Birds Take Backseat To Fish, Farms In The Klamath Basin
Driving around Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge is like being on bird safari. Guides today are refuge manager Greg Austin and biologist John Vradenburg.
“Starting to see the white-faced ibis,” says Austin, manager of the six preserves that make up the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex.
Austin and Vradenburg look out of the dusty car window at ibis wading in the distance.
“Yeah, this is the first time I’ve seen it today,” Vradenburg confirms.
Lower Klamath is a place of paradox. The wide-open landscape is a disconcerting contrast of wildness and impeccable human control. Gravel roads run along a grid of dikes separating wetlands from fields of wheat and barley. Irrigation channels, dams and water pumps crisscross the landscape.
Austin stops at a massive expanse of marshy field.
“That’s the first time we’ve had water on that in years,” he says.
His voice is tinged with sadness.
“Ten years at least,” Vradenburg says, matching Austin’s rueful tone.
The refuge is functionally near the bottom of a long hierarchy of water users in the basin. And over the past few years, the refuge wetlands haven’t been wet at all.
The coots, plovers, willets, godwits, grebes, and gulls don’t know the history of this land. They only know there’s water right now.
But Vradenburg says by the end of July, the water in this field will likely be gone. So the refuge, which was set aside by President Theodore Roosevelt as a haven for waterfowl, is pumping the water away to force the birds to leave.
“We can’t afford to have a whole bunch of areas that are going to attract a large number of birds in to nest, and then pull the bottom out from under them because the water’s not there,” Vradenburg explains.
This is the deep irony of Lower Klamath’s place in the basin. The natural systems that once kept the land wet have long been altered and now the refuge depends largely on water deliveries from the Bureau of Reclamation, the federal agency that controls the massive Klamath Basin irrigation project.
And despite having enough snow and rain last winter to end the Western drought, the refuge was given no guarantee of getting any more water this year.
“To know that you had this kind of water year, and the watershed is as wet as it is, and we may be still dealing with the same drought-like conditions that we’ve dealt with for the recent past history,” Vradenburg says. “I don’t know how we manage for that.”
About 20 miles north of the refuge, Jim McCarthy of the environmental group WaterWatch walks along a trail by Upper Klamath Lake. The narrow inlet above the Link River Dam attracts several mid-morning fishermen.
“How’s fishing?” McCarthy asks as he passes.
“No bites yet. Still trying to catch one,” an angler responds. This is the main reservoir for the Klamath Basin.
It’s a large shallow lake featuring high temperatures, massive algae blooms and the occasional trophy redband trout.
McCarthy says the refuge has an early water right that should give it the same access to this water as the oldest farms here. But he says the Bureau of Reclamation isn’t honoring those rights.
“If you have an agency coming in and using their power to deny legal water claims, that’s a very bad precedent,” he says. “That should set off alarm bells all across the West.”
At the very least, McCarthy says the bureau should extend the same courtesy to the refuge that it extends to farmers on the project. Each spring, the Bureau of Reclamation gives water delivery estimates to farmers based on winter precipitation levels.
“The bureau makes a big deal—and I think it’s totally appropriate—how they want to provide water certainty to the irrigators so they can plan their crops and plan their year and do what they need to do and make a living,” he says.
The bureau hasn’t given any kind of certainty to the refuges since 2013.
“(That’s) what allows the refuge to exist and fulfill its purposes: if it knows what water it’s receiving and the plans that they can make to provide breeding habitat and other kinds of habitat for birds.”
Evidence of the simmering tension over water bubbles up frequently in the Klamath Basin. You can ask about anything, “as long as you don’t talk about water or fish or wildlife or wetlands. But everything else you can talk about,” joked one federal employee.
At the Bureau of Reclamation office near Klamath Falls, this sentiment is a bit more subtle—and comes in the form of locked entries, barricades and fences (some of these measures, no-doubt, were post 9-11 security upgrades).
The building is squat and not aging very gracefully. It’s surrounded by modular outbuildings that resemble trailers. Yet this is a seat of power.
“We’re the ones that open and close the faucet so we do get characterized as the agency or entity that rules the water in the Klamath,” says Jason Cameron, deputy area manager for the bureau’s Klamath Basin office.
But Cameron says the bureau is only following the law.
Lower Klamath does have an early water right that gives them the same legal entitlement to water as the oldest farms on the Klamath Irrigation Project. The problem is physical access.
“If you do not have direct access to the source of water, then the water right holder together with the (land)owners (in) between … need to work closely together. Because the water right does not give the right to trespass over somebody else’s property,” says Tom Paul, special assistant to the director of the Oregon Water Resources Department, the state agency that manages water rights.
Irrigators on the Klamath Project have contracts that give them a priority for water delivery—this aligns closely with when the farmer and the land they use became part of the project.
“In those contract and then the prioritization system, it’s pretty clear that we need to meet our contractual obligations prior to making water available to the wildlife refuge,” says Reclamation’s Cameron.
At this point, the refuge doesn’t have a formal agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation to use project infrastructure to receive water. And without a contract-like arrangement, the refuges are out of luck.
Fish Over Birds
Perhaps a more immediate legal hurdle for the refuges getting water, somewhat ironically, is the Endangered Species Act. Three fish in the Klamath Basin—two species of sucker fish and the Klamath River coho salmon—are protected species under the law.
“In years past, prior to Endangered Species Act requirements on the project, there was ample water available for the refuge,” says Reclamation Deputy Director Cameron.
The latest round of requirements came in the form of a 2013 report by two federal agencies assessing the Klamath project’s impact on imperiled fish and their habitat. This biological opinion by the Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service serves as an instruction manual of sorts for protecting these fish.
Cameron says because of that document, the bureau doesn’t have any discretion on how much water the refuges can receive.
“In a nutshell, the 2013 biological opinion accounts for all of the water in the system. And clearly articulate how much water can go when and where,” he says.
The opinion cuts off the water completely to the refuges from March through the end of May. And then it says the refuges will only get water in the summer if the fish have enough and the project’s farmers get everything they need. And in fact, this latest version of has been even more onerous in terms of water for the refuges.
“The biological opinions previously didn’t specify what you could or couldn’t deliver to the refuges, where in the current biological opinion it does,” Cameron says.
Reclamation won’t know with certainty if there’s going to be water left until later in the season, although Lower Klamath started receiving some water in July.
So who gets the water in the Klamath Basin? First fish, then farms and then, if they’re lucky… the birds.
Ron Cole retired as Klamath Refuge Manager in 2014, a year after Reclamation stopped budgeting water for Lower Klamath.
“As a manager, I had no problem with the refuge giving up water to help endangered fish. But that’s been going on for a long time now, and we haven’t seen any real change in the fish population,” he says.
What has changed are the refuges. Nesting waterfowl, nesting shorebirds, migratory shorebirds, the number of birds, the number of waterfowl that migrate through the basin, have declined. Cole says there are species that once used the refuges that are now gone.
“They’re not endangered so no one’s worried about that,” he says.
Cole says a complex history and politics brought us to this moment.
“You want to keep the Endangered Species Act working and helping fish. You want to keep the economy of the basin functioning as best you can. If someone was going to have to give something up, there’s just not enough support to keep water on the refuge.”
Making It Flow
As intractable as the refuges’ water situation is, there are ideas for getting the water to flow once again for the birds.
Some involved look to the past, and the possibility of an agreement like the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement. This was a long-negotiated water agreement, full of compromise and promise. It effectively died when Congress failed to pass legislation to fund the deal.
“You look back on the old KBRA and it was groups getting together and compromising… knowing you’re not going to get everything you want but working together. I think as a community we’d be a lot better off with that,” says Austin, the current refuge manager.
The KBRA would have given the refuges some water certainty each year, as well as funneling more revenue made off farming on the refuges to pay for wildlife management.
“We believe we need a balanced approach because, without that, we have to legally write the biological opinions,” Austin says
Last year’s new agreement to remove four Klamath River dams called for a restart of KBRA-like negotiations. But as of yet no meetings between the interests in the basin are underway.
Another possible way forward has also recently emerged.
Before the change of administrations in January, Deputy Secretary of the Interior Mike Connor signed a memo saying Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuge met the requirement to get the highest priority water delivery priority from the Bureau of Reclamation.
In June, a bi-partisan group of lawmakers from California and Oregon (including Democratic Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley and Republican Rep. Greg Walden) drafted a letter to current Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke asking for a more reliable supply of water to the Klamath Refuges.
The letter specifically asks for the bureau to negotiate high-priority water delivery contract (it would technically be a memorandum of agreement) for the refuges.
Refuge and Reclamation staff say they had a preliminary meeting in June to discuss a way forward.
The letter also requests that the up-coming revision of the biological opinion should include changes to water delivery restriction on the refuges because “the criteria under the current biological opinion are almost impossible to meet.”
And this has never been more evident than this year: The entire Klamath Basin is lousy with water and Lower Klamath Refuge and the hundreds of species of birds that use it have been left with the liquid equivalent of scraps.
What Happens To Birds When Wildlife Refuges Dry Up?
Aline of binoculars point upwards at a ridge on the edge of Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuge. There’s an owl’s nest in a small cave about 150 feet up, and Charlotte Kisling has her scope trained.
“That’s a male barn owl in the scope,” she says to the group standing on the edge of the two-lane road.
“How do you know?”
“Females are tawny,” Kisling replies.
She knows a lot about birds and isn’t shy about sharing.
“Oh, I thought it was winking.”
It takes a pregnant moment for this comedic bit to land, but Kevin Spencer gets some appreciative chuckles from his fellow birders.
Spencer is leading this Klamath Audubon Society birding field trip through two of the Klamath National Wildlife Refuges straddling the Oregon-California border.
He doesn’t get a chance at an encore joke because another raptor comes on stage.
“There’s a prairie falcon flying!” Kisling yells in excitement.
The group tracks the brown mottled bird and its mate swoop and dip along the ridge. The high-pitched cries bounce off a rock wall and out over the miles of open valley floor behind the group.
“Look at this show. Just enjoy it,” she says, obviously doing so herself.
People travel here from all over the world to visit the Klamath Refuges. It’s one of the best spots for birding in the United States. There are birding trails, birding festivals—an entire birding economy in the Klamath Basin.
Today it’s a Southern Oregon crowd on the Audubon field trip, which is focusing not on raptors, but on shorebirds.
Kait White recently moved to Grants Pass from Georgia, and says she immediately heard recommendations to visit the refuges.
“My species list—I write everything down—is so long compared to other places you go to see one specific species or one or two things. But not like this,” she says. “We must have seen like 45 species today, so pretty awesome.”
And across the six preserves in the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex, there’s a place for every bird.
Sage grouse strut at Clear Lake.
Bald eagles roost at Bear Valley.
White pelicans patrol Klamath Marsh.
Terns summer at Tule Lake.
Red-winged blackbirds hide at Upper Klamath.
And their yellow-headed counterparts sing across the border in Lower.
But all this abundance could be deceptive.
Closing The Windows
Stories go around the Klamath Basin about the birds and how many there used to be.
“I talked to people that grew up here in the ’20s and ’30s,” says Ron Cole, former manager of the refuge complex.
Cole started at the refuges as a technician in the 1980s, left for a while, and then came back as manager in the early 2000s.
“The classrooms in Tulelake during the fall migration, the white-fronted geese were so numerous that the teachers would have to close the windows so she could talk to the class,” he says. “Because it was so loud.”
Now Cole says if you see a flock of white-fronted geese flying over the town of Tulelake in the fall, it’s a big deal.
That decline in birds is the story of the Klamath Refuges.
“Historically, it was thought that these refuges here had the highest concentrations of waterfowl found anywhere in the world,” says Bob Hunter, with the environmental group WaterWatch.
The Klamath refuges are located in the heart of the Pacific Flyway—one of the major migratory bird routes in the world, stretching from the southern tip of South America to Alaska. And a majority of the waterfowl on the flyway come through the Klamath Basin.
“This is the bottleneck right here. This is one of the few places where they can come where there are still wetlands available—a mix of wetland habitats that can provide a place for rest and re-nourishment on their migration both north and south in the spring and the fall,” Hunter said.
But populations here have plummeted over the past century, in part because of what humans have done to the landscape in the Klamath Basin. The estimated number of birds using the refuges have dropped from more than 7 million birds a year in the 1950s to closer to 1 million currently.
Because the birds migrate, problems in the basin likely aren’t the only reason. But the ecosystems here have been highly altered. Marsh connectivity has been lost and as much as 80 percent of the original wetlands in the basin have been drained; much of that area now used for agriculture.
The rate of habitat loss from development has slowed considerably. Recently though, the major issue in the basin has been lack of water. The water supply has been stretched thin—so thin that in an average water year, often there’s someone who won’t get the water they want. Even in good water years the refuges have no certainty they’ll get water.
Without this certainty, the ability of wildlife managers to plan for the season has been diminished, invasive plants are running rampant and disease has killed thousands of birds.
Conditions are changing on the refuges.
“We’re turning into more of a spring and fall migration stopover,” says current refuge manager Greg Austin.
Austin says the refuges haven’t been able to provide nesting habitat because they haven’t been able to keep water on the land.
“Historically, you’d have water here in the summer—permanent wetland units—that you would get a lot of breeding birds. And we don’t have that anymore,” he says.
Protecting Postage Stamps
John Alexander of the Klamath Bird Observatory has seen this loss in his work.
Paddling on the Upper Klamath Refuge canoe trail, he’s yelled at by birds perched on the reedy marsh and green linoleum swaths of lilypad called wocus.
“We’ll just tuck up into this little channel and sit tight a little bit. And hope that some of our black terns show up,” Alexander says as the canoe pushes through the lilypads.
The first of this year’s terns should be arriving any day. They’ll spend a couple weeks on the marsh pairing off and then they’ll build nests in the great sea of tules Upper Klamath is known for.
“(Upper Klamath is) a postage stamp of what wetland habitats probably were in the West originally,” Alexander says.
For a decade, the observatory tracked migratory black terns that nest in and around Upper Klamath. What they found was alarming.
While the terns’ numbers have remained relatively stable elsewhere, they declined here by 8 percent each year.
Alexander says rising and falling bird populations could be used to help determine the health of these wetlands.
“The consequences for society might not be as apparent as they could be,” he says, dipping his paddle into the calm, dark water.
“All of this represents clean water downstream. And all of this represents healthier watersheds that hold more water in the long run in a climate change scenario.”
For Alexander, the immediate question is not whether there’s enough protected wetland habitat in the Klamath Basin, but…
“Are we taking care of the postage stamp?”
And The Answer Is...
It would be pretty difficult to find a person who knows the situation at the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuge Complex and would still answer that question “yes.”
Bob Sallinger, conservation director of the Audubon Society of Portland, definitely would not. Instead, he’d take things a step further and place at least some of the blame on the refuges themselves—specifically the people that manage them.
Audubon is one of several groups suing the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over a new Comprehensive Conservation Plan for managing the refuges. The plan was released early this year. The suit argues the refuges aren’t doing what they should be doing to protect the birds.
“I would have hoped they would have seen this as a proactive opportunity to take a hard look at the (refuges) and figure out if what they’re doing makes sense. How it can be adjusted. And instead they double down on doing things exactly the way they previously did it,” Sallinger says.
Sallinger says the refuges’ primary mission is to manage for waterfowl—all waterfowl. But the new conservation plan only takes into account a select few species.
Just Add Memories
Retired refuge manager Cole is no fan of environmental groups’ legal challenges against the way the Klamath refuges are being operated. But he agrees with them on one thing. “This is something, that honestly, you just add water. It’s that simple. You just add water,” he says.
“This is something, that honestly, you just add water. It’s that simple. You just add water,” he says.
Cole has another old story about the refuges. It goes like this:
It’s 12 o’clock in the afternoon.
The birds get up into the air.
And you can’t see the sun because there are so many layers of birds in the sky.
It’s a powerful memory. But it’s not a memory of the young. Or the middle-aged. It’s a memory of only the oldest of the oldest remaining in the basin.
And without that memory …
“I worry that when people are looking out there now, [they think] this is good,” Cole says.
Because when the birds are migrating through the national wildlife refuges it is impressive.
“But if they knew there was an opportunity to see many more birds, would it matter to them? Don’t know. Maybe it wouldn’t. Maybe seeing just a few is enough.”
How Farming Inside Wildlife Refuges Is Transforming Klamath Basin Agriculture
Ryan Hartman is driving from field to field in the Klamath Basin, giving what amounts to a masterclass on how to run logistics for 3,000 acres of farmland.
He troubleshoots equipment at one spot, sets planting depth drills on another a mile away, and farther on, shows a few of his 12 employees where to install an irrigation pipe.
“It’s a pretty good job to have. You get to drive around in this every day … it’s pretty nice scenery,” he says of the big blue sky, the low brown mountains, the marshes and wide open fields outside his truck window.
Hartman has been farming for about eight years on land he leases inside the Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuges. He grows grain, alfalfa and potatoes.
Hartman pulls off onto a chocolate dirt road into a giant field. A low dike keeps water from a nearby lake off this farmland.
“These are yellows,” he says, pointing to one part of the potato field. “And from that way up are chippers—a variety for Frito Lay.”
A century ago, this land was under a massive lake that supported migratory birds. Now it supports potatoes and the people who grow them.
Hartman is one of them. But he’s also part of a new generation of farmers who are making agriculture more compatible with wildlife.
They’re adopting irrigation methods that provide habitat for waterfowl, help keep chemicals out of the wildlife refuges, and give growers a premium price for their crops. And they’re helping push the entire Klamath Basin toward a more sustainable agricultural system.
Refuges Are For Farmers
If you drink organic Northwest beer, there’s a decent chance you’ve tasted barley from the Klamath Basin National Wildlife Refuges.
Grain production on refuges is relatively common across the country, but the Klamath refuges are the only ones that also allow for row crops like potatoes, onions and horseradish.
These row crops are grown on Tule Lake refuge and no other because it is enshrined in federal law—1964 legislation called the Kuchel Act (pronounced Key-cull). The Kuchel Act was a compromise bill that stopped refuge land from being stripped away for homesteading, something that had slowly been happening since the land was set aside at the beginning of the 20th century. In return, the farming of grain and row crops was allowed to continue, as long as it supported “proper waterfowl management.”
The interpretation of this provision of the law has since been the subject of debate and litigation in the basin.
Currently about 40 percent, or 37,000 acres, of land on Lower Klamath and Tule Lake refuges are farmed. Around 10 percent of that land is in row crops.
The land is broken down into two separate programs; one involves farming on what are called co-op lands and the other affects growers on so-called lease lands.
The co-op farming is directly designed to provide food for waterfowl. No money exchanges hands. These growers can farm the land for free as long as they agree to leave at least a quarter of that grain standing at the end of the season.
“The co-op fields we have full control over,” says Greg Austin, manager of the Klamath Refuges. The refuges award co-op contracts based on which farmer offers the best deal.
“Annually what that best plan looks like changes based on what conditions are like,” says refuge biologist John Vradenburg. “What’s the refuge going to be most lacking in that year?”
Sometimes the refuge wants offers that will leave more grain standing. Sometimes it’s waterfowl habitat that gets prioritized. Sometimes other factors play into the decision.
Lease-land farming, by contrast, is more of an economic venture. It’s managed by the Bureau of Reclamation. Farmers bid on specific fields for five-year leases. Potatoes and onions grow here, but most of the land is in grain production. Farmers don’t have to leave any behind for birds.
All this has turned the Lower Klamath and Tule Lake National Wildlife Refuges into giant laboratories. They test ideas—both for the birds and for the farmers.
One of the most consequential experiments has involved crop irrigation on refuge land—a method that farmers call “flood fallow” and that the refuges have officially labeled as “walking wetlands.” It’s the program that Hartman is taking part in.
The aim is to improve the way agriculture supports habitat for waterfowl. The wildlife refuges have high-priority water rights. But their ability to channel water into wetlands is limited.
The refuges don’t have a formal agreement with the Bureau of Reclamation to deliver that water. And Endangered Species Act protections for imperiled fish in the Klamath Basin have kept water in streams that might otherwise reach the refuges.
Even if those things changed, the highest-priority water rights owned by the refuges are earmarked for crop irrigation, not wildlife.
So wildlife managers figured out that if they could convince farmers to use their agricultural water to periodically flood their fields for extended periods of time, they could provide more habitat for waterfowl.
“We have all these agricultural parcels spread throughout the refuge and they’re helping us bring the wetland conditions that have been lost,” Vradenburg says.
The Benefit For Farmers?
Fourth-generation Klamath Basin farmer Mark Staunton is among those who now flood their fields. When those fields are drained and put back into production, a year’s worth of bird poop and decomposing wetland plants cause crop fertility to skyrocket.
“We’re all the sudden back to production that maybe my great-grandpa would have seen when he first started farming on the lake,” Staunton says.
Staunton’s great-grandfather was one of the first homesteaders in the area. His uncle was the first to work with the wildlife refuges on field flooding about 15 years back.
Not only are farmers finding that the standing water makes the land more fertile, they’re also discovering that it kills off weeds.
Since this practice of flooding fields was first put to use, the program has taken off, triggering a transformation of farming on the refuge.
There’s another trend that’s changing agricultural practices in the Klamath Basin’s wildlife refuges: rising consumer demand for organic produce and grains.
The market has seen double-digit growth since the early 2000s and is currently valued at nearly $40 billion in the United States alone.
In the Klamath Basin, flood-fallow irrigation on the refuges has paved the way. On fields that are flooded for three growing seasons, farmers can immediately have their crops certified as organic—netting them higher prices than they’d get for conventionally grown crops.
In addition, when the Bureau of Reclamation drains fields that had been flooded, it can then offer them to farmers for organic production.
“We believe we’re getting higher and increase bids on the lots that are available for organic,” says Mike Green, manager of the lease land program for the Bureau of Reclamation.
Rob Wilson at the University of California extension office in Tulelake says as growers are seeing success using this system, other farmers off-refuge are jumping on board.
“We’ve seen a substantial increase in organic production. And we’re talking thousands of acres of wheat and small grains, barley, potatoes and many of the forages that are being grown,” Wilson says. “It’s becoming a substantial part of farming in the Klamath Basin.”
Staunton is part of that trend.
“About five years ago our farm was less than 15 percent organic to conventional, and now we’re about 50-50 if not a little bit more,” he says.
About half of the farmland on the Klamath refuges is now either organic or flooded as a wetland. And overall fewer chemicals are being put on ground, which is better for the birds.
Best Of An Awful Situation
Bob Hunter of the environmental group WaterWatch is not convinced.
“Walking wetland system certainly has provided the refuge manager with a tool to make an awful situation a little better than it is,” Hunter says.
It will take far more than a change in the way crops are irrigated to satisfy Hunter and other critics of farming on wildlife refuges.
“Tule Lake Refuge is really two polluted farm ponds and commercial farming,” Hunter says.
WaterWatch is suing the refuge for not phasing out farming in its latest conservation plan. The suit says in examining the potential continued compatibility of agriculture on the refuges, managers only considered its effect on a small subset of waterfowl—the same waterfowl that are known to use agriculture for forage and habitat.
Hunter recommends a springtime drive through the refuge to dispel any notion that it’s a park for wildlife.
“They have silhouettes of painted bald eagles out there to act as scarecrows to keep migrating geese off the fields,” he says. “So here you have a national wildlife refuge that is excluding birds so you won’t adversely impact farming.”
The refuge is attempting to rein in this practice in its new conservation plan. That’s drawn the ire of farmers. Some of them are suing over the conservation plan, saying there are changes to agriculture on the refuges that violate federal laws.
Again and again the situation at the Klamath refuges comes back to water.
Ron Larson is a retired biologist who worked for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in the Klamath Basin for 20 years.
“Personally, I think it’s unfortunate that there’s farming on the refuge. But on the other hand, the fact that there is farming on the refuge does provide a guaranteed water supply, at least for Tule Lake” refuge, Larson says. “So it’s kind of a Catch-22 situation, but it is unfortunate.”
Environmental groups say the refuges’ managers could do far more than encourage growers to irrigate crops in ways that benefit wildlife. Instead, they should take steps to ensure the refuges’ water rights are enforced to put more water directly into natural waterfowl habitat.
This is possible under Oregon water law. But the Oregon Water Resources Department says no changes can happen until after all water rights in the Klamath Basin have been certified. This adjudication process likely won’t be finalized for at least 10 years.
Hunter sees promise in changing the purpose of the refuges’ water rights to benefit wildlife. If the refuges truly care about the birds they’re supposed to be protecting, he says, the next great experiment will be phasing out farming altogether.
Jes Burns is the Southern Oregon reporter for EarthFix, an environmental journalism collaboration led by Oregon Public Broadcasting in partnership with six other public media stations in Oregon, Washington and Idaho.
She previously worked for the NPR affiliate KLCC in Eugene as a reporter and the local All Things Considered host. Jes has also worked as an editor and producer for Free Speech Radio News and has produced reports as a freelance producer for NPR, Sirius Radio's OutQ News and The Takeaway.
Jes has a degree in English literature from Duke University and a master's degree from the University of Oregon's School of Journalism and Communications.


Degenerative Disc Disease
Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD)
Although it’s a normal part of the aging process, degenerative disc disease can cause painful symptoms. Fortunately, there are minimally invasive treatment options that help provide relief and keep you active.
What Is Degenerative Disc Disease (DDD)?
Degenerative disc disease (DDD) is part of the natural process of growing older. As we age, our intervertebral discs lose their flexibility, elasticity, and shock absorbing characteristics. The outer fibers that surround the disc, called the annulus fibrosis, become brittle and are more easily torn. At the same time, the soft gel-like center of the disc, called the nucleus pulposus, starts to dry out and shrink. The combination of damage to the intervertebral discs, the development of bone spurs and the gradual thickening of the ligaments that support the spine can all contribute to degenerative arthritis of the lumbar spine.
To a certain degree, this process happens to everyone. However, not everyone who has degenerative changes in their lumbar spine has pain. Many people who have “normal” backs have MRIs that show disc herniations, degenerative changes, and narrowed spinal canals. Every patient is different, and it is important to realize that not everyone develops symptoms as a result of degenerative disc disease.
What Are The Symptoms Of Degenerative Disc Disease?
When degenerative disc disease becomes painful or symptomatic, it can cause several different symptoms due to the compression of the nerve roots. Depending on where your degenerative disc is located, it could cause:
- Back pain
- Radiating leg pain
- Neck pain
- Radiating arm pain
These symptoms are caused by the fact that worn out discs are a source of pain because they do not function as well as they once did, and as they shrink, the space available for the nerve roots also shrinks. As the discs between the intervertebral bodies start to wear out, the entire lumbar spine becomes less flexible. The result can be back pain and stiffness, especially towards the end of the day.


Taylor's Guide to Water Saving Gardens: Based on Taylor's Enclyclopedia of Gardening, by Norman Taylor (author) and Gordon P. DeWolf Jr. (Editor), paperback (good/very good condition)
In areas that experience frequent water shortages, gardeners need to find new and innovative ways to grow their gardens. This book provides the answers to such questions as, Which plants will thrive without much water? Different varieties of flowers, ground covers, shrubs, and trees are all discussed. Helpful gardening techniques are provided for the 260 plants featured, including effective irrigation and soil improvement. A sourcebook for gardeners with 324 color photographs.


As you all know the nation has been implementing new standards called Common Core for public schools in science, English, reading comprehension and math. The ACT has also been changed slightly to more closely test students over standards set by Common Core. We at iLearn Academy are changing our curriculum as well to align ourselves to the new standards.
I have been getting questions from parents and students alike as to why some units in certain classes have been changed or omitted. Please be cognizant of the new standards as they may explain changes in you iLearn Academy curricula.
Here is a helpful place to start:
The ACT has just released 2015 data from students who took the ACT in 2015. The data is an interesting snapshot of American high school students and valuable insight for those of you who are preparing or are about to prepare for the ACT. Have a look...
It's always important to start building skills for success early, so whether you are a few years away from high school or starting off your first year, check out these 10 great skills to build for success!
© iLearn Academy 2017


There are 7.7 million species of animals and birds present in the world. Animal Kingdom is highly diverse, ranging from larvae in puddles to blue whales in the seas. With such high diversity it is obvious that the world would be full of weird and surprising things that these animals adapt that help them survive.
Following is the list of such things that are sure to amaze you.
1. All Snails get pregnant!
Snails are creatures without gender distinction. They have reproductive organs of both the sexes. After mating, both the parties conceive and lay eggs! If you want to sound intelligent, the technical term is “hermaphrodite”.
2. Headstand before meals!
Flamingos have to feed with their heads upside down! Feeding process of Flamingos begins at their feet. They stir up the bottom of the shallow water they’re standing in. Then they bend down and fill their beaks with a scoop of water. The water is pushed out and the food is retained, working like a filter! Since the flamingos have to use their beaks in upside down manner too, their beaks have evolved to have such a different shape than rest of the birds!
3. Height of desperation!
If a female ferret goes out into the heat and fails at finding a male ferret, she’ll die! The reason behind this being heat increases levels of estrogen in her blood that causes bone marrow to dysfunction in its ability to make red blood cells and kill the poor ferret of anemia.
Be careful and sure while stepping out girl!
4. Dolphins can drown!
Dolphins are incapable of breathing underwater due to absence of gills. They have blowholes analogous to our nostrils and need to surface out for breathing. To prevent them from drowning while asleep, they sleep with their half brain awake which keeps them reminded that they need to swim to surface and breathe!
5. Females are the vicious ones!
Only female mosquitoes bite and suck blood. The itching sensation we feel when a mosquito bites is due to the release of their saliva into our blood. The saliva is a mixture of anticoagulants that helps the mosquito to suck the blood smoothly. The innocent males survive on flower nectar. The blood is needed for production of eggs. Stuffs people do for having kids! 😛
6. Your goldfish can get bleached!
If goldfish is kept in dull light, it’s colour fades away. It works in the similar way the phenomenon of sun tan works with us. Goldfish have chromatophores, pigments that change colour in response to light intensity. If kept in dark all the time, the chromatophores will not produce enough pigment to impart the lovely orange colour.
7. So many teeth!
Sharks may grow as many as 24000 teeth in their lifetime! Sharks are highly rich in terms of teeth they possess. They can afford to lose teeth easily! Teeth are generally shed out while attacking the prey. Their teeth losing rate is as high as a tooth every week at least.
8. Lighter than feathers!
Most of the birds like pigeons have light hollow skeletons. The light weight body is a major aspect that contributes to their flying capability. As a matter of fact, their bones are so light that their feathers weigh more than their bones!
9. How Romantic!
Sea otters are cute furry little creatures and they are also the largest of the weasel family. Sea otters hold hands while sleeping and eating to prevent drifting apart. Sometimes they even wrap some sea plants around themselves to strengthen the bond! So much love!
10. Sleeping and flying simultaneously!
Laysan albatrosses can sleep while flying. This ability acts as a defence mechanism against predators like whales and sharks. The bird rarely touches the ground after it learns to fly. It does rest on water though for feeding and sleeping though.


By Katherine Schneider
University of Wisconsin – Eau Claire
All new students’ first days are ones of adjustment. However, for international students this is even more true. You will be experiencing many different changes when entering college. There are usually four phases that you may experience.
- Honeymoon: Everything is great, nothing is wrong, you’re having a wonderful time.
- Shock: There are so many differences in this country that you don’t know how to deal with them. You didn’t think things would be like this.
- Negotiation: You learn to deal with the problems set before you and try to integrate them with your own beliefs.
- Acceptance: You are able to live well in the environment with the differences you are experiencing.
Some cultural differences you may experience due to change in customs are:
- Friendship: Most people you will come in contact with will be friendly. They will talk about current events, politics, hobbies, and sports. However, personal matters are often not spoken about such as financial or family problems.
- Dress: The attire worn is usually informal, unless otherwise told to wear formal clothing. It is not necessary to wear Western-style clothing. Clothing you have brought from home is acceptable.
- Greetings: When Americans greet each other, whether male or female, a handshake is generally the custom. Spatial distance is a very important aspect of nonverbal communication. Most Americans stand 3 feet apart when talking.
- Schedules: Americans place a high priority on being punctual. The phrase “time is money” is very common. You will be expected to be on time to events that have specific starting times, such as class, dinner arrangements, appointments, etc.
- Professors: The relationship between student and professor is usually open and informal. Most professors want their students to talk directly to them about any questions they have, in order to resolve them quickly.
Symptoms of Culture Shock
- Feeling very angry over minor inconveniences
- Withdrawal from people who are different from you
- Extreme homesickness
- Sudden intense feeling of loyalty to own culture
- Overeating or loss of appetite
- A need for excessive sleep
- Upset stomach
- Small pains really hurt
- Loss of ability to work or study effectively
- Unexplainable crying
- Marital or relationship stress
- Exaggerated cleanliness
- Feeling sick much of the time
You need not have every symptom on the list to have culture shock. It is possible that only a few may apply to you. These symptoms may also appear at any given time. However, those such as headache and upset stomach should be checked by a physician before you decide it’s only culture shock (Student Health Services, 521-6219).
Solutions for Culture Shock
Even though some people may not be able to eliminate culture shock, there are ways to ease the stress. Some of these activities are listed below:
- Keep Active. By getting out of your room or outside of your apartment, you are able to experience first-hand what Americans are doing. If you visit public places, such as a shopping mall or sporting events, you will be able to watch and learn how American customs are practiced. Contact the Student Life office (521-6207) to find out about all the campus organizations and campus events.
- Make American Friends. By having friends you can talk to, you are able to ask them questions about what you do not understand.
- Read. At the end of this brochure there is a list of possible websites that you may wish to read to gain more knowledge of the culture you are being introduced to. Accessing the Internet is of no cost to you if used on campus.
- Exercise. By finding an activity that you can enjoy, you will be able to reduce stress and depression. Americans like to run and walk on paths. They also like organized games. By contacting the Intramurals office (521-6586), you will be able to find out what programs are available.
- Community Activities. Talk with your host family, Resident Assistant, or other Americans about community activities, religious services, or volunteer opportunities to help you become a member of the community while you are here.
- Work on Your English. This is an extremely important concept. It is much easier to understand a culture when you can understand the language being used. Ask about any slang terms that you do not understand.
- Introduce Yourself to Other International Students. Other international students may be experiencing the same problems that you are. By talking to them, you may be able to find out ways they are coping with problems.
- BE PATIENT. Many international students experience culture shock in some way while they are here. Just recognize the problem and give yourself time to get over it. If you need to, keep reminding yourself that this is not permanent. If culture shock continues, you may contact International Programs Office (775-4095) and/or Counseling Services (521-6202).


We have seen that the design of mod-2n binary up-counters is straightforward, with all T states produced, and cycled through in sequence. For general mod-N counters we must begin to use (simplified) synchronous sequential circuit design techniques, with each present state of the circuit used to produce the necessary steering logic to take the circuit into the desired next state. Note that because the circuit is docked the outputs are always stable. This is because although the next state is determined by the present slate, the next state and present state variables are separated by the flip-flops, unlike the asynchronous sequential circuits studied in Chapter 5.
We begin by redesigning the mod-8 counter, which should give the circuit produced above (see the end of this section). Firstly we look at how D-type flip- flops could be used and then JK-types. This will also give us our first insight into the general differences in circuits designed using these two types of flip-flop.


I get asked this question all the time. "Are you the program that throws babies in the pool?" Usually, they also say "That's how I learned to swim. We did it the 'regular' way. My parents just threw us in the water and said 'Swim!'". Interesting...my reply: "We at ISR do not throw babies in the water...however that's how you learned and I'm sorry. That experience must have been very traumatic."
ISR of Lake Lanier students are never expected to have aquatic skills beyond what we have taught them. I can assure you that ISR Instructors will never place a child in the water without knowing they can attain air successfully. Once a child is fully skilled, we safely place them in water at different orientations to be sure that they can demonstrate the life-saving skills.
Let's also clarify the difference between "throw" and "place":
Definition of "to throw" To propel something through the air by swinging the arm and releasing the object from the hand.
Definition of "to place" Transitive verb to put something or somebody in a particular location or position; to set
Contact ISR of Lake Lanier for more information!
Blog with us!
Thank you for checking out my Water Safety Blog! Here you will find aquatic safety information, personal blog posts, recipes from my kitchen and swim savings for your family! Make sure to join us on our Facebook, Instagram, Twitter and Pinterest sites as well.


The first project
Work on the creation of a new anti-aircraft missile system started in 1952 year. During the first two years, United States research organizations studied the possibility of creating an air defense system with a semi-active radar guidance system and found out what technologies are necessary for the emergence of such military equipment. Already at this stage, the program to create an air defense system got its name. As a designation for the promising anti-aircraft complex, the hakron of the word Hawk (“Hawk”) - Homing All the Way Killer (“Interceptor controlled throughout the flight”) was chosen.
Preliminary work has shown the existing capabilities of the American industry and allowed to begin developing a new air defense system. In the middle of 1954, the Pentagon and several companies signed contracts to develop the various components of the HAWK complex. In accordance with them, Raytheon was to create a guided missile, and Northrop was required to develop all ground components of the complex: a launcher, radar stations, a control system and auxiliary machines.
The first test launches of the new model missiles were held in June 1956 of the year. The tests of the HAWK SAM continued for a year, after which the project developers began to correct the identified deficiencies. In the summer of 1960, the US military introduced a new anti-aircraft system under the designation MIM-23 HAWK. Soon the deliveries of serial complexes to the line units began. Later, in connection with the start of production of new modifications, the base anti-aircraft complex received an updated designation - MIM-23A.
The HAWK anti-aircraft complex included a MIM-23 guided missile, a self-propelled launcher, target detection and target radar, a radar range finder, a command post and a battery command center. In addition, the calculation of the air defense system had a number of auxiliary equipment: transport and charging machines of various models.
The aerodynamic shape of the MIM-23 rocket was formed in the early stages of work on the project and has not undergone any major changes since then. The guided missile had a length of 5,08 meters and a diameter of the hull 0,37 m. In the tail of the missile there were X-shaped wings with a span of 1,2 m with rudders across the entire width of the trailing edge. The launch mass of the missile - 584 kg, 54 kg accounted for high-explosive fragmentation warhead. The characteristics of the MIM-23A rocket equipped with a solid-fuel engine made it possible to attack targets at ranges of 2-25 km and altitudes of 50-11000 m. The probability of hitting a target with one missile was declared at the level of 50-55%.
For tracking airspace and target detection, the AN / MPQ-50 radar was incorporated into the HAWK air defense system. During one of the first upgrades, radar for detecting low-altitude targets AN / MPQ-55 was introduced into the equipment of the anti-aircraft complex. Both radar stations were equipped with antenna rotation synchronization systems. With their help, we managed to eliminate all the “dead zones” around the position of the radar station. The MIM-23A missile was equipped with a semi-active radar guidance system. For this reason, a target illumination radar was introduced into the HAWK complex. The AN / MPQ-46 illumination station could not only provide missile guidance, but also determine the range to the target. The characteristics of the radar stations made it possible to detect enemy bombers at a distance of 100 kilometers.
For the new missiles was created launcher with three guides. This system could be performed in both self-propelled and towed versions. After detecting the target and determining its coordinates, the calculation of the anti-aircraft complex had to deploy the launcher in the direction of the target and turn on the illumination locator. The homing head of a MIM-23A rocket could capture a target both before launch and in flight. Guidance of guided munitions was carried out according to the proportional approach method. When the rocket approaches the target at a given distance, the radio-fuse gave the command to undermine the high-explosive fragmentation warhead.
To deliver the missiles to the position and equipment to the launcher, the M-501-3 transport-loading machine was developed. The car on a light tracked chassis was equipped with a charging device with a hydraulic drive, which allowed to place three missiles on the launcher at the same time.
The MIM-23A HAWK anti-aircraft missile system clearly showed the possibility of creating a system of this class using semi-active radar guidance. However, the imperfection of the component base and technology affected the real capabilities of the complex. Thus, the basic version of HAWK could attack only one target at a time, which had a corresponding effect on its combat capabilities. Another serious problem was the small resource of electronics: for some modules that used vacuum tubes, the time between failures did not exceed the 40-45 hours.
M-501EX3 transport vehicle
AN / MPQ-48 Targeting Radar
The MIM-23A HAWK anti-aircraft complex significantly increased the potential of the air defense of the American troops, but the existing shortcomings called into question its further fate. It was necessary to carry out upgrades that could bring the characteristics of the systems to an acceptable level. Already in 1964, work started on the project Improved HAWK or I-HAWK ("Improved HAWK"). In the course of this modernization, it was intended to significantly improve the characteristics of the rocket, as well as update the ground components of the complex, including using digital equipment.
The basis of the upgraded air defense missile system was the rocket modification MIM-23B. She received updated electronic equipment and a new solid-fuel engine. The design of the rocket and, as a result, the dimensions remained the same, but the starting mass increased. Having burdened up to 625 kilograms, the upgraded rocket expanded its capabilities. Now the interception range ranged from 1 to 40 kilometers, height - from 30 meters to 18 km. The new solid-fuel engine provided the MIM-23B rocket with a maximum speed of up to 900 m / s.
The biggest innovation in the electronic components of the Improved HAWK SAM system was the use of a digital data processing system obtained from radar stations. In addition, the radar itself underwent significant changes. According to some data, after the improvements in the framework of the I-HAWK program, the operating time of radio-electronic systems for failure has increased to 150-170 hours.
The first anti-aircraft missile systems of the new modification entered the troops in 1972 year. The modernization program continued until 1978. The complexes built and renovated during the repairs helped to significantly increase the defense potential of the military air defense.
Shortly after the creation of the Improved HAWK project, a new program called HAWK PIP (HAWK Product Improvement Plan) was launched, which was divided into several phases. The first one was done before 1978. During the first phase of the program, the zenith complexes received upgraded AN / MPQ-55 ICWAR and IPAR target radars, which made it possible to increase the size of the monitored space.
From 1978 to the mid-eighties, HAWK system developers conducted the work of the second phase. Radar target illumination AN / MPQ-46 has been replaced by a new system AN / MPQ-57. In addition, in the ground equipment of the complex, some blocks based on lamps were replaced by transistor ones. By the mid-eighties, the optical-electronic detection and tracking station OD-179 / TVY was included in the I-HAWK air defense system. This system allowed to increase the combat capabilities of the whole complex in a difficult jamming environment.
In the 1983-89, the third phase of the modernization took place. Global changes have affected electronic equipment, most of which has been replaced by modern digital components. In addition, radar detection and target illumination stations were upgraded. An important innovation in the third phase was the LASHE (Low-Altitude Simultaneous Hawk Engagement) system, which allowed one anti-aircraft complex to simultaneously attack several targets.
After the second phase of modernization, the Improved HAWK systems were recommended to change the structure of anti-aircraft batteries. The main fire unit of the air defense missile system was a battery, which, depending on the situation, could have been two (standard battery) or three (reinforced) platoons. The standard composition implied the use of main and advanced fire platoons, reinforced - one main and two advanced ones. The battery consisted of the TSW-12 command post, MSQ-110 clearinghouse, AN / MPQ-50 radar and AN / MPQ-55 radar and AN / MPQ-51 radar. Each of the two or three main fire platoons included one AN / MPQ-57 radar, three launchers, and several auxiliary equipment. In addition to the radar light and launchers, the advanced platoon included a MSW-18 platoon command post and AN / MPQ-55 radar detection radar.
Since the early eighties, several new modifications of the MIM-23 guided missile were created. Thus, the MIM-23C rocket, which appeared in 1982, received an updated semi-active homing head, which allowed it to operate in conditions of the use of EW systems by the enemy. According to some reports, this modification appeared "thanks to" the Soviet electronic warfare systems used by the Iraqi Air Force during the war with Iran. In 1990, the MIM-23E rocket appeared, which also had greater resistance to enemy interference.
In the mid-nineties, the MIM-23K rocket was created. It differed from the previous ammunition of the family with a more powerful engine and other characteristics. The upgrade allowed to bring the firing range to 45 kilometers, the maximum altitude of the target - to 20 km. In addition, the MIM-23K rocket received a new warhead with ready-made fragments of 35 g each. For comparison, the fragments from the combat units of previous missiles weighed in 2 grams. It was argued that the upgraded warhead would allow the new guided missile to destroy tactical ballistic missiles.
Deliveries to third countries
The first HAWK anti-aircraft systems for the US military were manufactured in 1960. A year earlier, the United States, Belgium, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands and France signed an agreement to organize the joint production of new air defense systems at European enterprises. A little later, the parties to this contract received orders from Greece, Denmark and Spain, which were to receive a HAWK air defense system of European origin. Israel, Sweden and Japan, in turn, ordered the equipment directly from the United States. In the late sixties, the United States delivered the first anti-aircraft systems to South Korea and Taiwan, and also helped Japan with the organization of licensed production.
In the late seventies, European operators engaged in the modernization of their MIM-23 HAWK systems under the American project. Belgium, Germany, Greece, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands and France carried out the refinement of the existing systems in the first and second phases of the American project. In addition, Germany and the Netherlands independently improved the existing complexes, equipping them with additional infrared means for detecting targets. The infrared camera was installed on the illumination radar, between its antennas. According to some reports, this system made it possible to detect targets at distances up to 80-100 kilometers.
The military of Denmark wanted to get complexes that were improved in another way. Optical-electronic means of detecting and tracking targets were installed on the Danish air defense system HAWK. The complex included two television cameras designed for target detection at distances up to 40 and up to 20 kilometers. According to some sources, after such a modernization, Danish anti-aircraft gunners were able to monitor the situation using only optical-electronic systems and to turn on the radar only after approaching the target to the distance necessary for an effective attack.
MIM-23 HAWK anti-aircraft missile systems were shipped to 25 countries in Europe, the Middle East, Asia and Africa. In total, several hundred sets of air defense missiles and about 40 thousand missiles of several modifications were manufactured. A large part of the countries of operators have so far abandoned HAWK systems due to their obsolescence. For example, the last US Marine Corps in the American armed forces finally stopped using all the systems of the MIM-23 family at the beginning of the two thousandth.
Nevertheless, some countries continue to operate the HAWK SAM systems of various modifications and so far do not plan to abandon them. For example, a few days ago it became known that Egypt and Jordan, still using the HAWK complexes of later modifications, want to extend the life of existing missiles. For this, Egypt intends to order from the United States 186 solid fuel engines for MIM-23 rockets, and Jordan - 114. The total value of the two contracts will be approximately 12,6 million US dollars. The delivery of new rocket engines will allow customer countries to continue to operate the HAWK anti-aircraft systems over the next few years.
Of great interest is the fate of HAWK complexes supplied to Iran. For several decades, the Iranian military has exploited a number of systems in this family. According to some data, after the break with the US, Iranian experts independently conducted several upgrades of the existing air defense system using the available element base. In addition, at the end of the last decade, a Mersad complex with several types of missiles was created, representing a deep modernization of the American system. Exact information about this Iranian development is missing. According to some sources, Iranian designers managed to increase the firing range to 60 kilometers.
Despite the fact that the MIM-23 HAWK was developed in the United States to arm its own army, the American forces did not have to use it to destroy enemy aircraft or helicopters. For this reason, the first aircraft shot down by a MIM-23 rocket was recorded at the expense of the Israeli anti-aircraft gunners. 5 June 1967, Israel’s air defense attacked its own Dassault MD.450 Ouragan fighter. The damaged car could have fallen on the territory of the Nuclear Research Center in Dimona, because of which the air defense units had to use missiles against it.
In the course of the following armed conflicts, the calculations of the Israeli HAWK air defense system destroyed several dozen enemy aircraft. For example, during the Doomsday War 75 used missiles were able to destroy at least 12 aircraft.
During the Iran-Iraq war, Iran’s anti-aircraft gunners were able to destroy the order of Iraqi 40 aircraft. In addition, several Iranian vehicles were hit by friendly fire.
During the same armed conflict, Kuwait’s air defense system opened its combat account. Kuwaiti HAWK complexes destroyed one Iranian F-5 fighter that invaded the country's airspace. In August, the 1990 of the year, during the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait, the anti-aircraft gunners of the latter shot down 14 of enemy aircraft, but lost several HAWK SAM batteries.
In 1987, the French armed forces supported Chad during the conflict with Libya. 7 September the calculation of the French SAM MIM-23 performed a successful launch of a missile on the Libyan bomber Tu-22.
RK "Advanced Hawk" can hit supersonic air targets at distances from 1 to 40 km and altitudes of 0,03 - 18 km (maximum values of the range and height of destruction of the Hok air defense missile system are respectively 30 and 12 km) and can fire at adverse weather conditions and interference
The summer will be 54 of the year since the adoption of the HAWK air defense system into service with the American army. For anti-aircraft systems, this age is unique. Nevertheless, despite several upgrades, the US still stopped operating the MIM-23 complexes at the beginning of the last decade. Following the United States, several European countries have decommissioned these systems. Time takes its toll, and even the most recent modifications of the anti-aircraft complex do not fully meet modern requirements.
At the same time, however, most countries that once purchased the MIM-23 air defense system continue to operate it. Moreover, some states even intend to modernize and extend the resource, like Egypt or Jordan. Do not forget about Iran, which used the American development as the basis for its own project.
All these facts can serve as evidence that the MIM-23 HAWK anti-aircraft missile system proved to be one of the most successful systems of its class. Many countries have chosen this particular air defense system and continue to operate it to this day. Nevertheless, despite all its merits, HAWK SAM system is outdated and needs to be replaced. Many developed countries have long since written off obsolete equipment and put on duty new anti-aircraft systems with higher performance. Apparently, a similar fate soon awaits HAWK anti-aircraft complexes, protecting the sky of other states.
Vasilin N.Ya., Gurinovich A.L. Anti-aircraft missile systems. - Minsk: Popurri LLC, 2002


Do Vouchers Promise More Than They Deliver?
The continuing debate over vouchers is bound to become even hotter after investigators reported contradictory results about test scores. It's little wonder that confusion reigns.
Public school students who used vouchers to attend private schools in Louisiana and Indiana scored significantly worse on reading and math tests compared with similar students who remained in public schools ("On negative effects of vouchers," Brookings, May 26). But researchers at the University of Arkansas who looked at 19 studies of 11 voucher programs from Milwaukee, Wisc. to Delhi, India found that voucher students posted "statistically significant" improvement in math and reading test scores - the equivalent of several months of additional learning ("Vouching for Achievement," The Wall Street Journal, May 27).
Which side is right? Until now, most people have assumed that private schools provided a better education than public schools. But a public school student in Louisiana who was at the 50th percentile in math slipped to the 34th percentile after one year in a private school. A student at the 50th percentile in reading declined to the 46th percentile. The results were impressive because private schools with more applicants than seats used lotteries to choose applicants randomly. The performance of those who won (the treatment group) was then compared with the performance of those who lost (the control group). Moreover, students applying for a voucher were below average for the state, thereby negating the assertion that self-selection was at work.
In contrast, researchers delving into 19 studies of 11 voucher programs found that voucher students increased their reading scores by about 0.27 standard deviations and their math scores by about 0.15 standard deviations. In more understandable terms, that meant the voucher students benefited from the equivalent of several months of additional learning than non-voucher students. The 19 studies all compared a treatment group (voucher students) with a control group (non-voucher students).
Neither side's evidence will end the debate over vouchers, nor should it. Test scores are not the only factor that parents take into account in making a choice. If they believe that traditional public schools are shortchanging their children for any reason, they have the right to send them elsewhere, even when test scores tell a different story. Of course, they have always had this right by paying for private and religious schools. What is different today, however, is that public funds can be used for that purpose as a result of the U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in Zelman v. Simmons-Harris. The high court held that as long as public money was given directly to families, they were free to choose the kind of schooling they alone believed was best suited for their children, be it private, religious, online, or at home.


76 trade unionists murdered around the world in 2008
As you open this year’s Annual Survey of Trade Union Violations, you may be thinking of the terrifying impact of the global financial and economic crisis which hit millions of working women and men around the world in both industrialised and developing countries in 2008.
The crisis emphasises the need to develop a global economy based on decent jobs and social justice and it underlines the need for a better distribution of wealth. Instead workers everywhere have begun to feel the full impact of surging unemployment on their lives and that of their families and communities as decent work and decent jobs disappear. They have also begun to see the growing impact on their rights at work.
Trade union rights are universally-recognised human rights at work. Two key International Labour Organisation (ILO) conventions which define and guarantee them (conventions 87 and 98) have been ratified by 149 and 159 Member States of the ILO, respectively, out of a total of 182 worldwide.
Despite this formal recognition by governments, the ITUC is, this year again, documenting the continuous and often massive and harsh violations of fundamental trade union rights. This Survey is one of the ITUC’s means to expose and denounce those violations through its overview of the trade union rights situation in the world in 2008.
Countries where widespread and grave anti-union practices have unfortunately continued include: Colombia, Burma, Belarus, Sudan, Zimbabwe, Swaziland, Iran, Pakistan and the Philippines. Countries such as Honduras and Guatemala should this year be added to this list. In many other countries, where violations are not as outrageous, there is an overall growing tendency to undermine workers’ rights. Interference in trade union activities has been reported in Iraq, Kuwait, Latvia, Kyrgyzstan, the Russian Federation, Turkey and Venezuela, among others. Despite some legislative proposals or measures in some Middle East countries and Gulf States, migrant workers are still denied trade union rights in many countries. In addition to that, companies continued to take advantage of poor legislation and weak implementation to undermine workers' rights.
Worldwide in 2008, at least 76 labour activists were killed as a result of their actions for workers’ rights. Latin America remains the deadliest continent for trade unionists with over 66 murdered in 2008. 49 Colombian trade unionists lost their lives (including 16 union leaders, 4 of whom were women), a 25% increase over 2007. Trade unionists were also killed in Guatemala (9), Honduras (3) and Venezuela (4) among others. In Asia, at least 6 murders were reported (Nepal and the Philippines), as well as 3 in Africa (Nigeria, Tunisia and Zimbabwe) and 1 in the Middle East (Iraq).
In countries in every region, trade unions continue to be banned, or their establishment restricted. China still bans independent trade unions. Those attempting to unionise groups of workers or organise protests are often arrested, with some given prison sentences and others condemned to ‘re-education through work’.
Certain categories of workers also continue to be excluded. This includes public servants, agricultural workers, migrant and domestic workers, etc. The right to strike is often unduly limited, with lists of public services in which strike action is restricted going far beyond the ILO definition.
Again this year, several thousand trade unionists and workers were dismissed for participating in strike actions or protests; thousands more were harassed or discriminated against and hundreds arrested. The situation of domestic workers, mostly women and migrant workers in the Middle East and the Gulf States as well as some African and Asian countries, is also disturbing. Outright denial and other violations of labour and trade union rights were common in export processing zones, for example in Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Swaziland, Bangladesh, Kenya, Mauritius and Pakistan.
Furthermore, the ongoing globalisation of the world economy coupled with the global financial and economic crisis put inordinate pressure on labour markets, working conditions and workers’ rights everywhere. Workers continue to be threatened by employers with relocation, outsourcing and downsizing, with inevitable negative consequences for the effective exercise of their trade union rights.
New forms of employment relationships are also affecting fundamental rights. The use of bogus self-employment as well as subcontractors or labour agencies is increasing in industrialised and developing countries. This report documents cases in Korea, Croatia, Poland, Montenegro, Georgia, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Peru, Malaysia, Vietnam, South Africa, Chad and Morocco, amongst others. Sadly, we can only fear that next year’s Survey will paint a worsening picture.
This Survey, covering 143 countries, is also intended as a tool. It highlights wasted opportunities to promote better industrial relations, improve working conditions and productivity and to build or consolidate democratic institutions. It also illustrates good practice in cases where improvements are recorded. For instance, new legislation recognizing and enabling trade union organising has been adopted in Burkina Faso, Kenya, Mozambique and Australia.
You will find the full text of ILO core conventions 87 and 98 in the annexes as well as an overview of ILO decisions on key issues concerning trade union rights, which are often insufficiently known and understood.
Legislative frameworks and effective institutions should provide adequate protection and guarantees on freedom of association and collective bargaining. Unfortunately, in too many parts of the world, including Asia, the Middle East and the Gulf States, freedom of association is still not guaranteed by constitutions or labour laws.
Effective implementation of international conventions or even national labour laws and respect for trade union rights continues to fall far short of workers’ rightful expectations. This year again, the ITUC is reporting assassinations, abductions, arrests and imprisonments, as well as death threats, dismissals, harassments, acts of discrimination and intimidation against trade unionists.
Yet, millions of trade unionists and labour activists around the world continue to fight for workers’ solidarity, sometimes at the risk of losing their own lives or livelihoods. Prominent examples in 2008 included trade union leaders in Zimbabwe, Colombia, Guinea, Guatemala, the Philippines, Iraq and Iran.
I want to thank our affiliates, the Global Union Federations and all the persons who contributed to making this Survey possible, and to pay tribute to all those whose dedication to justice, equity and fairness at work has achieved so much for so many working people.
The ITUC remains the international voice and ally of trade unionists worldwide, especially when they can not rely on fair national legal systems to protect their fundamental trade union rights.
More than ever, the ITUC’s mission is to stand side by side with workers in their struggle for justice and the defence of trade union rights worldwide because "An Injury to One is an Injury to All!"


Game theory depends on strategy (your own strategy combined with the strategy of others). It is a branch of applied mathematics. Game theory is used in biology, computer science, engineering, international relations, philosophy, and especially economics.
"What economists call game theory psychologists call the theory of social situations, which is an accurate description of what game theory is about. Although game theory is relevant to parlor games such as poker or bridge, most research in game theory focuses on how groups of people interact (Levine, David K.)"
One common game in game theory is Paper, Scissors, Rock. In this game, opponents use their own strategy and skill to make decisions based on their interpretation of the other opponents' strategy. Many people may be familiar with the game the Prisoner's Dilemma. For a diagram of a similar game called the Pride Game, along with a detailed explanation, please see Figure 1.3.
Game theory was explored in the popular movie War Games from 1983. In this movie, the character played by Matthew Broderick learns that in the game of Global Thermonuclear War, there are no winners. War Games is not the only movie based on Game Theory. Others include the following: The Hunt for Red October, Dr. Strangelove or How I Learned to Quit Worrying and Love the Bomb, and Memento.
In 1944, John von Neumann and Oskar Morgenstern published the book Theory of Games and Economic Behavior. There had been some development of game theory prior to this book, but research was continued extensively in the 1950s. In the 1970s, game theory was applied to biology as well.
The different types of games in game theory are: extensive form game, normal form game, cooperative game/characteristic function form, and partition function form. Game theory has been used in economics and social sciences. Games can also be broken down into the following categories: cooperative or non-cooperative, symmetric and asymmetric, zero-sum and non-zero-sum, simultaneous and sequential, perfect information and imperfect information, infinitely long games, discrete and continuous games, one-player and many-player games, and Metagames.
Closely related to game theory are decision theory (one person games), general equilibrium theory (dealing with trade and production), and mechanism design theory (dealing with the consequences of different rules).
It is exciting that game theory is being used today in developing artificial intelligence. Game theory, around since the days of Plato, is still being developed and researched along with the other branches of applied mathematics.


One by one, all of our warm white lights are being replaced by cold, harsh, bluish-white LEDs. And it is happening fast.
Everywhere. In our streetlights, our workplaces, even our homes. How do you like looking into those blue-white vehicle headlights as compared with the yellow-white ones we have been using since the automobile was invented?
LED lighting is the way of the future, don’t get me wrong, but we should be specifying and installing LED lights with a correlated color temperature (CCT) of 2700K or 3000K—with few exceptions—not the 4000K or higher that is the current standard.
Why is 4000K the current standard? Because blue-white LEDs have a slightly greater luminous efficacy than yellow-white LEDs. Luminous efficacy is the amount of light you get out for the power you put in, often measured in lumens per watt. But should luminous efficiency be the only consideration? What about aesthetics? In addition to luminous efficacy, there are other, more significant ways to reduce power consumption and greenhouse gas emissions:
- Use the minimum amount of light needed for the application; no need to overlight
- Use efficient light fixtures that direct light only to where it is needed; near-horizontal light creates annoying and visibility-impairing glare and light trespass, and direct uplight into the night sky is a complete waste
- Produce the light only when it is needed through simple switches, time controls, and occupancy sensors; or, use lower light levels during times of little or no activity
Even the super-inefficient incandescent light bulb (with a CCT of 2400K, by the way), operating three hours each night uses less energy than the light source with the highest luminous efficacy operating dusk to dawn. Think about it.
In my town, as in most now, the soothing orange 1900K high pressure sodium (HPS) streetlights are being replaced with 4000K LEDs. That’s a big change. It will completely transform our outdoor nighttime environment. Warm-white compact fluorescents are 2700K, and even tungsten halogen bulbs are 3000K. Do we really want or need 4000K+ LEDs?
We are currently witnessing a complete transformation of our illuminated built environment. Not enough questions are being asked nor direction being given by citizens, employees, and municipalities. The lighting industry generally wants to sell as many lights as possible at the highest profit margin. We as lighting consumers need to make sure we have the right kind of light, the right amount of light, and lighting only when and where it is needed.


1. A subject frequently talked about in our country (Greece) is tax reform, which is not surprising since the taxes here change faster than seasonal fashions. At the time of writing (winter 2012) the EU and the IMF are insisting on the modernisation of our taxation system. Sadly, they are not insisting on a fundamental tax reform. In reality, calculating tax is very complicated in all areas of economic activity, and it is easy to see how that brings about corruption, bribery, tax avoidance and an overpowering feeling of suppression and injustice. The latter has two aspects: on the one hand, the taxpayer feels that they are paying more than others in that the more one works and the more one earns, the more tax one has to pay, while others work less and pay less tax. On the other hand, the taxpayer feels that the quality of the corresponding public services they receive in exchange for taxes (security, education, healthcare etc) are deficient and inadequate.
Is there an alternative to this state of affairs?
Indeed, there is. There is a simple, effective and just system which significantly constrains the potential injustice, fraud and corruption, if it does not eliminate them outright. It is only partially implemented in some US states, Denmark, New Zealand and elsewhere. This system also provides a significant economic growth stimulus.
2. This system is both simple and effective, because it is founded on the very nature of production, the quintessence of the economy. Let us see what this means.
In any economy, small or large, a public or private business, every good or service produced, including the Gross National Product of the country, contains two values: the first is derived from the labour of the individual, and the other from the existence and progress of society or the nation.
Classic economists such as Alfred Marshall (Principle of Economics,London 1890) and meta-classics such as R. Burgess (Public Revenue without Taxation, London 1993), N. Kazanas (Society with no Taxes, Athens 1996), and others, recognise these two values in their writings. Supporters of Communism, retain the crooked view that Marx referred to the unique value created by workers alone; but Marx did point out in his more mature work Critique of the Gotha Programme(1875) the following: he wrote that labour is not the single source of wealth [i.e. goods and services which men desire to have] and that Nature creates value as well as labour: Nature here implies public value.
3. The value or price of a product or of the whole of the yearly production of a business, has a component which derives from the effort of the worker(s) and another which derives from the existence of society and the services that it provides. The first one is called “private share” (or value) and the second one “public share”. Let us explain what this second one is.
The economist A. Kanellopoulos, minister of Trade in 1974, in the first democratically elected government (led by K. Karamanlis) after the seven-year junta, wrote: “On a particular plot of land, wealth, power, knowledge and culture accumulate… by purchasing a location in the city, one does not merely secure a place to settle… one also purchases a saving in time, as well as access to information, directness and a set of services” (translation and emphasis mine: p.120 in The Economy between Yesterday and Tomorrow, Athens, 1980).
Such is the contribution of society or State: time, information, directness, a wealth of services – including cultural events, specialised technology, public transport, connection to remote areas and foreign lands etc. All these can be found in the capital and less so in large towns, villages and mountain ranges, in decreasing order.
This contribution forms the public share of the value or price of a product or of the yearly gross production of a business.
A rationally planned taxation system will focus on this public share of the total value of a product and not at all on the private one. Since this value stems from the existence of society or the State, returning it whence it came would not be a form of, strictly speaking, taxation but a true “return” which is a form of reward or compensation.
4. The current system of taxation is entirely irrational, haphazard, inefficient, confused and unjust. It is known as “progressive”.
The rationale that everyone must contribute according to their earning power might sound quite democratic or logical, but only to those that do not look deeper than the surface of life and activity.
We all know that the progressive system of taxation allows corruption to become rife: on the one hand we have tax officials who can be bribed and on the other taxpayers that evade their taxes. The situation is so well known that there is no need for anything more to be said.
Moreover, as the lower incomes and low pensions are also taxed, the net income of the recipients diminishes and so does their purchasing power. In practice, all these people, who form the large masses of citizens, stay poor or become poorer, and find themselves in need of government benefits and handouts, which usually are very low-quality charity.
When one examines the twenty year period of 1972-1992, one sees that, despite some increase in wages, especially during the A. Papandreou government where inflated wage rises took place, wages and profits maintain more or less the same level of GDP, as one can see on this graph from the Greek Ministry of Finance:
But, in the long term, an even greater consequence is inflation, since the taxes end up being passed into the prices of goods and services, inflating them.
Workers ask for and receive wage-increases, part of which they lose in the form of tax. These wage-increases eventually end up being passed into the prices of goods and serices, and the vicious circle repeats.
R.G. Holcombe also demonstrated clearly that by transferring taxes and despite the beneficial treatment of lower incomes and the associated handouts, within a period of 25 years, the programmes aiming to redistribute income had little or no effect: the poor remained poor and the rich became richer! ( See p.286-8, Public Sector Economics, 1987, Wandsworth, CA.) R. Burgess shares a similar view: “it is possible that the price rise can go on indefinitely and that inflation could become a chronic persistent state of affairs” (p. 58, Public Revenue without Taxation, Shepheard Walwyn London 1992).
5. Another aspect of the ‘progressive’ system of taxation is limiting and discouraging.
Let us imagine two bookshops or kebab shops or grocers or any similar small business. In each case, one business works normal business hours, remains shut during holidays and always takes part in strikes, marches and protests. The other works 2-3 hours overtime, and whenever possible opens the shop even during a holiday. The latter, unsurprisingly, has a larger income.
What does our taxation system do? It rushes to exact more taxes from the harder-working business. The lazy one gets tax rebates and handouts – funds that have been collected from the conscientious and eefficient businesses.
6. It is strange that conservative or neoliberal, or even socialist and progressive, governments maintain and apply this ineffective, illogical and detestable system of taxation that punishes hard work and limits growth while encouraging corruption and indolence.
Why is this nonsensical system perpetuated? There are three simple reasons:
a) Here, like elsewhere, the powerful effect of inertia is in operation. This is the system we have, this is what we have inherited, this is what holds in other countries – and we know of no better.
b) There is ignorance among the masses of citizens. The millions of people do not have the necessary information and believe that politicians and specialised “scientists” called economists know what they are doing by maintaining the present system (it was first enacted by the British PM Pit in the 1790s and CapodIstria in Greece in 1830: direct income tax at a “progressive” scale of 10-25%).
c) There are powerful lobbies that wish to profiteer at the expense of the state and society. It is not just corrupt tax officials and high-income taxpayers that benefit; all of them have connections with politicians, journalists, unionists and civil servants in other services. A great number of citizens also have undeclared income from activities involving corruption of some sort.
7. Economists of all sorts and academics, in particular, constitute a quite remarkable fraternity with regard to this issue. Because they really know that another, completely different method of taxation exists, indeed, since it is mentioned in almost all Economics textbooks; they occasionally mention it in their talks and lectures but, alas, they do not promote it!
Perhaps they would not be wrong if someone accused them of deception. But it is more probably that they also suffer from inertia or cowardice.
It is also worthy of note that the system of Land Value Taxation was known to some Greek freedom fighters of the War of Independence of 1821 and the central principle was expressed plainly. For example, an issue of the ministry equivalent to the Home Office, dated 6/5/1822 and bearing the title “To the tax officials of Marathonisi and the captains of Mani” makes the following suggestion: “all Turkish owned estates within freed Greek lands are to be considered as owned by the state and laboured by those that were already labouring there; the rent of those estates is to be added to the National Fund”(Greek Independence Records, volume A’, p.408-9).
The economic rent or surplus, is the additional income that is earned by locations of arable land, e.g. cotton or tobacco or wheat, happen to be more fertile or closer to irrigation sources, transport, the markets etc. They therefore earn more when all other things like labour and capital are in equal use. This rent (=surplus above the production of the marginal locations) is the component which was defined as “public share” of the total value of a good/service, which is due to Nature and the existence of the community (see §3, above).
The advantageous lands have a greater value than the others, since their yield is greater. Thus, the value of the land is a reliable and accurate indicator. Lands in the margin of production with the lowest value have the lowest productivity and thus have but a negligible public share. It is the high-value lands which have a naturally higher productivity and a considerable public share/value.
The same can be applied to a nation as a whole. The plots in central locations of cities have immensely higher values compared to rural farmlands, while rocky mountain ranges without irrigation, soil or minerals have no value in the real estate market.
Therefore, the public value and economic rent in remote farmlands is negligible, whereas, as one moves to more fertile lands in the countryside and toward more central plots in cities, the public value increases, skyrocketing in the most central locations of the capital.
This public share/value or economic rent is the only kind of income that should be taxed.
8. Adam Smith and all the classics, as well as some modern economists like Nobel laureates M. Friedman and J. Stiglitz, they all teach that taxing economic rent (or collecting the public value of production) is a particularly advantageous and beneficial form of taxation that does not have any negative effects on the economy (e.g. see H. Speight, The Science of Prices and Incomes, 1965, Methuen, London, p.277). H.E. Daly wrote: “taxing economic rent does not cause any distortion in the ordering of economic funds and is the most effective means of collecting public revenue. To the extent that this replaces other means of taxation, it will increasingly stabilise the most effective allocation of funds” (p. 67,Steady-State Economics, 1992, Earthscan, London).
Simply put, it is not possible for this type of taxation to pass into the prices of goods and services; furthermore, workers will receive higher wages and growth will be stable. Innovation, initiative and hard work will be rewarded appropriately.
Moreover, since the land values are easily known and their knowledge is accessible to everyone, corruption will cease to exist; the ensuing transparency is a most desirable outcome. Tax authorities will require but a small office with very few employees.
One finds the idea stated in the writings of Smith, Ricardo, Mill, Marshall, Friedman, Stiglitz, and many other well-known and not well-known academics. Yet governments do not apply the method.
The reasons why governments are reluctant to apply this system are given above, in section §6.
Land Value Taxation is an efficient, counter-inflationary system of taxation which encourages growth, does not discourage hard work and returns to the state what belongs to it in the first place; i.e. the value generated by the public services and the progress of the community.
I will return.


The observatory – located near Ottawa, Ontario, Canada – is named in honour of my father-in-law James Gordon Scott. He had traced his genealogy roots to a farm in the Scottish Borders called Denholm Hill Farm. The farm gets its name from the nearby town of Denholm. The “Hill” is Ruberslaw and at elevation 390m is one of the highest points in the area. The original farm cottage and outbuildings still stand at the base of the hill. The farm’s pastures now include a good portion of the hill itself.
There never has been any astronomy done at or near the farm. Although the summit of Ruberslaw would be a great place for an amateur observatory. I haven’t seen the skies at night, but i would think that they would be quite dark. The nearby town of Hawick might create a bit of a light dome but otherwise there is only small villages and farm houses in the area.
Just for fun, here is a link for the weather in Denholm, Scottish Borders, Scotland, UK.


Not to be confused with the Biribiri, the Biriba is another fantastic fruit of Costa Rica. Its official name is Rollinia deliciosa and it is native to tropical South America. A characteristic is its scalelike skin, which looks rough and hard, but actually it is really soft. Behind the extraordinary skin hides a white, soft and sweet pulp with big black seeds in it. The flesh of the Biriba is comparable to a smooth, velvety custard. But don’t worry, they can be taken out very easily.
The Biriba is usually eaten out of hand, but the Brazilians also make wine out of it. Not only is the fruit useful for humans, the Biriba tree also holds value. Its wood is used for building boats and out of the young tree the indigenous people in Brazil make a traditional instrument, called Berimbau.
How do you eat your Biriba?


Expressive text and art tell the story of the life cycle of trees as it has never been told before --- in reverse. Here's a lyrical depiction of the life cycle of trees, told one step at a time, based on newly researched information. The steps are described in simple but evocative text, each starting with “Before . . .” for a rhythmic telling. For example, “Before we stood tall, we clothed ourselves in bark and crowned ourselves in leaves, waving eagerly at the sun.” Particular attention is paid throughout to what's happening underground and how that links all life in the forest. Beginning with mature giants, “mighty in the kingdom of trees,” and ending with the promise of new life on the branches that are “hoping to be mighty in the kingdom of trees,” it's a beautiful and loving celebration of the circle of life. Jessica Kulekjian's skill at seamlessly blending nonfiction information with a poetic narrative sets this informational picture book apart. She also uniquely incorporates intriguing new research on how trees communicate with each other using an underground network of roots and fungus that connects the forest and helps the trees to thrive. Madeline Kloepper's rich artwork with its deep earth tone palette brings the forest and all its inhabitants alive on the page. The material has been vetted by several scientists, including experts on trees, insects and mushrooms. Supported by well-researched backmatter, the book has strong curriculum links to early elementary earth and life science topics, including plants, ecosystems and soil.


a. Standard solid-shank rivets and the
universal head rivets (AN470) are used in aircraft
construction in both interior and exterior
locations. All protruding head rivets may be
replaced by MS20470 (supersedes AN470)
rivets. This has been adopted as the standard
for protruding head rivets in the United States.
b. Roundhead rivets (AN430) are used in
the interior of aircraft except where clearance
is required for adjacent members.
c. Flathead rivets (AN442) are used in
the interior of the aircraft where interference of
adjacent members does not permit the use of
d. Brazierhead rivets (AN455 and
AN456) are used on the exterior surfaces of
aircraft where flush riveting is not essential.
e. Countersunk head rivets MS20426
(supersedes AN426 100-degree) are used on
the exterior surfaces of aircraft to provide a
smooth aerodynamic surface, and in other applications
where a smooth finish is desired.
The 100-degree countersunk head has been
adopted as the standard in the United States.
Refer to MIL-HD BK5 Metallic Materials and
Elements for Fight Vehicle Structures, and
U.S.A.F./Navy T./O. 1-1A-8, Structural Hardware.”
f. Typical rivet types are shown in table
Monel rivets are used in special cases
for riveting high-nickel steel alloys and nickel
alloys. They may be used interchangeably
with stainless steel rivets as they are more easily
driven. However, it is preferable to use
stainless steel rivets in stainless steel parts.
h. Copper rivets are used for riveting
copper alloys, leather, and other nonmetallic
materials. This rivet has only limited usage in
i. Hi-Shear rivets are sometimes used in
connections where the shearing loads are the
primary design consideration. Its use is restricted
to such connections. It should be
noted that Hi-Shear rivets are not to be used
for the installation of control surface hinges
and hinge brackets. Do not paint the rivets before
assembly, even where dissimilar metals
are being joined. However, it is advisable to
touch up each end of the driven rivet with
primer to allow the later application of the
general airplane finish
7-2. MATERIAL APPLICATIONS.
a. Rivets made with 2117-T4 are the
most commonly used rivets in aluminum alloy
structures. The main advantage of 2117-T4 is
that it may be used in the condition received
without further treatment.
b. The 2017-T3, 2017-T31, and 2024-T4
rivets are used in aluminum alloy structures
where strength higher than that of the 2117-T4
rivet is needed. See Metallic Materials and
Elements for Flight Vehicle Structures
(MIL-HDBK-5) for differences between the
types of rivets specified here.
c. The 1100 rivets of pure aluminum are
used for riveting nonstructural parts fabricated
from the softer aluminum alloys, such as 1100,
3003, and 5052.
d. When riveting magnesium alloy
structures, 5056 rivets are used exclusively
due to their corrosion-resistant qualities in
combination with the magnesium alloys.
e. Mild steel rivets are used primarily in
riveting steel parts. Do not use galvanized
rivets on steel parts subjected to high heat.
f. Corrosion-resistant steel rivets are
used primarily in riveting corrosion-resistant
steel parts such as firewalls, exhaust stack
bracket attachments, and similar structures.
j. Blind rivets in the NASM20600
through NASM20603 series rivets and the mechanically-
locked stem NAS 1398, 1399,
1738, and 1739 rivets sometimes may be substituted
for solid rivets. They should not be
used where the looseness or failure of a few
rivets will impair the airworthiness of the aircraft.
Design allowable for blind rivets are
specified in MIL-HDBK-5. Specific structural
applications are outlined in NASM33522.
Nonstructural applications for such blind rivets
as NASM20604 and NASM20605 are contained
CAUTION: For sheet metal repairs to airframe,
the use of blind rivets must be
authorized by the airframe manufacturer or
approved by a representative of the FAA.
For more information on blind rivets, see page
4-19, f. of this document.