text:
Univision fires radio station executive over inflated ratings
By Meg James
Signage and a satellite dish is seen atop the Univision facility in Los Angeles in 2004. (Reed Saxon / Associared Press)
Spanish-language media giant Univision Communications has fired a programming executive at its KSCA-FM (101.9) in Los Angeles for scheming to artificially inflate the radio station's ratings.
The high-ranking executive, who was not named by the company, had access to several devices that ratings giant Nielsen uses to gauge audience sizes. The so-called portable people meters were then apparently set to KSCA, making it look as if the station had more listeners.
KSCA leapfrogged over four other stations to claim the No. 1 spot in April for its morning drive-time show. Nielsen's April ratings indicated that Univision's morning show was more popular than powerhouses such as Ryan Seacrest on KIIS-FM (102.7) and "Kevin & Bean" on KROQ-FM (106.7).
The ratings incident marks the second controversy to hit Univision's Los Angeles station since it canceled Eddie Sotelo's wildly popular "Piolín por la Manana" last summer. Sotelo left the station amid allegations of sexual harassment by a co-worker that set off a series of legal skirmishes.
"We are cooperating fully with Nielsen," Jose Valle, president of Univision Radio, said in a statement Monday. "A radio station employee being related to a Nielsen participant seriously undermines the industry and is unacceptable."
Nielsen said it had launched "an immediate and aggressive review" into how the breach happened. The New York company said it would review ratings issued since last year to check for further inaccuracies. Nielsen got into the radio measurement business last fall when it acquired Arbitron. It also plans to issue revised ratings for April and its May report this week.
Ratings wars among big radio stations aren't just for bragging rights by on-air personalities.
More than $1 billion is spent each year by advertisers in the L.A. market, and stations rely heavily on Nielsen to establish their ad rates. Fluctuations in audience levels could cost a station hundreds of thousands of dollars in potential revenue.
For Univision, the launch of its new morning program in December was crucial on several fronts. The media giant needed a strong program to replace the one that featured Piolín, and they wanted to syndicate the program for use in other markets.
"El Bueno, La Mala y El Feo" (The Good, the Bad and the Ugly) was an immediate hit among Spanish-speaking listeners who tuned in for a mix of Mexican regional music and banter between its three hosts. The program was syndicated and also performed well in Chicago, Dallas, Houston, San Antonio and San Diego.
But its big April ratings surge startled other station managers because it trounced rivals.
Peter W. Burton, vice president and general manger at the Los Angeles classic rock station 100.3 FM the Sound declined to comment on Nielsen's investigation into the Univision executive. But Burton credited Nielsen for promptly taking steps to correct the problem.
"It's good to know that Nielsen has these measures in place to catch things like this," Burton said. "We're glad Nielsen's doing the best they can to be accurate. Everything in life can be manipulated, and we pay a lot of money for Nielsen [ratings]."
Ratings companies historically have struggled to accurately represent Spanish-language viewers in their sample audiences. Many immigrant families are suspicious of a company that says it wants to monitor their TV viewing and radio preferences and will not agree to participate.
When it cannot achieve a sufficient number of any demographic group, including Spanish-speaking Latinos or affluent consumers, Nielsen will then rely on statistical calculations to weight the sample. That process could give one family a disproportionate effect on the outcome of the ratings.
There are 2,700 families in the Los Angeles region who participate in the Nielsen sample audience for radio. The company has not disclosed what percentage are Spanish speakers. They receive the portable people meters, which they are supposed to wear during the day. The device detects the signals of radio stations being listened to and transmits the data to Nielsen.
Radio executives have said several recent cases suggest problems with Nielsen's methodology and recruitment efforts to attract a representative sample into its audience panels. Nielsen, for its part, says it intends to expand the size of its sample audience in L.A. in the next few months.
This wasn't the first case of alleged ratings manipulation involving members of Nielsen's sample pool of radio listeners.
Radio executives were suspicious of last year's sudden strong performance for KLAX-FM (97.9), a radio station owned by Spanish Broadcasting System. In that case, a Spanish-language morning show hosted by a former janitor-turned disc jockey, Ricardo Sanchez, soared in popularity and overtook Univision's KSCA and English-language competitors.
Nielsen investigated allegations that a delivery truck driver was tipping off station associates by providing them with the names and addresses of people in the sample audience when they received a people meter in the mail.
Nielsen never confirmed the allegations. Spanish Broadcasting took Sanchez, who goes by the moniker "El Mandril" (the Baboon), off the air. He was never implicated in those allegations and has since moved to another station.
Staff writers Ryan Faughnder and Saba Hamedy contributed to this report.


text:
The Caucus | Rove, Miers to Testify Before House Panel
Rove, Miers to Testify Before House Panel
March 4, 2009 6:47 pm March 4, 2009 6:47 pm
Updated Karl Rove, the top adviser to former President Bush, and Harriet Miers, a former White House counsel in the previous administration, will give testimony to the House Judiciary Committee in its investigation of the firings of United States attorneys, House leaders announced tonight.
The two will give sworn depositions; the Judiciary Committee reserved the right to ask them to testify in public.
For the moment, the agreement appears to have ended a lengthy standoff between top Bush advisers and Congressional leaders who had tried to compel them to testify under oath. Many of the attorneys' firings were criticized as political, and the controversy led to the resignation of Attorney General Alberto Gonzales.
Just four days before Mr. Bush left office this year, his most recent White House counsel, Fred Fielding, had advised Mr. Rove that he should continue to resist testifying before Congress. The Bush White House had asserted that Mr. Rove had immunity from having to testify about advice he had given to the president and that these matters were protected under executive privilege.
Mr. Rove's lawyer had sought an opinion on this issue from the Obama administration's White House counsel, Greg Craig. Tonight, Mr. Craig issued this statement:
Today's agreement between the House Committee and the former administration is the product of a tremendous amount of hard work, patience, and flexibility on both sides. The agreement will allow the committee to complete its investigation into the U.S. attorneys matter and it will do so in the way such disputes have historically been resolved – through negotiation and accommodation between the legislative and executive branches. The president is pleased that the parties have agreed to resolve this matter amicably and that they have committed to work in good faith to bring about a timely and final resolution of this matter, which is in the interest of the American people.
Earlier, a statement by Speaker Nancy Pelosi said:
The agreement for Karl Rove and Harriet Miers to testify upholds a fundamental principle: no one is above the law and Congressional subpoenas must be complied with.
As public officials, we take an oath of office to uphold the Constitution. It is the institutional duty of Congress — as an independent branch — to ensure against abuse of power through meaningful oversight over the Executive Branch. When there are credible allegations about the politicization of law enforcement, the need for Congressional oversight is at its greatest.
In upholding our oaths of office, the House of Representatives was determined to preserve checks and balances — the separation of powers that protects the rule of law. It brought action in court to enforce the Judiciary Committee's subpoenas, and won a major ruling by U.S. District Judge John Bates dismissing the extreme position of absolute immunity from Congressional oversight advocated by the Bush Administration for former Administration officials. Under this agreement, the precedent established by Judge Bates' historic ruling rejecting this extreme Bush Administration doctrine will be preserved.
A spokesman for former President Bush, Rob Saliterman, issued this statement: "At the urging of the Obama administration, and in consideration of the Executive Branch interests at stake, we have reached an accommodation with the House Judiciary Committee that satisfies the Committee's desire for additional information and will finally put this matter to rest."
Other statements include this one released by Senator Patrick Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee and longtime critic of Bush policies on the attorneys issue:
It should not have taken until now to obtain testimony and documents from Bush administration officials connected to the investigation into the firings. Today's agreement leaves in place the court ruling that rejected the Bush administration's unprecedented and unfounded blanket claims of executive privilege and immunity. I rejected those claims as excessive and wrong in my ruling on President Bush's position over a year ago, and a bipartisan majority of the Senate Judiciary Committee ultimately found Karl Rove and former White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten in criminal contempt.
I commend Chairman Conyers for the agreement reached today. I hope Congress, and the American people, will now finally hear long overdue answers to serious questions about political interference by the Bush White House in our nation's top law enforcement agency.
Jeff Zeleny contributed to this post.
rmc March 4, 2009 · 6:58 pm
They agree to tesify?
In other words, there is a new sherrif in town who doesn't play.
Agree? In other words someone from the justice department told them that if they did not agree that they would be arrested on the spot.
Rot in jail Rove. You are one of the most vile things that ever happened to American politics. And unfortunately, you came at a time when there was a president in power who was not only a puppet, he was a stupid weak puppet. He let you carry on behind the scenes without restraint. And that is called giving you enough rope to hang yourself.
I might even like to visit you in jail. It would be fun.
former american citizen in Sweden March 4, 2009 · 7:00 pm
Let's just hope rove(r) doesn't get nervous and make-a-mess on the House J.C. floor.
Chris, NYC March 4, 2009 · 7:01 pm
Oh, Harriet Miers! I almost forgot about that spectacular Bush Supreme Court nominee.
She wasn't as lucky as other Bush unqualified cronies like Gonzales and Brownie.
Augustine 25 March 4, 2009 · 7:05 pm
Scary stuff… If you've ever been harmed by a government policy, then you know how vulnerable you feel when you are subject to the brutal realities of power. Our prayers are with Karl Rove and Harriet Miers.
jp, milltown, nj March 4, 2009 · 7:06 pm
not good enough. i want visuals of them squirming. i wanna see 'em sweat, stutter, and swear.
Jerry R. March 4, 2009 · 7:08 pm
I bet they won't give direct answers.
Jeremie March 4, 2009 · 7:08 pm
Late Christmas present?
Carole March 4, 2009 · 7:09 pm
I'm so tired of having to answer to non-Americans about how the U.S. breaks its own laws. Here in the UK, people hear an American accent and with uncharacteristic (what they consider) boldness, they grill Americans overseas as if we're all unofficial ambassadors obligated to explain how the Bush administration violated basic tenets of the U.S. rights we all take for granted.
Karl Rove symbolized to many around the world the ability to scope out how to get beyond the law. When a campaigning Obama promised to restore the rule of law, not everyone believed him.
This is a start. As Nancy Pelosi said, no one's above it.
Now that's something we can explain to non-U.S. people who – believe it – follow everything the U.S. does with a velcro-like interest you wouldn't believe.
Carole Bell
//www.Americans-Away-From-Home.com
DFC March 4, 2009 · 7:10 pm
Rove under oath? Does he believe that "the whole truth and nothing but the truth" is even possible?
Harry March 4, 2009 · 7:16 pm
So the Wicked Witch of the West, after adding so much pork the the stimulus package that it's doomed for failure, now has the time for her witch hunt. Nice going Pelosi. The country is going broke, and you are still worried about the Bush Administration. I will throw a party the day they kick you out of that seat, you Botox laced old hag!.
Adam in NJ March 4, 2009 · 7:21 pm
So we will hear I take the fifth, over and over and over. Fabulous.
Axl March 4, 2009 · 7:22 pm
I don't care if they stand there and plead the 5th on every question, it's a good thing they have finally put a stop to this madness and submitted to Congressional questioning.
Executive privilege exists and is a real and practical legal concept that's accepted implicitly, with limits. The notion that executive privilege extends beyond a sitting President's term is absurd in the extreme. The notion that a sitting President can refuse to submit to oversight by Congress or refuse to comply with judgments and court orders issued by the Federal Bench is alarming.
President Obama's Administration has shown disturbing signs of continuing some of this excessive behavior by subtly threatening, in one wiretapping challenge case a few days ago, to send the FBI to enter a federal judge's chambers to retrieve a classified document. This is outrageous. Constitutional separation of powers exists for very good reasons.
The case is Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation v. George W. Bush.
David W March 4, 2009 · 7:26 pm
Ask them anything you want but you will not learn anything new.Maybe some evasive answers here and some finger pointing there plus the occassional pat on the back for preventing a "terrorist attack on Bush's watch"but we know the drill by now; the public can not be trusted to be told the truth for the sake of national security.
John McGrath March 4, 2009 · 7:26 pm
Rove will love it. These appearances will help him sell more books and get higher fees for TV bloviating. (But I do find his bloviating quite intelligent, even when I dismiss its premises.)
Rove will probably subtly smear Bush and Cheney. He will certainly be able to wrestle with the lazy minds of Congress. He will praise Obama as an intro to condemning him.
Rob, an American senior citizen March 4, 2009 · 7:30 pm
Rove has agreed to NUMEROUS requests previously. Doesn't mean a thing. Arrogance allows such.
Mott deWitt March 4, 2009 · 7:30 pm
This hearing should be held in an open session. Rove is like a roach, he thrives in the dark.
Karena March 4, 2009 · 7:31 pm
Testifying is one thing. Telling the truth is another. Are we to assume Rove had a Damascus moment and will start telling the truth after not doing so all this time? I think not.
rkrenke March 4, 2009 · 7:32 pm
Rove may very well be the most ethically- and morally-challenged individual I've ever had the misfortune to witness. Both he and Miers should testify publicly – Americans have a right to know what roles they played in the politicization of our justice system.
Rove also needs to answer questions regarding his involvement in the political prosecution of Gov. Don Siegelman and the outing of CIA agent Valerie Plame.
Phil H. March 4, 2009 · 7:32 pm
Which one will break Alberto Gonzales' record (57 invocations) of "I don't recall" answers? Might be both of them.
Phil, Los Angeles.
Lisa March 4, 2009 · 7:37 pm
"I don' recall"…"I don't recall"…..I don't expect either Miers or Rover to say anything at all relevant. They may have agreed to testify but they will never say anything incriminating against Bush or Cheney.
bob March 4, 2009 · 7:41 pm
While we're at it, let's get Bill and Hillary to testitfy about dubious deals in their administration such as the Rich pardon.
tracy minneapolis March 4, 2009 · 7:44 pm
Oh JohnD you poor pathetic harmed by a government policy person you. Your prayers do not count. You mock Christ by the things you say and the disdain you have for those who are not like you.
Remeber JohnD you are a minority in this world of color. You always have been and you always will be a minority.
Enjoy your ocean view, count your money and tell your wife once more how bad your life is because of affimitive action. You are truly pathetic. The only thing worse than a tattletale is a crybaby. You have been one your entire life. Just ask your siblings.
g english March 4, 2009 · 7:44 pm
John Drew said: "Our prayers are with Karl Rove and Harriet Miers."
Whooooah there matey… not so fast. Who is this "our"?
I think Harriet Miers is a sycophantic fool and my prayer is that Karl Rove goes to prison where he belongs. And if there is any justice Dick Cheney will join him there.
bxnyc March 4, 2009 · 7:45 pm
Lets not get too happy about this. Believe me, they both will have lawyers (plural) sitting next to them. I firmly believe that they will take the fifth and refuse to testify under the claim of self incrimination (remember you saw it here first). Anyone who believes that Rove & Miers are going to incriminate their mentor(GWB), when hell freezes over. Rove only agreed to this to stay out of jail because he knows that politicans of all stripes will always defend politicans of all stripes. However, no matter how hard they try, the republicans are in free fall and losing altitude rapidly.
byron March 4, 2009 · 7:45 pm
Can you plead the 5th in a written deposition?
Obama to Brown: We Really, Really Like You
Lamont Weighs Run for Connecticut Governor

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


text:
Jones Pass
Alberta. Pass
4 km N of Loren Lake, 34 km NE of McBride
53° 31′ 52″ N 119° 48′ 16″ W — Map 83E12 — Google — GeoHack
Earliest known reference to this name is 1912.
Name officially adopted in 1925
"On a pass a few miles west of there [Bess Pass]," wrote Donald Phillips of his explorations in 1912, "I found what I took to be one of W.R. Jones's camping places when he was exploring that country a pass for the G.T.P. Ry., and later on we called that litle pass, between the middle fork and the west branch of the Jackpine, Jones Pass."
Robert W. Jones was a location engineer for the Grand Trunk Pacific Railway who made a survey on the Alberta side of the boundary around 1906.
Frederick Talbot wrote about him in The Making of a Great Canadian Railway:
With him [G.T.P. surveyor C. C. Van Arsdoll] was associated a kindred spirit. This was Mr. R. W. Jones. Railway spies among the secrets of Nature in the mountains, like poets, are born, not made. And Mr. Jones certainly knows the Rockies through and through. In the search for the breach in this frowning wall through which the Grand Trunk Pacific could be carried in the easiest manner he probed the barrier through and through, exploring in all about 10,000 square miles. It was not open country that he traversed, but the heart of the range, bristling with precipitous, snow-crowned caps, which he trod through and through for the slightest sign of a passage, which, upon discovery, no matter how narrow, was followed up till it either came to a dead-end, comprising as it were a huge couloir, or sloped up towards the clouds. Every little detail was scrutinised closely, and committed to memory and paper by means of an eye trained to the country from prolonged seclusion in the wilds. Nothing escaped his vigilance. It might have been a narrow ledge here or a gully there, but it was searched industriously, in the hope that it might help to solve the problem in hand.
The most remarkable phase of his task was the flying survey, wherein the country was reconnoitred hurriedly but thoroughly. Jones went off with but an Indian to keep him company. The red man, Pierre Belcour by name, has accompanied his " white chief " so often that the two are almost inseparable companions.
Talbot, Frederick Arthur Ambrose [1880–1924]. The making of a great Canadian railway. The story of the search for and discovery of the route, and the construction of the nearly completed Grand Trunk Pacific Railway from the Atlantic to the Pacific with some account of the hardships and stirring adventures of its constructors in unexplored country. London: Seely, 1912. p. 163. Internet Archive
Phillips, Donald [1884–1938]. "Winter conditions north and west of Mt. Robson." Canadian Alpine Journal, Vol. 6 (1915–1915):128-1935. Alpine Club of Canada
Jobe, Mary Lenore [1878–1966]. "Mt. Kitchi: A New Peak in the Canadian Rockies." Bulletin of the American Geographical Society, Volume 47, No. 7 (1915):481-497. JSTOR
Karamitsanis, Aphrodite [1961-]. Place names of Alberta: Mountains, mountain parks and foothills. Calgary: University of Calgary Press, 1991
Modified September 6, 2021.
← Johnson Pit Kain Face →


Nowadays, we live in a society that obsessed with beauty. From the moment each of us sets foot on this earth to the day we die, we are taught by the culture around us that beauty means lives happily ever after, while the hideous witch or ogre is doomed to meet a grisly end. We grow older and the princesses of our bedtime stories make way for shimmering Hollywood stars and carefully made-up models in magazines. The message, however, remains the same which is "beauty is everything". But as we strive for this indefinable perfection, we must ask ourselves what it truly means to have beauty and how far we are willing to sacrifice to obtain it. With all the big brand launches their much anticipated products and some of them not being available in our countries, we tend to trust online shopping but is this safer? Shopping for cheap designer cosmetics might put you at risk and with social media playing a big role in this, many of these products are fake and more alarming could leave you with bad side effects. The beauty industry is exploding and with the youth trying to keep up with their beauty idols and catch up with trends, many are taking short cuts. These unregulated fakes can contain a lot of unregulated dangerous ingredients that we don't know of and can cause massive damage.


text:
NDI Group
For the society
See how we work
Scope of activities
Services for the energy sellers
Biogas power plants
Experience in PPP
Sopot City Center
Job offers in NDI
Get to know our HR
Traineeships and apprenticeships
National and international wholesale electricity trading
The core business of Inter Energia SA is domestic and international wholesale electricity trading. In addition, the company also operates in the electricity generation market, through investments in renewable energy sources.
Domestic and international electricity trading is the cornerstone of our business. We use all available trading platforms (Polish Power Exchange, brokers, bilateral contracts) to create portfolios of different risk profiles, shaped to our arbitrage strategies as well as the needs of our trading partners.
We offer both conventional electric power, proposed in standard products (baseload, peak, offpeak), and property rights resulting from certificates of origin of the energy generated in high-efficiency cogeneration and the renewable sources belonging to our company.
Since 2012 we have also been selling electricity to end customers who intend to use the right to change the electricity supplier. Our cooperation offer is addressed to business customers connected to each voltage level.
Our company has general distribution agreements (GDA) with: Tauron Dystrybucja S.A., Energa Operator S.A., ENEA Operator S.A., PKP Energetyka S.A. Oddział w Warszawie, RWE Stoen Operator Sp. z o.o., PGE Dystrybucja S.A
At present we do not sell electricity to households.
See electricity price list (.pdf)
Services for the energy sellers industry
POB service
The commercial balancing service consists in settling the total difference between the amount of electricity consumed by the End Users and the amount of electricity previously reported by the Seller.
In the POB service, Inter Energia S.A., based on a Trade Balance Service Agreement concluded with the Energy Seller, shall report daily to the Transmission System Operator (TSO) the Electricity Sales Agreements (ESA), concluded by the Balanced Entity.
Benefits of the service
By using our services, the Seller avoids the costs of providing the necessary IT infrastructure (WIRE system) and does not have to conclude an electricity transmission agreement with the TSO, or provide the required securities. Additionally, the Seller is not responsible for reporting its ESA properly, and Inter Energia S.A. ensures efficient and timely flow of reports and information.
See full POB offer (.pdf)
Due to the progressive liberalization of the gas market, we have been active in the natural gas market since 2013. We have all the permits and contracts that allow us to do business, including:
• concession for trading natural gas
• transmission contract with GAZ-SYSTEM S.A.
• access to the Gas Market on the Polish Power Exchange
Inter Energia SA was freed by the President of the Energy Regulatory Office from the obligation to submit for approval tariffs for gas on the wholesale and/or commodity market.
Inter Energia is currently generating electricity through the management of municipal waste and degassing of landfills. We have two small biogas plants located in Pyskowice and Racibórz (Silesian Voivodship). The facilities have installed capacities of 0.36 and 0.18 MW.
Concessions and licenses
Concession for electricity trading
Decision of the President of the Energy Regulatory Office of October 29th, 1999 No. OEE/210/867/W/1/2/99/AS, for the period from 05.11.1999 to 05.11.2009, extended by the decision of the President of the Energy Regulatory Office of 01.12.2008 No. OEE/527/867/W/2/2008/PJ for the period from 06.11.2009 to 06.11.2019.
Concession for electricity generation
Decision of the President of the Energy Regulatory Office of 25.08.2009 No. WEE/1338/867/W/3/2009/AWŚ for the period from 25.08.2009 to 02.07.2024.
Concession for trading gaseous fuels
Decision of the President of the Energy Regulatory Office of 19.02.2013 No. OPG/221/867/W/DRG/2013/KL for the period from 25.02.2013 to 25.02.2023.
Entry into the Register of Small Installation Producers
Certificate of entry into the Register of Small Installation Producers of 04.05.2015 No. MIZOE/URE00001/2015.
Inter Energia SA
Plac Trzech Krzyży 10/14
Email: biuro@interenergia.pl
VAT EU: PL 952-18-11-869
KRS (CRN): 0000035636
District Court for the Capital City of Warsaw,
12th Commercial Department of the National Court Register
Share capital: PLN 2.200.000
* I consent to the processing of my personal data contained in the form.
NDI SOPOT S.A. is the controller of your personal data contained in the form; it is processed in order to respond to your inquiry. Information about your rights, our contact details and the contact details of the data protection officer, the legal basis of the processing, recipients of your data, storage period and voluntary data submission and consequences of not submitting it can be found here. More information found here. More information.
ENDI GAME
HYDRO-ENGINEERING
CHLEBOVA
TRE MARE RESIDENCE
KAPRIOLA ESTATE
CERTFICATES
© 2021 NDI GROUP
I agree to so-called. cookies being stored on the device that I use and to the processing of my personal data that I leave while using the websites, and other parameters stored in cookies for marketing purposes, including profiling and analytical purposes, by NDI SOPOT SA with its registered office in Sopot, ul. Powstańców Warszawy 19, 81-718 Sopot, KRS (CRN): 0000138784, NIP (Tax ID): 583-000-75-31 (hereinafter: the Company) and its trusted partners. The data controller is the Company.


Rihanna gets her own street!
Rihanna has been honoured recently by having a street named after her in Barbados on the street that she grew up in.
Barbados will change 'Westbury New Road' to 'Rihanna Drive'. There'll be an official ceremony, and Riri has been expected to show up!


text:
Q: How to execute Hive query inside sparkcontext.parallelize(.......).map()? I am unable to execute below code.
This code tried to execute hive query from a hive table using SparkSession inside SparkContext runJob() method.
val lines = sparkSession.sparkContext.parallelize(Seq("hello world"),1)
sparkSession.sparkContext.runJob(lines, (t: TaskContext, it: Iterator[String]) => {

val conf = new SparkConf().setAppName("Testing")
val session = SparkSession.builder().master("local[*]").config(conf).enableHiveSupport().getOrCreate()

var df : DataFrame= session.sql(s"select count(*) from employee")
println("Task attempt id => " + t.taskAttemptId() + "  and  count:" + df.first)

})

I am able to get the result in local IntelliJ. However when I try to run the JAR in "yarn cluster" mode, I am getting the below exception:-

18/12/17 12:18:27 ERROR Executor: Exception in task 0.3 in stage 0.0 (TID 3)
java.io.StreamCorruptedException: invalid type code: 00
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readObject0(ObjectInputStream.java:1377)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.defaultReadFields(ObjectInputStream.java:1990)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.defaultReadObject(ObjectInputStream.java:500)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.ParallelCollectionPartition$$anonfun$readObject$1.apply$mcV$sp(ParallelCollectionRDD.scala:74)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.ParallelCollectionPartition$$anonfun$readObject$1.apply(ParallelCollectionRDD.scala:70)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.ParallelCollectionPartition$$anonfun$readObject$1.apply(ParallelCollectionRDD.scala:70)
    at org.apache.spark.util.Utils$.tryOrIOException(Utils.scala:1269)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.ParallelCollectionPartition.readObject(ParallelCollectionRDD.scala:70)
    at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke0(Native Method)
    at sun.reflect.NativeMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(NativeMethodAccessorImpl.java:57)
    at sun.reflect.DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.invoke(DelegatingMethodAccessorImpl.java:43)
    at java.lang.reflect.Method.invoke(Method.java:606)
    at java.io.ObjectStreamClass.invokeReadObject(ObjectStreamClass.java:1017)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readSerialData(ObjectInputStream.java:1893)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readOrdinaryObject(ObjectInputStream.java:1798)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readObject0(ObjectInputStream.java:1350)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.defaultReadFields(ObjectInputStream.java:1990)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readSerialData(ObjectInputStream.java:1915)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readOrdinaryObject(ObjectInputStream.java:1798)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readObject0(ObjectInputStream.java:1350)
    at java.io.ObjectInputStream.readObject(ObjectInputStream.java:370)
    at org.apache.spark.serializer.JavaDeserializationStream.readObject(JavaSerializer.scala:75)
    at org.apache.spark.serializer.JavaSerializerInstance.deserialize(JavaSerializer.scala:114)
    at org.apache.spark.executor.Executor$TaskRunner.run(Executor.scala:298)
    at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor.runWorker(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:1145)
    at java.util.concurrent.ThreadPoolExecutor$Worker.run(ThreadPoolExecutor.java:615)
    at java.lang.Thread.run(Thread.java:745)

Caused by: java.io.IOException: java.util.NoSuchElementException: key not found: 0
    at org.apache.spark.util.Utils$.tryOrIOException(Utils.scala:1276)
    at org.apache.spark.broadcast.TorrentBroadcast.readBroadcastBlock(TorrentBroadcast.scala:206)
    at org.apache.spark.broadcast.TorrentBroadcast._value$lzycompute(TorrentBroadcast.scala:66)
    at org.apache.spark.broadcast.TorrentBroadcast._value(TorrentBroadcast.scala:66)
    at org.apache.spark.broadcast.TorrentBroadcast.getValue(TorrentBroadcast.scala:96)
    at org.apache.spark.broadcast.Broadcast.value(Broadcast.scala:70)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.HadoopRDD.getJobConf(HadoopRDD.scala:147)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.HadoopRDD.getPartitions(HadoopRDD.scala:198)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:252)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:250)
    at scala.Option.getOrElse(Option.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.partitions(RDD.scala:250)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.MapPartitionsRDD.getPartitions(MapPartitionsRDD.scala:35)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:252)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:250)
    at scala.Option.getOrElse(Option.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.partitions(RDD.scala:250)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.MapPartitionsRDD.getPartitions(MapPartitionsRDD.scala:35)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:252)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:250)
    at scala.Option.getOrElse(Option.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.partitions(RDD.scala:250)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.UnionRDD$$anonfun$1.apply(UnionRDD.scala:84)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.UnionRDD$$anonfun$1.apply(UnionRDD.scala:84)
    at scala.collection.TraversableLike$$anonfun$map$1.apply(TraversableLike.scala:234)
    at scala.collection.TraversableLike$$anonfun$map$1.apply(TraversableLike.scala:234)
    at scala.collection.immutable.List.foreach(List.scala:381)
    at scala.collection.TraversableLike$class.map(TraversableLike.scala:234)
    at scala.collection.immutable.List.map(List.scala:285)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.UnionRDD.getPartitions(UnionRDD.scala:84)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:252)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:250)
    at scala.Option.getOrElse(Option.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.partitions(RDD.scala:250)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.MapPartitionsRDD.getPartitions(MapPartitionsRDD.scala:35)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:252)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:250)
    at scala.Option.getOrElse(Option.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.partitions(RDD.scala:250)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.MapPartitionsRDD.getPartitions(MapPartitionsRDD.scala:35)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:252)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:250)
    at scala.Option.getOrElse(Option.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.partitions(RDD.scala:250)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.MapPartitionsRDD.getPartitions(MapPartitionsRDD.scala:35)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:252)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD$$anonfun$partitions$2.apply(RDD.scala:250)
    at scala.Option.getOrElse(Option.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.rdd.RDD.partitions(RDD.scala:250)
    at org.apache.spark.ShuffleDependency.<init>(Dependency.scala:91)
    at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.exchange.ShuffleExchange$.prepareShuffleDependency(ShuffleExchange.scala:261)
    at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.exchange.ShuffleExchange.prepareShuffleDependency(ShuffleExchange.scala:84)
    at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.exchange.ShuffleExchange$$anonfun$doExecute$1.apply(ShuffleExchange.scala:121)
    at org.apache.spark.sql.execution.exchange.ShuffleExchange$$anonfun$doExecute$1.apply(ShuffleExchange.scala:112)
    at org.apache.spark.sql.catalyst.errors.package$.attachTree(package.scala:52)
    ... 38 more
Caused by: java.util.NoSuchElementException: key not found: 0
    at scala.collection.MapLike$class.default(MapLike.scala:228)
    at scala.collection.AbstractMap.default(Map.scala:59)
    at scala.collection.mutable.HashMap.apply(HashMap.scala:65)
    at org.apache.spark.storage.BlockInfoManager.lockForReading(BlockInfoManager.scala:196)
    at org.apache.spark.storage.BlockManager.getLocalValues(BlockManager.scala:450)
    at org.apache.spark.broadcast.TorrentBroadcast$$anonfun$readBroadcastBlock$1.apply(TorrentBroadcast.scala:210)
    at org.apache.spark.util.Utils$.tryOrIOException(Utils.scala:1269)

How to fix this issue?

A:
This code tried to execute hive query from a hive table using SparkSession inside SparkContext runJob() method.

This is technically not possible and Spark SQL / Spark Core does not support it.
A Hive query in Spark SQL is translated into an RDD which in itself is a description of a distributed computation.
SparkContext.runJob is to trigger a distributed computation as a Spark job (which in itself is a set of tasks).
See the distinction? The former is a description while the latter is execution. They are different and won't work together.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Extract of sample "Classical music concert review"
"Classical Music Concert Review Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 Words", n.d. https://studentshare.org/visual-arts-film-studies/1421612-a-concert-report.
The topic of "Classical music concert review" was hard to find. I spent hours to find it. Here at StudentShare, I got the best example. Many thanks!
Let us write or edit the essay on your topic "Classical music concert review" with a personal 20% discount.
Let us find you another Essay on topic Classical music concert review for FREE!


SCC is Proud to Serve Cherokee County!
Cherokee County Residents: Attend College Tuition-Free!
Cherokee County K-14 Scholarship Fund - Established by Cherokee 2020 to encourage county residents to continue their education for at least two more years beyond high school, this fund covers any tuition amount remaining after all other funding and financial aid options have been exhausted.
Listen to our podcast or download the podcast transcript for detailed information!


text:
10 Magic Phrases to Use in Video Meetings So People Will Like You More
Start with 'Let me be up front.'
By Bill Murphy Jr., www.billmurphyjr.com@BillMurphyJr
Always look on the bright side of pandemics. (Apologies to Monty Python.)
At least, look on the bright side of having been forced to work from home and conduct much of our business over video for the past six months.
Because with challenges come opportunities -- and this situation presents an incredible opportunity to train yourself to make other people like you more, to listen to your suggestions, and to root for your success.
Much of the power of communication has to do with word choice. And because we're all doing so much work via Zoom, or Microsoft Teams (or whatever), I almost hate to mention how simple it now is to say the right thing.
The reason? You can cheat. More accurately, you can post "cheat sheet" notes around the perimeter of your computer screen, reminding you to weave certain magic phrases into your conversations that are proven to evoke positive reactions from other people.
Seriously, it's so easy now that it's almost not fair. You can make your own list, but here are 10 phrases that might help you get started -- and why.
(Update: Based on reader reactions, I came up with a follow-up edition, too: 10 More Magic Phrases to Use in Zoom Calls and Video Meetings.)
1. "Allow me to be upfront."
I'll start with this one, because it's a phrase for the beginning of conversations. Another variation I like a lot, and that I borrowed from the movie The Untouchables: "Let me pay you the compliment of being blunt."
These phrases set expectations, signal honesty, and imply that you don't want to waste anyone else's time. You recognize that not everything you have to say will be easy to hear, but that you want to treat other people with respect.
2. "Tell me more."
This is the best non-judgmental, opening, warm reaction you can have to almost anything anyone else will say on a work video call. Everybody wants to hear that someone else wants to hear more from them. The only time not to use this? When someone has just finished speaking at length and explaining their point in depth.
3. "What do you think?"
If you value people's opinions, and--related, but important--if you want them to think that you value their opinions, this is a magic phrase. Ask this question, and you'll increase your charisma. It also applies in almost every life situation--not just video business meetings, but even casual interactions among strangers.
4. "How can I help?"
Most people are wired to be grateful to those who offer legitimate help. The power of this phrase is also clearest when we juxtapose it with what you shouldn't say, which is, "Let me know if I can help." That phrase requires an intermediate step on the part of your audience, which makes it less likely you'll have the opportunity to assist.
5. "Please/thank you."
If you don't habitually use the words "please" and "thank you," start doing so. Politeness costs literally nothing, but these words engender positive reactions. In fact, if you have trouble remembering, put these two phrases in big letters right at the top of your computer. Sprinkle them in at first, even when it seems a bit odd to do so.
6. "You're welcome."
Welcome to my personal crusade to get people to say this two-word phrase instead of "No problem" or "Yep" or the like. Saying "you're welcome" drives home that you agree that you've done something worthy of thanks--and that you did so because the person for whom you did the favor is worth it, too. It's a positive reflection on both you and them.
7. "I'm sorry, I interrupted you."
I know that I can dominate conversations sometimes if I don't watch myself. It's my personality, I suppose, but avoiding this isn't just about being polite. It's about listening. Because if you're not listening, you're probably not learning. Also, in case it's not clear--say this phrase and then shut up. Make it a real invitation for other people to talk.
8. "I've noticed that you do ______ very well."
You're a great salesperson. You're a good listener. You're super-adaptable. You're an incredible teacher or mentor. Whatever it is, find something good and truthful to say about people you're talking with, and say it. Also, prefacing with "I've noticed that you ..." makes clear this isn't a one-time observation.
9. "I wonder how we can fix this."
There's rarely reason to assign blame (rarely but not never). However, truly charismatic people, and truly great leaders, are the ones who manage to assemble a committed team to tackle problems. No complaints, no divisions. The emphasis is on "we" and "fix." Just a simple, seven-word statement about looking together for solutions.
10. "Let me find out."
You're not just willing to help. You're willing and eager to go out of your way to do so. At the same time, you want people to make decisions based on data to the maximum extent possible. But honestly, I don't mean to overanalyze this one. When there are gaps in your knowledge, you seek to fill them. Good message.
I'm sure you'll have your own phrases to add. Some might even be industry-specific.
Just remember, the point isn't to rely on Post-it notes with smart, charismatic sayings for your entire business life. It's to train yourself to think to say these kinds of things automatically.
It's like muscle memory for charisma and leadership.
Because someday, the pandemic will end. But the almost magic way that people react to these kinds of positive phrases will last a very long time.
Get Inc.'s top posts straight to your inbox. Sign up here and you'll receive Today's Must Reads before each day is done.
Like this column? Sign up to subscribe to email alerts and you'll never miss a post.


Ah, the wonderful sights and scents of the holiday season all in one centerpiece! While your guests feast on scrumptious holiday meals, they can feast their eyes on a traditional centerpiece of fir, ceder and pine, with red carnations, pine cones and a touch of caspia. Two candles and red ribbon complete the picture.


text:
Home › Magazine › 2008 Fall › Pinon Canyon: "One Colossal Land Grab"
Pinon Canyon: "One Colossal Land Grab"
Posted on December 1, 2008 by Land Report Editors
Folks in Southern Colorado don't trust the Army. And with good reason. In 1983, when the Department of Defense established the 500-square-mile Pinon Canon Maneuver Site (PCMS), the Army acquired almost half the 285,000 acres by using eminent domain. It…
Folks in Southern Colorado don't trust the Army. And with good reason. In 1983, when the Department of Defense established the 500-square-mile Pinon Canon Maneuver Site (PCMS), the Army acquired almost half the 285,000 acres by using eminent domain.
It was an ugly experience, but when it concluded the military made two promises: there would be no live-fire exercises at Pinon Canyon, and no additional lands would be taken. Now, a quarter-century later, both promises have been broken.
BY TREY GARRISON
PHOTOGRAPHY BY GUSTAV SCHMIEGE
The Army broke its first promise — the no live-fire ban — in 2004. Given the lay of the land, it was a particularly unwelcome decision. The short-grass prairie that blankets Southern Colorado's arid savannah takes on a tinderbox quality when rainfall is sparse. Not surprisingly, live artillery fire only exacerbates those conditions. That was certainly the case this summer when lightning ignited grass fires on the maneuver site. They quickly spread to neighboring ranches. The burn eventually engulfed more than 40,000 acres.
Two years after the live-fire ban was broken, word got out that the powers that be at Fort Carson wanted to break the Army's second promise and acquire additional acreage, more specifically, 418,000 additional acres. The land the Army wants is a mosaic of private and federal lands in the Comanche National Grasslands. This time the Army promises there will be no heavy-handed eminent domain proceedings, which makes sense because since 2007 the Department of Defense has been prohibited by Congressional mandate from condemning any private land. But that has not prevented it from seeking "willing sellers."
The problem? Hardly a soul in southeast Colorado believes the Army any more. The plan to buy from willing sellers looks more like a try at a checkerboard land grab. And, if a recently uncovered 2004 Fort Carson proposal is accurate, it looks like the Army wants a hell of a lot more than 418,000 acres; it wants 7 million. Welcome to Pinon Canyon.
THE LANDOWNERS' PERSPECTIVE
Mack Louden is one of the leaders in the fight against the Army's plans to expand the PCMS. It's cost him a lot — time, money, stress on the home front. But he's willing to risk everything, because to Louden it's a fight worth fighting. This summer Louden closed down his feed store, a Trinidad landmark for almost a century. He could run a ranch, a business, or fight the insurgency, but not all three.
"When it comes down to it, this is what's important," he told me when I stopped in for a visit a few months ago. He spit into a cup to underline his point. His piercing eyes are at odds with his tired, craggy face, just as he himself seems equally cynical and optimistic. "It's driving my wife crazy how much of my time this has taken, but no matter what it costs me I'd fight it again if I had the chance."
The battleground known as Pinon Canyon is desolate country on the east side of the Continental Divide that resembles the barren environs found in much of Iraq and Afghanistan. Generations of ranchers dating all the way back to Charlie Goodnight have tended their herds here. Opponents of the Army's plans say the 418,000-acre seizure would devastate the local economy. An estimated $20 million a year in agricultural production would be lost, and so would more than 500 ranches.
Lon Robertson is a neighbor of Louden's. (Neighbor in these parts means he lives only 10 or 20 miles away.) Robertson heads the Pinon Canyon Expansion Opposition Coalition (www.pinoncanyon.com). To him, the proposed expansion is about much more than land. "The impact on this whole region will be monumental. It will be devastating," he says.
The Department of Defense already owns about 25 million acres of which the Army's share is 15 million acres. The military says it's not enough for what it needs. Local ranchers disagree. Their response? Not one acre more. This battle cry has become the name of their legislative action committee.
"This land is not for sale at any price," Louden says.
THE ARMY'S PERSPECTIVE
Since World War II, Fort Carson has been a Colorado Springs landmark. Located approximately 100 miles away from Pinon Canyon, it is from this base that units are trained at PCMS. The Army says it needs to expand PCMS for a number of reasons, including the 2007 Grow the Army initiative, a program that, in a surprise twist, is designed to do just what its name says. Over the course of the next two years, the Pentagon plans to expand the number of soldiers stationed at Fort Carson from 16,000 to 25,000.
"Changes to unit organization in the past year, upgrades to technology, and a decision to add a fifth BCT (brigade combat team) under Grow the Army have all pushed the doctrinal training land requirements up, not down, at Fort Carson," says Army spokesman Dave Foster at the Pentagon.
As to why the Army doesn't use some of the millions of acres it already owns, Foster says part of it is because the terrain isn't right. There are also cumbersome federal restrictions. But what it really boils down to — and he admits this — is convenience.
"In order to support Fort Carson-based soldiers, other federal lands must not only be suitable and available, they must also be within 200 miles of Fort Carson/PCMS," Foster says. "If the federal lands are further away than 200 miles, the burden on soldiers and families to use the land regularly for home-station readiness training purposes becomes so great that the Army would be forced to consider realigning units away from Fort Carson and to other installations with closer facilities.
"There are a handful of federal landholdings … that the Army is investigating further, (but) none of these are assured or problem-free. Securing permission from other federal agencies to train on these lands is a lengthy and difficult process."
Louden's take on the convenience angle is less than generous: "Yeah, it's convenient for them. The generals can fly down, observe training and maneuvers, and fly back to Colorado Springs in time to play golf in the afternoon."
There's a new twist on the saga of Pinon Canyon, one that undermines the Army's assertion that it only needs a little here and a little there. According to a 2004 study out of Fort Carson titled "Analysis of Alternatives Study: Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site, Colorado," the Pentagon has been planning on acquiring almost 7 million acres in southeastern Colorado, forcing more than 17,000 residents off their land, and establishing the largest military base in the world. The 2004 study states:
… Fort Carson's Range and Training Land Program (RTLP) Development Plan, September 2003, identified the multi-phased acquisition of 6.9 million acres of land, currently owned by private land owners and the U.S. Forest Service (Comanche National Grasslands), as an option to the use of this land for large-scale, doctrinally sound Joint and Combined military training for units stationed at or deployed to Fort Carson and PCMS. Likewise, an expanded PCMS offers DoD the ability to simulate the situation in the Middle East, complete from deployment, through operations to re-deployment.
This unprecedented acquisition of almost 11,000 square miles of private and public land would result in an operations area larger than Massachusetts. The multi-service battlefield would be more than triple the
size of New Mexico's White Sands Missile Range, which at 3,200 square miles, is currently the largest military installation in the United States.
Opponents of the expansion say it would decimate the social and economic fabric of southeastern Colorado and destroy the last intact short-grass prairie along the American Great Plains.
The Pentagon's analysis makes clear that the land acquisition was designed to take place in many phases with the first phase matching almost exactly the Army's current push for about 100,000 acres next to the PCMS.
"This report also shows that far from compromising its plans, the Army is actually sticking almost exactly to the phased acquisition laid out in this document," Louden says. "Army assistant secretary Keith Eastin has stated publicly that the Pentagon will be back for more land in the future."
It's hard for people to get their head around how much this would affect not just southeast Colorado but much of the Southwest, he says.
"People need to understand the sheer size of this planned land grab and the disastrous consequences of letting the Pentagon get one more acre. The damage to this fragile region and the rare wildlife it supports would be catastrophic," Louden says. "Ranchers whose relationships with the native grasslands go back many generations would lose their lands and their livelihoods. The region's family ranching and agriculture-based economy and the communities that depend upon it would be devastated. And a vast trove of historical, archaeological, and paleontological treasures would be lost."
Jim Herrell, a fellow opponent of the expansion, says the Army's ongoing pursuit of expansion is a telltale sign of the disconnect between the government and the people it is bound to serve.
"Every level of democracy has voiced its opposition to the expansion of the size and boundaries at Pinon Canyon clearly and repeatedly, yet the Pentagon and its contractors refuse to heed the will of the people," Herrell says. "Now we see why the Army plans to build extensive facilities and intensify use on the 238,000 acres they already have but have rarely used. The Army got its foot in the door in the 1980s with promises that they'd never be back and there would be no live-fire. Those promises are broken. Letting the Pentagon go ahead with their plan inside and outside the PCMS would open the gate to an unconscionable drain on taxpayers."
The enormous swath of khaki-colored ranchland in and around Pinon Canyon is environmentally-sensitive short grass prairie. Patchy, protein rich grasses that keep herds fed in the winter are interspersed with the kind of rugged scrub and rocky flatland that also nurtures dust storms. Even today, ruts made by pioneers' wagons traveling along the Santa Fe Trail a century ago are plainly visible. Imagine what a 67-ton Abrams or an 18-ton Stryker on maneuvers can do, much less the impact of live-fire exercises in a place where lightning strikes spark grassfires that can burn hundreds of acres at a go.
Town and county governments throughout the area — except Trinidad itself – have passed resolutions against the expansion. A bipartisan coalition of state lawmakers pushed through the Colorado Legislature a largely symbolic measure in 2007 condemning expansion plans.
For opponents, the campaign has been one of battles won, campaigns lost, brilliant strategy, lawsuits, and holding tactics. Initially, the Army planned to seize the land through eminent domain, as it did back in the 1980s. The power to condemn private land for public use is nothing new. It's right there in the last part of the Fifth Amendment of the U.S. Constitution:
"… nor shall private property be taken for public use, without
just compensation."
But since many Colorado ranchers had been down this road before with the Army, they mobilized immediately and started beating down the doors of their legislators. The fight has been carried on for two years now. The two primary weapons have been legal documents and official filings. In an ironic twist, the Army has been bogged down with all sorts of red tape: studies and statements on environmental effects and historical impact. In 2007, expansion opponents won their first serious victory when Congress banned on any funding for eminent domain or expansion activities. U.S. Rep. Marilyn Musgrave (R-CO), aided by U.S. Rep. John Salazar (D-CO), pushed the ban through.
At press time, the nation's largest land grab has been reduced to a stalemate, trench warfare at its finest. Congress has approved the ban for another year, through the end of fiscal 2009. But U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-CO), whose district includes Colorado Springs, wants the expansion. Lamborn has led the effort to allow the Army to circumvent the spending ban by attaching language to the 2009 Defense Authorization Act that allows the solicitation of "willing sellers."
"The Army believes it can buy the land it needs from willing sellers," Foster says. "The Army has no desire to assert its condemnation authority, does not feel such authority is needed in this case, and seeks only the ability to buy on the open real estate market like any other organization."
Opponents say that this is an end around and a dirty trick. They say Lamborn's maneuver is a checkerboard land grab that would make acquisition of other parcels inevitable by devaluing other ranchlands. Plus, it will intimidate owners, who worry they won't get as much compensation should eminent domain come later. Live-fire war games and demands for access easements tend to drive down the values. They also spook cattle.
"(Salazar and Musgrave) authored legislation banning all funding for any expansion of the Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site; a majority of the U.S. House and Senate approved the bill; and President Bush, the commander in chief, signed it into law," Robertson said in an email he sent me. "Is (Eastin) that unfamiliar with the chain of command that he believes he can go ahead and spend taxpayer dollars anyway?"
The most recent battlefront is over construction on the existing PCMS site. A non-profit group allied with Robertson's organization called Not 1 More Acre! filed a lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for Colorado on April 23 to halt the construction of an encroaching 16-barrack military base on the western edge of the existing training site.
This construction is designed to demonstrate "need." The Army plans to relocate military personnel to the area. The suit charges the Department of the Army with failure to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (NEPA) and failure to disclose the destructive environmental,cultural, and socio-economic impacts of the army's proposed current expansion of Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site (PCMS) to encompass private property between La Junta, Trinidad, and Walsenburg.
Meanwhile, the Army is building its own "coalition of the willing" to strengthen its claims on the land around PCMS. Kimmie Lewis, a third-generation rancher, says the Army is cozying up with environmental groups which see potential gain in taking land from private ownership, even if some of the land would be sacrificed to the damage caused by armored and mechanized military exercises.
"The PCMS expansion plan incorporates a Private Lands Initiative, which is a cooperative effort between the U.S. Army Forces Command, The Nature Conservancy, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, which seeks to annex additional land around the borders of the installation, creating a buffer zone (and) removing even more land from productive purposes," Lewis says. "It's a strange coalition but it's come together at several military sites.
The Nature Conservancy has been an active partner with the Pentagon since at least 2005, when the Bush White House urged "cooperation conservation" between the two as a way to expand the amount of land "protected" by the federal government, including the creation of environmental buffer zones around military bases. Senator Wayne Allard (R-CO) and Rep. Joel Hefley (R-CO) helped TNC acquire a $7 million
grant to secure a buffer zone south of Colorado Springs to protect the fort's northern borders. These are called Army Compatible Use Buffers (ACUB), and they are legally binding agreement between an Army installation and another party that enables the other party to acquire land or interest in land from a willing private landowner in the vicinity of Army training areas. Fort Carson and eight other installations are currently enrolled in the "Active Conservation Buffer Program.
All of this — the uncovered plans, the lawsuits, the counter maneuvers, the political infighting — it takes its toll. It's the uncertainty that's the killer here. Even Sen. Ken Salazar (D-CO) — who has been trying to thread the needle between his ranching constituents and the demands of the Army — is frustrated. He told The Land Report that he still thinks a compromise can be reached that satisfies all.
"I am still hopeful that there is a way to find a win-win solution that strengthens the agricultural economy of southeastern Colorado and fulfills the needs of the Army. I have suggested several ideas to the Army, including leasing land from local landowners and opening some of the existing site to grazing. The Army has shown openness to some of these concepts, and Fort Carson officials are taking steps to work more closely with local communities to hear their concerns and ideas as well," Salazar told me. "The cloud of uncertainty, however, is still hanging over the heads of local property owners, in large part because they still worry that the Army will use eminent domain to take their land. I have supported, and will continue to support, barring the use of eminent domain at Pinon Canyon. The residents should not have to live in fear of the Army taking their land."
Rep. Musgrave concurs. "For the past two years I've worked on preventing the Army from spending any money on the expansion," she tells The Land Report. "But (the Army) is very tenacious. They have time and all the things government has on their side."
It's this sort of scenario that has Mack Louden worried. He thinks one of the biggest problems expansion opponents face is that the opinion makers and major media types in Washington and New York can't fathom the scale of acreage under discussion.
"For someone who pays $1 million for a 1,000-square-foot apartment or a quarter-acre lot, they think 100,000 acres is all the land in the world. Why not give up a little?" Louden says.
But in this part of the country a rancher needs up to 100 acres to support a single cow-calf pair. In the warmer months herds are fed grain. During the harsh winters they survive on protein-rich native grasses. Louden, whose own 30,000-acre ranch supports just 300 Red Angus, says that when all is said and done a rancher with his size operation is lucky to net $35,000 a year. Most ranchers and their wives work extra jobs to make ends meet or to get health insurance coverage.
Louden and I are driving down a dirt road that runs between along the fence line of the existing PCMS. Kennie Gyurman, who lost his ranch in the first PCMS back in 1983 and is still mad about that 25 years later, has joined us. Gyurman's beat-up Ropers, faded Wranglers, and angry disposition come across anti-military, but once upon a time he worked for the Department of Defense just outside Denver.
"You can't trust a thing they tell you," Gyurman says. "They'll say they want one thing and take another. They'll say they just want this much, and then they'll take everything. We have to stop them."
Opponents of the expansion such as these two aren't worried about their land. Gyurman's already lost his, and Louden's ranch isn't even in the Army's sites. Their position is as much philosophical as it is self-interest.
As Lon Robertson told me last year, "They say they need the land to help train our soldiers to fight for our rights. I thought one of our rights was the right to own property."As for Louden, he sees a bigger problem than just one wing of the Pentagon making designs on a largely unknown piece of rural Colorado.
"The people are losing the government," Louden says. "The Pentagon is going ahead with their plans despite all the studies they're supposed to be doing. It affects everyone in this region, and they're not even following their own rules."
"This is one colossal land grab in Colorado," says Rep. Musgrave, adding that she has little doubt the 2004 study where the Army eyes 7 million acres is the long-term goal. "And it's always hanging over everyone. You can bet if there is (a permanent solution), we will find it. But bureaucracy has all the time in the world. They can be very patient and come back when this crowd gets worn down. I support the military with all my heart but they're not right here. Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."
"We are all Americans," Louden says. "We all support our country and our military. But the military is supposed to answer to the people, and to serve to protect our rights. What is the military defending us from if they're the ones who take our land?"
‹ Tom Barrack Takes Control of Neverland
Border Fence Spikes Demand for Appraisers ›
Tagged with: Charlie Goodnight, Comanche National Grasslands, Dave Foster, Defense Authorization Act, Department of Defense, DoD, Doug Lamborn, Fort Carson, Gustav Schmiege, Jim Herrell, Joel Hefley, John Salazar, Ken Salazar, Kennie Gyurman, Lon Robertson, Mack Louden, Marilyn Musgrave, Pinon Canon Maneuver Site, The Nature Conservancy, US Army, Wayne Allard
Posted in 2008 Fall, Cattle, Farming, Feature, Federal Policy, Gustav Schmiege, Magazine, News Desk, Public Land, Topics, Trey Garrison, West
6 comments on "Pinon Canyon: "One Colossal Land Grab""
Randy Cooper says:
Still believe the best solution to numerous problems in the United States of America is to dig a moat between the U.S. / Mexico border, take the excess dirt to New Orleans and build it up above sea level, then take the displaced alligators and put in the moat to help the U.S. military patrol the border against illegal immigrants.
There you have it, the solution to many of our problems.
Steven Taillebois says:
Well it all makes the armies propaganda that they exist to protect freedom and the American way of life a sham. What they are doing, is at it's core an attempt to drive people from their homes and trades. And they'll do it by either direct fiat or by indirectly by destroying the economic viability of the communities in southeastern Colorado.
And when they are all done, and world conditions dictate that another site is needed which duplicates another war zone…what will be left behind is a ruined landscape. Farm trucks and the occasional traveler leave no substantial imprint upon these types of land, but tracks and live fire will irrevocably change them. Plus after its all done lost munitions will remain making the area a risk for the remaining wildlife and people. Even at places like Camp Hale where the Army was a positive force, it's not unknown for people to come across live munitions and some have been killed by them. And Camp Hale was an era wherein depleted uranium munitions were not in common use. And those will considerably complicate the reconversion of this land to civilian use, if the army ever actually returns any of it.
Perhaps the army needs to realize that their expansion of Pinon Canyon will destroy much more than this proposed expansion will protect. And if their leadership is unable to make this very basic moral realization might I suggest they buy up some old Soviet era Russian uniforms. At least that way the true attitudes would might be made more clear…
Kennie Gyurman says:
I liked the article "Pinon Canyon: One Colossal Land Grab." It is informative and covers the subject well. I remember well the drive down the road bordering the PCMS. I would like to clarify some things in the article about my family and myself. My father and uncle owned the Gyurman Ranch with their children.I am third generation and the ranch has been in the family since 1915. In 1982-83 the Army condemned and took possession of 5000 acres of the family ranch.This was about one-third of the ranch. The remaining family members still own every acre today that was not condemned in 1982. My wife and I are very much worried about our land and home which is just four miles west of the current PCMS. Our property is in the Army's area of interest. The other family members have the remainder of the original ranch in the area of interest.
I am angry at the way my family and other families were treated in 1982-83 when we had our land seized by court order. I am angry that my 85 year old father who trusted his government was treated like dirt, as were all of the other ranchers who were not for sale at any price. I am angry that the Pentagon and the people from Fort Carson that are in charge of this expansion are back again to do the same thing and are using the same tactics. I am angry that people in the Pentagon and other governmental agencies can treat American citizens this way.
I am proud to live in this great country and fully support the men and women in the military. I worked in the defense industry at the Rocky Flats Nuclear Weapons Plant for 31 years and am glad I did. My only anger in this matter is directed at the people involved in trying to grab 418,000 acres of good productive pasture land.
Kennie Gyurman
Eric OKeefe says:
Really insightful addition to Trey's update on Pinon Canyon, Kennie. I know our coverage has focused primarily on the last few years, so to hear your recollections about the 1980s is an entire new chapter for almost all of us.
Trey Garrison says:
Kennie, I'm glad to hear from you. I wish I could have spent a little more time on your own story, because in a way it encapsulates everything ranchers there have faced and are facing. It's been death by a thousand paper cuts for all of y'all.
I remember standing outside your home, and just being overwhelmed by the overwhelming silence. Living down here in Dallas, it's easy to forget what quiet is like, and it's easy to see why–even if you take away the issue of ranching–a man would be so attached to his land in that quiet corner of America.
My best to you and your wife. Thank you again for your hospitality. I hope to see you again next time I'm up in those parts.
David Schneider says:
In 1986 the Army stole my cousin Clesta's ranch homesteaded by her father Henry schneider after WW1. What made him so prosperous made her so poor dur to our own government! So, was Aaron Russo wrong in his documentary, "America: Freedom to Fascim"?


text:
Instrument Panel Replacement
Plane Instrument Panel
Flight Simulator Instrument Panel
Instrument Panel Repair
Instrument Panel Cover
What is an Instrument Panel?
R. Anacan
An instrument panel, often known as a dashboard, is the component of a vehicle that contains instrumentation, gauges, and control surfaces. Generally speaking, the instrument panel is located at the front of a vehicle, or where the main control surfaces, — such as a steering wheel, airplane yoke, or handlebar — are located, Depending on the type of vehicle, this panel can be a simple design consisting of just a few basic gauges, indicator lights and controls to extremely complex and extensive panels.
The instrument panel is a critical and important component of any vehicle, whether it is an airplane, automobile, boat or motorcycle. The purpose of an instrument panel is to provide the operator with pertinent information needed to operate the vehicle successfully. Some of the more common gauges on instrument panels are speedometers, which measure the speed of a vehicle tachometers, which measure the amount of revolutions or the rotation speed of an engine; engine temperature gauges; and fuel gauges.
An instrument panel relays data concerning an aircraft's orientation and speed to its pilots.
Depending on the type of vehicle, the instrumental panel may also consist of gauges that are unique to that specific type of vehicle. A boat or ship may have a water depth meter and a wind speed and wind direction meter. An automobile may have a tire pressure monitor or an open door warning light. An airplane or helicopter typically has an altimeter, which indicates altitude, and pitch, yaw and roll indicators that show the level of rotation along its three main axes.
Most vehicles include a tachometer which displays the rotation speed of the engine in rotations per minute.
On an airplane or helicopter, the instrument panel not only provides the pilot with basic information, but the instrumentation is often critical for the safe operation of an airplane. In bad weather conditions, or when visibility is poor, a pilot is often not able to rely on his vision alone to fly the aircraft. When "flying blind," an aircraft's instruments enable a pilot to navigate successfully with limited or no visual cues. In fact, an important element of a pilot's training program is learning when to trust the instruments of the aircraft over what is visible with the eyes.
The instrument panel of an aircraft includes an altimeter, which measures a plane's distance above the ground.
Whatever the vehicle, it is extremely important that the operator know exactly what type of information is displayed on the instrument panel and what that information means. It is also essential that vehicle operators heed the information presented by the instrumentation on their vehicle. The most advanced sensors and indicators are of no use if a driver does not know what the warning means, or chooses to ignore it. Vehicle manufacturers produce extensive manuals so that vehicle operators are informed about the specific details about their vehicle's instrument panel.
What Does a Panel Operator Do?
What Does an Instrumentation Design Engineer Do?
What Is an Alidade?
What does "HOTAS" Mean?
What is an Air Data Computer?
What is the Hobbs Meter?
What is an Instrument Approach?
By: pixel974
By: Ron-Heidelberg
By: Pierre Landry
By: Naj
If weather or visibility is poor, a pilot has to rely on his instrument panel more than his eyes.
By: Shutterbas
Though they share some similarities, the instrument panels of fixed wing aircraft and helicopters differ.


My work experience includes nine years at UCLA, from Corporate Financial Services in Accounts Payable and Extramural Fund Management, to academic financial management as a fund Manager, to Auxiliary Services as Financial Services Manager in UCLA's Housing Division.
My formal education includes a MBA degree in Finance from Pepperdine University and a B.S. degree from UCSD. In addition, I have completed UCLA Financial Management Certification and nationwide HRCI Professional Human Resources Certification.
I have worked in the finance for almost ten years, learning and implementing the different facets of UCLA financial management. Although much of my experience revolves around finance, I also believe in team building, having served as chair of departmental events. I currently hold the office of Staff Assembly Board Member at Large, where I help to coordinate volunteers and assist officers and committees with events and planning. However, I would like to give back to the UCLA community within my field of proficiency, of which is financial administration.
My background has trained me to appreciate the challenges and responsibilities of sound fiscal management. As your Treasurer, I will build on the work of our previous treasurers by providing strategic budget monitoring and forecasting systems. I will ensure that accurate and thorough financial reports are provided in a timely manner to the president and board members so that they may effectively plan and manage all Staff Assembly programs. In addition, I will research and recommend additional sources for revenue to ensure the expansion of the staff development scholarship program.
As Treasurer I will be a positive asset to Staff Assembly. Since I enjoy working with people and have extended experiences in financial management, it would be an honor and a privilege to serve as your next Staff Assembly Treasurer.