round bales or    stacks as needed. Provide during this period a temporary windbreak or shelter against    winter storms.
  • 5. Inject ewes with vitamins A, D and E as insurance against deficiencies and supply a    salt-mineral mixture free choice.
  • 6. Give pregnant ewes 0.5-0.75 pound of shelled corn daily during the last month of    gestation.

 

Corn and Other Harvested Crop Residues

Non-pregnant ewes or ewes in the first 15 weeks of gestation can utilize corn stalks, leaves, shucks and other low-quality residues at a savings of 20-50 percent of usual feed costs. Corn residue may be grazed or collected in a stacker for later use. The exercise the ewes get when they glean the field is beneficial during early gestation.

Ewes should be vaccinated with Clostridium perfringens type D toxoid 2 weeks before grazing to prevent enterotoxemia (over-eating disease). In some cases, it may be necessary to limit the grazing area or maintain a high stocking rate to prevent diarrhea.

Water and a free choice salt-mineral mixture should always be provided. Having grass pasture next to the cornfield is desirable to help balance nutrient and feed intake. As ewes approach the last 4-6 weeks of gestation, they should be removed from the field and placed on a winter fescue pasture or in dry lot.

 

HARVESTED FORAGES FOR SHEEP

The most satisfactory harvested forage for ewes is good quality alfalfa hay, although other high-quality legumes are almost as good. Alfalfa hay furnishes adequate protein, necessary vitamins and minerals. Other satisfactory harvested forages include legume-grass silage, corn silage and haylage (low-moisture silage). Three pounds of corn silage or legume-grass silage or 2 pounds of haylage are approximately equivalent in dry matter content to 1 pound of hay.

Legume-grass silage or haylage usually furnishes adequate protein for ewes, but a corn silage ration will require additional protein and minerals. Soybean meal at a rate of 0.2 pound per ewe daily should be added to corn silage, with a mineral-salt mixture available free choice. Another way to supplement corn silage is to add 10 pounds of urea or 10 pounds of limestone per ton of 65 percent moisture silage at the time of ensiling. Uniform mixing is necessary if this supplementation method is to be successful.

 

MANAGING SHEEP ON PASTURE

Animal performance and enterprise profitability depend, in no small measure, on how well the pasture is managed and utilized. Presented here are nine basic management practices that optimize the productivity of both the animals and the land they graze. How these practices can be applied to meet the forage needs of a 100-ewe flock on 30 acres is then discussed.

Recommended Pasture Management Practices

  • 1.Subdivide large pastures into paddocks for rotational grazing at a high stocking rate.    An electric fence can be erected at a reasonable cost and easily moved. Rotational grazing    reduces internal parasite infestation of sheep.
  • 2.Vary the stocking rate to coincide with pasture productivity. This should result in    greater plant vigor, more forage production and less weed problems. Too heavy a stocking    rate eventually decreases the pasture stand and forage yield, while too low a rate reduces    carrying capacity and results in forage waste.
  • 3.Reduce the intake of non-lactating ewes by restricting their grazing time. A pasture’s    carrying capacity can be increased greatly when non-lactating ewes are restricted to 50    percent of the normal grazing time each week. Increasing the stocking rate and rotating    pastures during the non-lactating period also reduces intake.
  • 4.Adjust the lambing season to coincide with maximum pasture growth periods in the    spring or fall. Cool-season perennial grasses reach their maximum growth in May and June    and a second but smaller peak period in the fall. Ewes lambing in March or April make    better use of spring pasture growth than ewes that lamb in January or February. These    winter lambing ewes must be fed harvested feeds during the period of greatest nutritional    needs. Ewes that lamb in September or October make good use of fall pasture growth during    lactation. After weaning, which is the period of lowest nutritional needs, these ewes can    be maintained on winter pasture, reducing the need for harvested forages.
  • 5. Regardless of lambing time, provide additional energy in the form of shelled corn to    “flush” at breeding, during the last 4-6 weeks of pregnancy, and in the first 8    weeks of lactation. If low-quality forages are used, protein supplements are also    recommended.
  • 6. Separate ewes with single lambs from those with twin lambs, and creep feed the twin    lambs on pasture. To reduce internal parasite infestation in lambs, separate the ewes and    lambs daily. Allow the lambs to graze clean pasture while creep feeding.
  • 7. If you raise both cattle and sheep, consider grazing them together. Sheep prefer    shorter and more tender grasses, while cattle will consume less tender growth. In    addition, cattle may help in reducing predator problems. A ratio of 3-5 sheep for each    beef animal will insure that the pasture is well utilized. Ewes nursing lambs may graze    first and then be followed by cattle.
  • 8. Control weeds and thistles. Although sheep will consume 90 percent of the weeds in a    pasture, thistles and some other weeds will be left alone. Non-grazed weeds should be    mowed when the animals are rotated to another area or controlled with an approved    herbicide.
  • 9. Fertilize pastures according to soil test. Optimum pasture production can only be    attained with a proper fertilization program.

 

Example Pasture Program for a 100-Ewe Flock

Properly fertilized and managed, 30 acres should adequately supply the pasture and harvested forages to support 100 ewes and 150 lambs during the year. This acreage does not provide the concentrates needed such as shelled corn, which must be produced on other acreage or purchased. Recognizing that the amount of land required for this size flock will vary with climatic conditions, soil type and forage adaptability, the following is a reasonable guide for pasture program planning.

The 30 acres are divided into three fields of 10 acres each (stocking rate of 10 ewes and 15 lambs per acre) and managed as such:

Field A–Temporary pasture crops.

1. Plow and seed to winter wheat in late August.

2. Graze in October and early November as a breeding pasture for spring-lambing ewes or a lactation pasture for fall-lambing ewes. 3. Rest until April 1.

4. Graze in April and early May as a lactation pasture for spring-lambing ewes or a breeding pasture for fall-lambing ewes.

5. Plow in late May and seed to sudangrass in 14-inch rows.

6. Graze in June and July with spring-born lambs.

Field B–Legume-grass mixture for permanent pasture or harvested forages.

1. Harvest early spring growth for hay, haylage or silage in May or early June.

2. Graze the regrowth with non-lactating spring-lambing ewes or with gestating fall- lambing ewes in July and August.

3. Use as an emergency pasture or for additional forage production as needed.

Field C–Tall fescue for winter pasture.

1. Harvest early spring growth for forage, or graze with ewes and lambs in May and June.

2. Round-bale or stack the second growth in July and August and store in the field.

3. Defer fall grazing until December 1.

4. Graze as a winter pasture from December 1 to April 1, utilizing round bales or stacks when needed.

Ewes lambing in January may not need the full 30 acres, since they will be on a maintenance diet during most of the pasture season. In that case, the temporary pasture (Field A) can be eliminated from the program or used to produce additional forages for the confined winterfeeding period. Ewes on the accelerated program can use Field A for two of the three lambing periods in May and September.

SUMMARY

Traditionally, sheep have been raised in Indiana at relatively low stocking rates. In many cases, they are grazed on unimproved pastures or merely serve as “weed killers” or “lawn mowers. Under these conditions, sheep performance and profits are low when compared to other livestock.

To compete economically, sheep operations must be intensified to increase returns per acre. Producers with adequate forage acreage can best do this by adjusting lambing programs with available forage production and by improving pasture utilization. When properly managed and used, improved pastures should support eight to ten ewes and their unweaned lambs or 20-25 weaned lambs per acre. Producers with limited forage acreage should consider a semi-confinement program, where the lambs are fed in confinement while the ewes make maximum use of pastures.

Footnotes

* Sheep-days is the number of sheep per acre that a particular pasture will support for a specified number of days. e.g., 350 sheep-days for wheat means that acre will support 10 sheep for 35 days.

** Harvest the excess growth of tall grasses in May and June for hay, haylage or silage.

 


New 11/82

Cooperative Extension Work in Agriculture and Home Economics, State of Indiana, Purdue University and U.S. Department of Agriculture Cooperating. H.A. Wadsworth, Director, West Lafayette, IN. Issued in furtherance of the Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914. It is the policy of the Cooperative Extension Service of Purdue University that all persons shall have equal opportunity and access to our programs and facilities.

 

 

AAPL: Sell the News

Michael Blair Disclosure: I am short AAPL.

Apple is a big company with a massive market capitalization and it needs big news to move the needle higher. New products which are incrementally better, and in the case of the A7 processor a lot better, may not be enough to convince investors that Apple will not suffer the reality that many competitors have entered what is a maturing market and despite its incredibly good products Apple is losing share.

I am short Apple calls at $515 strike with a January 2014 expiry. I may add to the short by shorting the stock on any strength.

The tablet war is getting interesting. Launched by Apple (AAPL) in April 2010, the iPad created the tablet market which immediately took a bite out of personal computer (PC) demand, much to the chagrin of companies tied to PCs like Microsoft (MSFT), Intel (INTC) and Hewlett-Packard (HPQ).

(click to enlarge)

Tablets are primarily consumption devices rather than computers used for creation of content or for work in enterprises. The major casualty of their popularity was lower priced laptops and “netbooks” which were also popular for consuming content rather than creating it.

(click to enlarge)

Having created the market, Apple dominated tablet sales for an extended period until it attracted competition, in particular from Android devices. By the second quarter of 2013, Android-based tablets had more than doubled Apple’s global market share in tablets with 67% of the market. Apple’s market share dropped from 47% to 28% over the previous year not only as a result of Android’s success but also as a result of the more than fourfold growth of Windows-based tablets, albeit from a very small base.

(click to enlarge)

Apple’s efforts to protect its position included upgrades to the iPad annually and the introduction of the iPad mini in October 2012. The popular iPad mini sold well but did not stop the relentless erosion of market share.

(click to enlarge)

While the iPad mini did not stem the market share erosion Apple was facing, it did displace full sized iPads. At the same time, in the Android space, Amazon’s (AMZN) Kindle Fire tablet was a hit with consumers along with various Samsung Galaxy tablets of differing form factors. By the fall of 2013, almost one in five iPads sold was an iPad mini, while Samsung Galaxy tablets represented a full 55% of the Android tablets sold followed by Kindle Fire tablets representing another 21% of Android tablets.

(click to enlarge)

Microsoft’s efforts to get into the tablet space got off to a rocky start. Microsoft introduced the Surface RT tablet running on an Nvidia processor based on an ARM Holdings design and a Surface Pro tablet based on an Intel chip and capable of operating all Windows software in much the same fashion as a PC. Critics panned the devices. The RT model was criticized for having little application support and the Pro model for having inadequate storage and limited battery life. Despite a large advertising campaign neither the RT nor the Pro model sold particularly well and Microsoft took a $900 million charge to write down inventory.

At the same time, in Asian markets, smartphones with larger than 5 inch screen sizes called “Phablets” took off in terms of consumers demand, surpassing tablets in volumes by the first quarter of 2013 in the Asia Pacific region.

(click to enlarge)

Fast forward to October 22, 2013, when Apple launches the new iPad mini with retina display and a new full sized iPad based on the powerful A7 processor and in a thinner chassis, to be called the iPad Air. As you might expect from Apple, both devices are gorgeous to look at and continue Apple’s outstanding combination of design and innovation.

(click to enlarge)

Coincidentally Nokia (NOK) also launched a new tablet, the Lumia 2520, another very nice looking design based on Microsoft’s RT operating system and shipping with a full version of Microsoft Office.

(click to enlarge)

The question for investors is whether the announcements will have an effect on share prices. Given that Nokia’s handset business is about to be acquired by Microsoft and that the handset business is likely to be a small part of Microsoft for years to come, I would not expect the market to react to the Nokia announcement.

The real money to be made or lost is in the case of Apple.

Apple stock typically rises in anticipation of new products as it did leading up to the iPhone 5s and iPhone 5c announcements.

(click to enlarge)

But, typically, the stock falls away in the weeks following the news.

(click to enlarge)I don’t expect this announcement to be any different. The news is out now, and while it is good news it is unlikely enough good news to offset the competitive forces the market sees and in my view fears.

Apple is a big company with a massive market capitalization and it needs big news to move the needle higher. New products which are incrementally better, and in the case of the A7 processor a lot better, may not be enough to convince investors that Apple will not suffer the reality that many competitors have entered what is a maturing market and despite its incredibly good products Apple is losing share.

I am short Apple calls at $515 strike with a January 2014 expiry. I may add to the short by shorting the stock on any strength.

Leanne Simpson. The other half of the Elsipogtog story.

((Leanne’s fourth book, The Gift is in the Making, a collection of Nishnaabeg stories is now available from the Debwe Series, Highwater Press. Her first book of short stories, Islands of Decolonial Love is forthcoming fall 2013 from ARP Books and is accompanied by a full length spoken word album.))

In the mid-1990s I moved to Mi’gma’gi to go to graduate school. I was expecting to learn about juvenile Atlantic salmon on the Miramichi River. I was naive and misguided. Fortunately for me, the Mi’kmaq people saw that in me and they taught me something far more profound. I did my first sweat in the homeland of Elsipogtog, in the district of Siknikt. I did solidarity work with the women of Elsipogtog, then known as Big Cove, as they struggled against imposed poverty and poor housing. One of them taught me my first song, the Mi’kmaq honour song, and I attended her Native Studies class with her as she sang it to a room full of shocked students.

I also found a much needed refuge with a Mi’kmaq family on a nearby reserve. What I learned from all of these kind people who saw me as an Nishnaabeg in a town where no one else did, was that the place I needed to be wasn’t Mi’gma’gi, but in my own Mississauga Nishnaabeg homeland. For that I am grateful.

Nearly every year I travel east to Mi’gma’gi for one reason or another. In 2010, my children and I travelled to Listuguj in the Gespe’gewa’gi district of Mi’gma’gi to witness the PhD dissertation defense of Fred Metallic. I was on Fred’s dissertation committee, and Fred had written and was about to defend his entire dissertation in Mi’gmaw (Mi’kmaq) without translation — a ground breaking achievement. Fred had also kindly invited us to his community for the defence. When some of the university professors indicated that this might be difficult given that the university was 1300 km away from the community, Fred simply insisted there was no other way.

He insisted because his dissertation was about building a different kind of relationship between his nation and Canada, between his community and the university. He wasn’t going to just talk about decolonizing the relationship, he was determined to embody it and he was determined that the university would as well. This was a Mi’kmaw dissertation on the grounds of Mi’kmaw intellectual traditions, ethics and politics.

The defense was unlike anything I have ever witnessed within the academy. The community hall was packed with representatives from band councils, the Sante Mawiomi, and probably close to 300 relatives, friends, children and supporters from other communities. The entire defense was in Mi’gmaw lead by community Elders, leaders and Knowledge Holders — the real intellectuals in this case.

There was ceremony. There was song and prayer. At the end, there was a huge feast and give away. It went on for the full day and into the night. It was one of the most moving events I have ever witnessed, and it changed me. It challenged me to be less cynical about academics and institutions because the strength and persistence of this one Mi’gmaw man and the support of his community, changed things. I honestly never thought he’d get his degree, because I knew he’d walk away rather than compromise. He had my unconditional support either way. Fred is one of the most brilliant thinkers I’ve ever met, and he was uncompromising in his insistence that the university meet him half way. I never thought an institution would.

rexton---the women march1394352_10151916870188959_1762282314_

All of these stories came flooding back to me this week as I watched the RCMP attack the non-violent anti-fracking protestors at Elsipogtog with rubber bullets, an armoured vehicle, tear gas, fists, police dogs and pepper spray. The kind of stories I learned in Mi’gmagi will never make it into the mainstream media, and most Canadians will never hear them. Instead, Canadians will hear recycled propaganda as the mainstream media blindly goes about repeating the press releases sent to them by the RCMP designed to portray Mi’kmaw protestors as violent and unruly, in order to justify their own colonial violence. The only images most Canadians will see is of the three hunting rifles, a basket full of bullets and the burning police cars, and most will be happy to draw their own conclusions based on the news – that the Mi’kmaq are angry and violent, that they have no land rights, and that they deserved to be beaten, arrested, criminalized, jailed, shamed and erased.

The story here, the real story, is virtually the same story in every Indigenous nation: Over the past several centuries we have been violently dispossessed of most of our land to make room for settlement and resource development. The very active system of settler colonialism maintains that dispossession and erases us from the consciousness of settler Canadians except in ways that is deemed acceptable and non-threatening to the state. We start out dissenting and registering our dissent through state-sanctioned mechanisms like environmental impact assessments. Our dissent is ignored. Some of us explore Canadian legal strategies, even though the courts are stacked against us. Slowly but surely we get backed into a corner where the only thing left to do is to put our bodies on the land. The response is always the same — intimidation, force, violence, media smear campaigns, criminalization, silence, talk, negotiation, “new relationships,” promises, placated resistance and then more broken promises. Then the cycle repeats itself.

This is why it is absolutely critical that our conversations about reconciliation include the land. We simply cannot build a new relationship with Canada until we can talk openly about sharing the land in a way that ensures the continuation of Indigenous cultures and lifeways for the coming generations. The dispossession of Indigenous peoples from our homelands is the root cause of every problem we face whether it is missing or murdered Indigenous women, fracking, pipelines, deforestation, mining, environmental contamination or social issues as a result of imposed poverty.

So we are faced with a choice. We can continue to show the photos of the three hunting rifles and the burnt out cop cars on every mainstream media outlet ad nauseam and paint the Mi’kmaq with every racist stereotype we know, or we can dig deeper. We can seek out the image of strong, calm Mi’kmaq women and children armed with drums and feathers and ask ourselves what would motivate mothers, grandmothers, aunties, sisters and daughters to stand up and say enough is enough. We can learn about the 400 years these people and their ancestors have spent resisting dispossession and erasure. We can learn about how they began their reconciliation process in the mid-1700s when they forged Peace and Friendship treaties. We can learn about why they chose to put their bodies on the land to protect their lands and waters against fracking because setting the willfully ignorant and racists aside, sane, intelligent people should be standing with them.

Our bodies should be on the land so that our grandchildren have something left to stand upon.

source

Her Blog:  http://leannesimpson.ca/about/