In The News Today...

Quote: kenarman

There were a lot more bison running around then the large mammal population we have now. Why didn't the land get destroyed by them if large mammals are so destructive?

I'm am told that in good grass land like on the west side of the Rockies, you can raise a cow on five acres of land. Go to Eastern Oregon and it takes 50 acres to raise a cow.

Quote: beachbumbabs

Didn't somebody up thread pooh pooh this attack as no big deal because nobody died?

What a horrible result. They might as well be dead if they're near-vegetative.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/29/yulia-skripal-no-longer-in-critical-condition-says-salisbury-nhs

"The condition of Yulia Skripal, who was poisoned with a nerve agent in Salisbury along with her father, is improving rapidly, doctors have said."

"Her father’s condition was described by the hospital as still critical but stable. "

"I would like to reiterate Public Health England’s advice that the risk to the public is low."

I say a state has the right to terminate the lives of it's spy's. Or to have a death penalty for treason or crimes against the state. No one gives a spit if Israel sprays hundreds of Palestinians with super tear gas, from a drone. https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-03-30/israeli-troops-kill-seven-gazans-wound-500-amid-massive-border-protests. A bit of a double standard.

This map from 1897 show the range from the Rockies to Kentucky and almost down to the Gulf of Mexico. That seems it would be in some of your desert Southwest.

BUFFALO MAP

http://www.ducksters.com/geography/us_states/us_deserts.php If you are determined, yes a few buffalo wandered through here. But our local ancestral indians all spun cotton because there were no hides. T

Quote: petroglyph

http://www.ducksters.com/geography/us_states/us_deserts.php If you are determined, yes a few buffalo wandered through here. But our local ancestral indians all spun cotton because there were no hides. T

Did you not look at my link? The heavy concentration area on the map goes well into the south west desert but only on the east side of the Rockies.

Quote: kenarman

Did you not look at my link? The heavy concentration area on the map goes well into the south west desert but only on the east side of the Rockies.

Yes I did. Click on it and blow it up. The concentration [yellow] doesn't enter the SW. It doesn't look like it touches Az., very little of Nevada, only part of Utah.

To the east in higher country New Mexico, more water from snow, west Texas yep. It doesn't look like any of the dense buffalo comes to the Sonoran desert or the Mojave? Southern California. Nope. We only get 4-7 inches of precipitation per year, and that happens in a few monsoons. Look at the hide/fur on them, evolution didn't grow that for the Sonoran.

Herds of buffalo were the largest biomass on the planet at the time. Herds as you probably know in Montana were said to be 5 miles wide and 100 miles long.

They were herd animals. No way a herd of 500 hung out in the desert, just isn't enough food or water. They were able to migrate as well. Cattle just keep trampling the same domain. Critters out here eat cactus for water.

There are no buffalo in the petroglyphs here.

Quote: kenarman

This map from 1897 show the range from the Rockies

From the Great Shining Mountains if its an 1897 map.

Hydraulic mining changed the landscape as did slaughter of the Beaver, Passenger Pigeons, Turkeys and of course the Buffalo which were often simply shot and left to rot. The later federal program to thin herds in the high desert often caused erosion since the grazing and hoof impact kept the grass selected for holding the soil.

Walmart to remove Cosmopolitan magazine from checkout lines.

Not the news itself that makes me post this. But the article got me to thinking. Cosmo's articles are kind of a female version of "Playboy" or "Maxim." Their target market is similar, just women instead of men. Yet Cosmo always has women on the cover! Is there really something to the idea that using females to sell works because "the men want to be with her, the women want to be her" thus only the women who can never be her are the only ones who get upset?

Quote: AZDuffman

Is there really something to the idea that using females to sell works because "the men want to be with her, the women want to be her"

But the men only want to be 'with her'
long enough to get laid these days.
Many men have little use for women
now, other than for sex. They can get
their own meals and do their laundry
and have somebody come in to do the
cleaning. Men don't need the running
commentary on all their shortcomings
that comes with a wife or live in GF.