text:
Full Case Name: David R. Brower, an individual; Samuel F. Labudde, an individual; Earth Island Institute, a California nonprofit corporation; Humane Society of the United States, a Delaware nonprofit corporation; American Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, a New York nonprofit corporation; Defenders of Wildlife, a District of Columbia nonprofit corporation; International Wildlife Coalition, a Massachusetts nonprofit corporation; Environmental Solutions International, a Florida nonprofit corporation; Animal Welfare Institute, a Delaware nonprofit corporation; Society for Animal Protective Legislation, a District of Columbia nonprofit corporation; Animal Fun, a California nonprofit corporation; The Oceanic Society, a California nonprofit corporation, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Donald Evans, Secretary of Commerce; William T. Hogarth, Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries Service, Defendants-Appellants.
Country of Origin: United States Court Name: United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit Primary Citation: 257 F.3d 1058 (2001) Date of Decision: Monday, July 23, 2001 Judge Name: Silverman Jurisdiction Level: Federal Judges: Myron Bright Barry G. Silverman and William A. Fletcher Attorneys: Katherine W. Hazard, for defendants-appellants. Joshua R. Floum, for the plaintiffs-appellees. Docket Num: 00-15968
The district court held that the Secretary's Initial Finding, triggering a change in the dolphin-safe label standard, was not in accordance with the law and constituted an abuse of discretion because the Secretary failed to (1) obtain and consider preliminary data from the congressionally mandated stress studies and (2) apply the proper legal standard to the available scientific information. We affirm.
The Secretary of Commerce appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in favor of Earth Island. [FN1] The district court held that the Secretary's Initial Finding, triggering a change in the dolphin-safe label standard, was not in accordance with the law and constituted an abuse of discretion because the Secretary failed to (1) obtain and consider preliminary data from the congressionally mandated stress studies and (2) apply the proper legal standard to the available scientific information. We affirm.
FN1. Appellants and appellees will be referred to as "Secretary" and "Earth Island," respectively.
I. Factual and Procedural Background
This case concerns congressional efforts to protect dolphins in the Eastern Tropical Pacific Ocean ("ETP"), which covers between five and seven million square miles and extends from the southern Californian to the South American coastlines. In the ETP, yellowfin tuna schools swim below dolphin groups, which are visible as they break the surface to breathe and leap into the air. Since 1959, fishermen in the ETP have pursued and chased the air breathing dolphin groups in order to catch the yellowfin tuna below. In this year-round process, referred to as "setting on dolphins," the fishermen use explosives, chase boats, and helicopters to drive the dolphins and tuna into the center of purse seine nets. Floats and weights support the nets, which close like a purse around all trapped inside. From 1959 to 1972, millions of dolphins were killed in the nets. Public outrage over the ETP dolphin deaths led to a variety of legislation and ultimately a dolphin-safe labeling standard. A review of the legislation leading to the standard and the potential easing of that standard is necessary for an understanding of the present controversy.
In 1972, public outcry over the ETP dolphin deaths led Congress to enact the Marine Mammal Protection Act ("MMPA"), 16 U.S.C. §§ 1361 et seq., which had the reduction of ETP dolphin deaths as one of its goals. The MMPA directed the Secretary of the Treasury to "ban the importation of commercial fish or products from fish which have been caught with commercial fishing technology which results in the incidental kill or incidental serious injury of ocean mammals in excess of United States Standards." Id. § 1371(a)(2). Having conducted research required by the MMPA, the National Marine Fisheries Service found that three ETP dolphin stocks were depleted-the coastal dolphin (42 Fed. Reg. 64, 548-60 (1977)), northeastern offshore spotted dolphin (58 Fed. Reg. 58, 285 (1993)), and the eastern spinner dolphin (58 Fed. Reg. 45,006 (1993)). [FN2] In 1984, 1988, and 1992, Congress amended the MMPA to ban importation of tuna that failed to meet certain conditions regarding dolphin mortality. 16 U.S.C. §§ 1371(a)(2)(B) & 1411 et seq. In 1990, responding to consumer concern and American tuna processors labeling changes, Congress enacted the Dolphin Protection Consumer Information Act ("DPCIA") under which tuna sold in the United States could not have a "dolphin safe" label if the tuna had been caught using purse seine nets intentionally deployed on or to encircle dolphins. 16 U.S.C. § 1385.
FN2. "Depleted," a term of art under the MMPA, signifies that a species or population stock has fallen below its optimum sustainable population. 16 U.S.C. § 1362(1)(A).
The American legislation and corresponding standards caused the loss of a large market for those countries that continued to set on ETP dolphins with purse seine nets. In 1992, the United States and other nations with purse seine fishing vessels in the ETP negotiated the International Dolphin Conservation Program ("La Jolla Agreement"), in which they "agreed to maintain dolphin kill levels at or below a 'dolphin mortality limit' assigned to each vessel, and to work toward reducing dolphin mortality to levels approaching zero." Brower v. Daley, 93 F.Supp.2d 1071, 1074 (N.D.Cal.2000). Three years later, the La Jolla Agreement was formalized into a binding agreement, the Panama Declaration, under which the United States agreed to seek changes in United States laws pertaining to tuna embargoes, market access, and the dolphin safe label. S. 397, 105th Cong., 143 Congr. Rec. 379-01 (1997). The Panama Declaration sought legislation to change immediately the dolphin safe labeling standard and to allow tuna caught with purse seine nets to be labeled "dolphin safe" as long as no dolphins were observed to be killed or seriously injured during the set.
In part to implement the Panama Declaration and eliminate the ban on tuna imports from countries complying with the La Jolla Agreement, on August 15, 1997, Congress enacted the International Dolphin Conservation Program Act ("IDCPA"), Pub. L. No. 105-42, 111 Stat. 1122. While there had been success in lowering dolphin mortality rates, [FN3] Congress remained concerned that, even if dolphins were not killed or seriously injured in the purse seine nets, the physiological stress they suffered during the year-round chase and encirclement would impede the dolphin populations' recovery. Accordingly, Congress rejected Panama Declaration language which sought an immediate change in the dolphin-safe label. H.R. Rep. No. 105-74 (pt. 1), reprinted in 1997 U.S.C.C.A.N. 1628. Congress included in the IDCPA a requirement of specified research projects directed toward assessing the prevalence and magnitude of fishery-induced stress in the ETP dolphins.
FN3. In 1972, the estimated annual ETP dolphin mortality rate caused by the purse seine net fishery was 423,678. By 1992, the estimated rate had dropped to 15,550. These numbers do not reflect the proportional impact on the total population.
Through the IDCPA, Congress amended the DPCIA and required the Secretary to make Initial and Final Findings as to "whether the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins with purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the [ETP]." 16 U.S.C. § 1385(g)(1) & (g)(2). The Secretary was to make the Initial Finding on the basis of research conducted before March 1, 1999, information obtained under the International Dolphin Conservation Program, and any other relevant information. [FN4] The IDCPA also amended the MMPA to provide details of the required research:
FN4. (g) Secretarial findings
(1) Between March 1, 1999, and March 31, 1999, the Secretary shall, on the basis of the research conducted before March 1, 1999, under section 1414a of this title, information obtained under the International Dolphin Conservation Program, and any other relevant information, make an initial finding regarding whether the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins with purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the [ETP].
16 U.S.C. § 1385(g)(1).
Congress also required the Secretary to make a Final Finding by December 31, 2002 on the basis of the completed stress studies, information obtained under the International Dolphin Conservation Program, and any other relevant information:
(2) Between July 1, 2001, and December 31, 2002, the Secretary shall, on the basis of the completed study conducted under section 1414(a) of this title, information obtained under the International Dolphin Conservation Program, and any other relevant information, make a [final] finding regarding whether the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins with purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the [ETP].
(a) Required research
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall, in consultation with the Marine Mammal Commission and the Inter-American Tropical Tuna Commission, conduct a study of the effect of intentional encirclement (including chase) on dolphins and dolphin stocks incidentally taken in the course of purse seine fishing for yellowfin tuna in the [ETP]. The study, which shall commence on October 1, 1997, shall consist of abundance surveys as described in paragraph (2) and stress studies as described in paragraph (3), and shall address the question of whether such encirclement is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the [ETP]. (2) Population abundance surveys.--The abundance surveys under this subsection shall survey the abundance of such depleted stocks and shall be conducted during each of the calendar years 1998, 1999, and 2000.
(3) Stress studies.--The stress studies under this subsection shall include--
(A) a review of relevant stress-related research and a 3-year series of necropsy samples from dolphins obtained by commercial vessels;
(B) a 1-year review of relevant historical demographic and biological data related to dolphins and dolphin stocks referred to in paragraph (1); and
(C) an experiment involving the repeated chasing and capturing of dolphins by means of intentional encirclement.
§ 1414a(a). The Secretary delegated the research to the National Marine Fisheries Service. A change in the dolphin-safe labeling standard from the existing, more restrictive standard to the less protective standard depended on NMFS's answer as to "whether the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins with purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the [ETP]."
On March 25, 1999, NMFS submitted its report to Congress. NMFS found that the currently depleted populations of both northeastern offshore spotted dolphins and eastern spinner dolphins [FN5] were "not increasing at the rate expected based on the low rate of reported mortalities from the fishery since 1991 and the reproductive potential for these populations." Report at vi. NMFS noted the difficulty in attributing the cause of the low or declining growth rates. Id. at viii. NMFS identified only one possible non-fishery related explanation for the slow or declining growth rates-a large scale environmental variability in the ocean habitat. However, NMFS discounted that explanation: "The review of environmental conditions did not disclose any large-scale oceanographic regime shifts during recent decades [and therefore] it is unlikely that [the dolphin populations'] failure to grow can be explained by large-scale environmental variability." Id. at 23.
FN5. Sparse and unreliable data on the coastal spotted dolphins, the third depleted stock, failed to provide population abundance estimates. Report at 20-21. Therefore, NMFS concluded that "it is not possible at this time to determine if chase and encirclement by the purse seine fishery is having a significant adverse impact on the coastal stock of spotted dolphins." Id. at 21.
Turning to fishery-related explanations for the slow or declining population growth rates, NMFS identified stress, separation of cows and calves (with subsequent death of calves), as well as under-reporting of direct kills. NMFS noted that none of these potential explanations is necessarily exclusive of the others. Id. However, NMFS reported that it did not have data from any of the three mandated stress research projects. Id. at 4. Therefore, regarding stress concerns, NMFS included only the "physiological and behavioral stress in mammals" literature review. After reviewing the literature, NMFS concluded that:
Although this review of existing literature regarding stress in mammals cannot provide a quantitative or definitive answer to the question of whether the tuna fishery is causing stress to affected dolphin populations, the available information and evidence point to the likelihood that physiological stress is induced by fisheries activities. It is therefore plausible that stress resulting from chase and capture in the ETP tuna purse-seine fishery could have a population level effect on one or more dolphin stocks.
Id. at 5.
NMFS then reported that it did not have evidence to determine whether there was physiological evidence of stress in individual dolphins from the affected dolphin populations, and that the answer probably would be available at "the completion of the necropsy sampling program." Id. at 14. Therefore, NMFS concluded that:
Given the information available from research vessel abundance estimates, tuna vessel abundance indices and observed fishery mortality, the quantitative answers to the question, "In the period since 1991, has there been for any depleted stock a failure to grow at the expected rate ..." are "yes" for both northeastern offshore spotted and eastern spinner dolphins. The probabilities associated with these answers are quite high, well above the suggested thresholds.... When considered with the qualitative answer from oceanographic studies (that it is unlikely that such a failure to grow can be explained by large-scale environmental variability) and the qualitative answer from the literature review (that it is plausible that stress resulting from chase and encirclement could have population level effects) the information suggests but by no means conclusively that the fishery has been the source of significant adverse impact on these two populations.
Id. at 22 (emphasis added). [FN6]
FN6. The record includes a "Scientists Statement Regarding the Setting of Nets on Dolphins in the [ETP]" ( 9/95 ) and "Letter from Sixteen Marine Mammal Scientists" (3/24/99) ("[A]s scientists who have conducted research on cetaceans and have observed the impacts of human activity on them ... we believe that research on the effects of human activities on dolphins demonstrates that it is highly likely that the activities of the [ETP] tuna fleets are causing significant negative impacts on dolphins in addition to the direct mortalities counted by observers.").
On May 7, 1999, the Secretary issued his Initial Finding (64 Fed. Reg. 24590-01) concluding "that there is insufficient evidence that chase and encirclement by the tuna purse seine fishery 'is having a significant adverse impact' on depleted dolphin stocks in the ETP." Pursuant to the Initial Finding, the dolphin safe label standard changed effective February 2, 2000, to permit the use of "dolphin safe" labeling when purse seine nets are used, as long as no dolphins were killed or seriously injured during the particular set in which the tuna were caught.
Earth Island challenged the validity of the Secretary's Initial Finding under the Administrative Procedures Act, 5 U.S.C. § 706 et seq. as arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and contrary to law. [FN7] Earth Island claimed that the Secretary failed to obtain and consider preliminary data from the congressionally mandated stress research projects, and failed to determine whether, on the basis of the best available scientific evidence, the use of purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on the depleted dolphin populations. Earth Island also asserted that the Secretary failed to apply the proper legal standard to the scientific information available, abused his discretion, and acted arbitrarily and capriciously by failing to find significant adverse impact given the best available evidence.
FN7. Earth Island also challenged the Secretary's Initial Finding under the National Environmental Policy Act, 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq. The district court granted the Secretary's summary judgment motion on the NEPA claim holding that NEPA "only applies to 'discretionary federal action' " and did not apply in this case because the "Secretary's initial finding was a nondiscretionary act for purposes of NEPA." Brower, 93 F.Supp.2d at 1090. Earth Island does not appeal that determination.
The district court found that the Secretary's Initial Finding was not in accordance with the law and an abuse of discretion because the Secretary failed to (1) obtain and consider preliminary data from the congressionally mandated stress studies and (2) apply the proper legal standard to the available scientific information. The district court concluded that:
[I]t would flout the statutory scheme to permit the Secretary to fail to conduct mandated research, and then invoke a lack of evidence as a justification for removing a form of protection for a depleted species, particularly given that the evidence presently available to the Secretary is all suggestive of a significant adverse impact.
Brower, 93 F.Supp.2d at 1089. The district court granted plaintiff's motion for summary judgment and set aside the Secretary's Initial Finding "until such time as the Secretary has an opportunity to consider preliminary results from the Congressionally mandated stress research studies." Id. The Secretary appealed.
II. Jurisdiction and Standard of Review
We have jurisdiction over the district court's judgment pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291.
We review the district court's grant of summary judgment de novo. Sierra Club v. Babbitt, 65 F.3d 1502, 1507 (9th Cir.1995). In determining whether summary judgment was properly granted, we must "view the case from the same position as the district court" and apply the same standards. Nevada Land Action Ass'n v. U.S. Forest Serv., 8 F.3d 713, 716 (9th Cir.1993). We may affirm the district court grant of summary judgment on any basis supported in the record. Hells Canyon Alliance v. U.S. Forest Serv., 227 F.3d 1170, 1176 (9th Cir.2000). We review the district court's factual findings for clear error. Russian River Watershed Prot. Comm. v. City of Santa Rosa, 142 F.3d 1136, 1140 (9th Cir.1998).
An agency's interpretation or application of a statute is a question of law reviewed de novo. Partridge v. Reich, 141 F.3d 920, 923 (9th Cir.1998). In reviewing an agency's statutory construction, we must reject those constructions that are contrary to clear congressional intent or frustrate the policy that Congress sought to implement. Chevron, U.S.A., Inc. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837, 843 n. 9, 104 S.Ct. 2778, 81 L.Ed.2d 694 (1984); see also NRDC v. EPA, 966 F.2d 1292, 1297 (9th Cir.1992) ("On questions of statutory construction, courts must carry out the unambiguously expressed intent of Congress.").
Under the Administrative Procedures Act, we review the Secretary's Initial Finding, in light of the administrative record, to determine if the Finding is " 'arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or otherwise not in accordance with law' or if the [Finding] failed to meet statutory, procedural, or constitutional requirements." Citizens to Preserve Overton Park, Inc. v. Volpe, 401 U.S. 402, 413-14, 91 S.Ct. 814, 28 L.Ed.2d 136 (1971); see also 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A)-(D). This inquiry, while narrow, must be searching and careful. Marsh v. Oregon Natural Res. Council, 490 U.S. 360, 378, 109 S.Ct. 1851, 104 L.Ed.2d 377 (1989). An agency's action may be arbitrary and capricious if "the agency has relied on factors which Congress has not intended it to consider, entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem, offered an explanation for its decision that runs counter to the evidence before the agency, or is so implausible that it could not be ascribed to a difference in view or the product of agency expertise." Southwest Ctr. for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Forest Serv., 100 F.3d 1443, 1448 (9th Cir.1996).
III. Analysis
The starting point in statutory interpretation is the language of the statute itself. Group Life & Health Ins. Co. v. Royal Drug Co., 440 U.S. 205, 210, 99 S.Ct. 1067, 59 L.Ed.2d 261 (1979). In construing federal statutes, we presume that the ordinary meaning of the words chosen by Congress accurately express its legislative intent. Mills Music, Inc. v. Snyder, 469 U.S. 153, 164, 105 S.Ct. 638, 83 L.Ed.2d 556 (1985). "The meaning of statutory language, plain or not, depends on context." Holloway v. United States, 526 U.S. 1, 7, 119 S.Ct. 966, 143 L.Ed.2d 1 (1999) (internal citations omitted). Context in this regard relates to "the design of the statute as a whole and to its object and policy." Gozlon-Peretz v. United States, 498 U.S. 395, 407, 111 S.Ct. 840, 112 L.Ed.2d 919 (1991) (quoting Crandon v. United States, 494 U.S. 152, 158, 110 S.Ct. 997, 108 L.Ed.2d 132 (1990)). In determining a statutory provision's meaning, we "may consider the purpose of the statute in its entirety, and whether the proposed interpretation would frustrate or advance that purpose." United States v. Mohrbacher, 182 F.3d 1041, 1049 (9th Cir.1999) (citations omitted).
In urging this court to reverse the district court, the Secretary and amici stress that this case involves international concerns and competing policies for protecting dolphins. That it does, but it is not our role to make policy decisions about ETP dolphin conservation. Such decisions are within Congress's bailiwick, and both the Secretary and this court must defer to congressional intent as reflected in the IDCPA.
The Required Secretarial Findings
In the section entitled "Secretarial Findings", the IDCPA mandates the Secretary's course of action: "[T]he Secretary shall ... make an initial finding regarding whether the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins with purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the [ETP]." 16 U.S.C. § 1385(g)(1) (emphasis added); see also id. § 1385(g)(2) (final finding). The common meaning of "whether" is "whichever of the two," Merriam Webster's Collegiate Dictionary (10th ed. 1993), and should be read to mean "whether or not". Therefore, the IDCPA's mandatory language required the Secretary to make an Initial Finding whether or not the purse seine net fishery was having a significant adverse impact on any depleted ETP dolphin stock.
However, urging us to read § 1385(h) [FN8] as establishing a default to the less protective label standard, the Secretary argues that he is not required to find affirmatively that there is not a significant adverse impact. The Secretary contends that if he fails to find evidence of significant adverse impact, then the less protective dolphin labeling standard will go into effect. We reject this interpretation for several reasons.
FN8. (h) Certification by captain and observer.--
(1) Unless otherwise required by paragraph (2), the certification by the captain under subsection (d)(2)(B)(i) of this section and the certification provided by the observer as specified in subsection (d)(2)(B)(ii) of this section shall be that no dolphins were killed or seriously injured during the sets in which the tuna were caught.
(2) The certification by the captain under subsection (d)(2)(B)(i) of this section and the certification provided by the observer as specified under subsection (d)(2)(B)(ii) of this section shall be that no tuna were caught on the trip in which such tuna were harvested using a purse seine net intentionally deployed on or to encircle dolphins, and that no dolphins were killed or seriously injured during the sets in which the tuna were caught, if the tuna were caught on a trip commencing--
(A) before the effective date of the initial finding by the Secretary under subsection (g)(1) of this section;
(B) after the effective date of such initial finding and before the effective date of the finding of the Secretary under subsection (g)(2) of this section, where the initial finding is that the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock; or
(C) after the effective date of the finding under subsection (g)(2) of this section, where such finding is that the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins is having a significant adverse impact on any such depleted stock.
16 U.S.C. § 1385(h).
First, the Secretary's interpretation is at odds with the statute's structure. Under § 1385(g), "Secretarial Findings," the IDCPA required the Secretary to make a finding whether or not the fishery-related activities were adversely impacting the dolphins. This finding requires a "yes" or "no" answer: "Yes," there was a significant adverse impact or "no," there was no significant adverse impact. Section 1385(h), "Certification by Captain and Observer," does not determine the parameters or scope of the Initial Finding. Nor does it change the Secretary's burden of proof as written in § 1385(g), "Secretarial Findings".
Second, Congress rejected Panama Declaration language which sought an immediate change in the dolphin safe label. It would be inconsistent with that history and congressional concern to interpret the statute as establishing the new less-protective labeling standard as the default. [FN9] Just as we may not substitute our judgment for the agency's, Overton Park, 401 U.S. at 416, 91 S.Ct. 814, the agency may not ignore Congress, Conner v. Burford, 848 F.2d 1441, 1454 (9th Cir.1988).
FN9. See Report, A.R. 2141 ("Considerable concern about the potential effects of stress caused by [purse seine nets] led to inclusion in the IDCPA of research projects directed toward assessing the prevalence and magnitude of fishery-induced stress in the dolphins targeted by this fishery."); S8299, 143 Congr. Rec. (IDCPA requires "the expeditious commencement of research to further study the effect of dolphin setting on dolphins. Tuna caught by dolphin sets may not be labeled dolphin safe until at least March 1999, at which time the Secretary of Commerce must review the preliminary results of the study, and make a determination as to whether or not dolphin setting is causing significant adverse impacts to depleted dolphin stocks in the ETP.").
Finally, this default construction should be avoided because it would lead to absurd results. Griffin v. Oceanic Contractors, Inc., 458 U.S. 564, 575, 102 S.Ct. 3245, 73 L.Ed.2d 973 (1982) (Statutory interpretations "which would produce absurd results are to be avoided if alternative interpretations consistent with the legislative purpose are available."). Such a default construction would render the required stress studies irrelevant. The use of a default does not encourage active, aggressive fact-finding and research or conclusive answers. For example, the Secretary could deliberately drag his feet in commencing studies or while conducting studies and then conclude there was insufficient evidence to warrant finding a significant adverse impact on the ETP dolphin stocks. Similarly, the Secretary could limit the studies' breadth and then discover that there was insufficient evidence to warrant finding a significant adverse impact on the ETP dolphin stocks. Following the Secretary's interpretation, under the above scenarios, the dolphin labeling standard would default to the less protective standard for the Initial Finding, because the Secretary failed to find evidence of significant adverse impact, and the less protective standard would be in place during the interim period between the Initial and Final Findings. A practical consequence of this default would be increased pressure on the Secretary to keep the same dolphin labeling standard, that is, to have the same result for the Final Finding.
We reject the Secretary's default construction and hold, as Congress required, that the Secretary must affirmatively find whether or not there is a significant adverse impact before the dolphin safe labeling standards can be relaxed.
Commencement of the Stress Studies
The deference accorded an agency's scientific or technical expertise is not unlimited. Defenders of Wildlife v. Babbitt, 958 F.Supp. 670, 679 (D.D.C.1997). The presumption of agency expertise can be rebutted when its decisions, while relying on scientific expertise, are not reasoned. Id. We defer to agency expertise on methodology issues, "unless the agency has completely failed to address some factor consideration of which was essential to [making an] informed decision." Inland Empire Pub. Lands Council v. Schultz, 992 F.2d 977, 981 (9th Cir.1993) (internal citations omitted).
The IDCPA statutory language clearly and unambiguously required the Secretary to commence a study, consisting of abundance surveys and stress studies, on October 1, 1997. [FN10] 16 U.S.C. § 1414a(a). The IDCPA provided explicit, detailed instructions for the stress studies. Additionally, the IDCPA required that:
FN10. " 'Shall' means shall." Center for Biological Diversity v. Norton, 254 F.3d 833, 837-38 (9th Cir.2001) (quoting Forest Guardians v. Babbitt, 174 F.3d 1178, 1187-88 (10th Cir.1999)); see also United States v. Monsanto, 491 U.S. 600, 607, 109 S.Ct. 2657, 105 L.Ed.2d 512 (1989) (by using "shall" "Congress could not have chosen stronger words to express its intent that forfeiture be mandatory").
Between March 1, 1999, and March 31, 1999, the Secretary shall, on the basis of the research conducted before March 1, 1999, under section 1414a of this title, information obtained under the International Dolphin Conservation Program, and any other relevant information, make an initial finding regarding whether the intentional deployment on or encirclement of dolphins with purse seine nets is having a significant adverse impact on any depleted dolphin stock in the [ETP]. 16 U.S.C. § 1385(g)(1) (emphasis added).
Trying to support his Initial Finding, which did not incorporate any stress study evidence, the Secretary asserts that the legislative history indicates that Initial Finding would be made on the basis of limited evidence. This contention is without merit. Issuing the Initial Finding using limited evidence is very different from issuing the Initial Finding without obtaining or considering any data from stress studies that are specifically required. Given the mandatory, detailed, and explicit language regarding the stress studies, the Secretary was required to conduct stress tests and consider some preliminary results prior to issuing the Initial Finding. [FN11] See, e.g., NRDC v. EPA, 966 F.2d 1292, 1300 (9th Cir.1992) ("This court must uphold adherence to the law, and cannot condone the failure of an executive agency to conform to express statutory requirements.").
FN11. Accordingly, the Secretary's assertion, that he had discretion to schedule the stress studies after the Initial Finding, is also without merit. This contention conflicts with the plain statutory terms (§ 1414a (requiring stress studies); § 1385(g)(1) (requiring Initial Finding to use § 1414a research)) and is not accorded deference. See, e.g., Board of Governors of the Fed. Reserve Sys. v. Dimension Fin. Corp., 474 U.S. 361, 368, 106 S.Ct. 681, 88 L.Ed.2d 691 (1986).
The Stress Studies
The Secretary contends that the district court erroneously found that NMFS failed to comport with the spirit and the letter of the law by unreasonably delaying the stress studies and failing to collect, analyze, and report on any stress study data. We reject this contention.
In determining whether NMFS unreasonably delayed the stress studies, 5 U.S.C. § 706(1), we balance the following "TRAC" factors:
(1) the time agencies take to make decisions must be governed by a "rule of reason"[;] (2) where Congress has provided a timetable or other indication of the speed with which it expects the agency to proceed in the enabling statute, that statutory scheme may supply content for this rule of reason [;] (3) delays that might be reasonable in the sphere of economic regulation are less tolerable when human health and welfare are at stake [;] (4) the court should consider the effect of expediting delayed action on agency activities of a higher or competing priority[;] (5) the court should also take into account the nature and extent of the interests prejudiced by the delay[;] and (6) the court need not "find any impropriety lurking behind agency lassitude in order to hold that agency action is unreasonably delayed."
Independence Mining Co. v. Babbitt, 105 F.3d 502, 507 n. 7 (9th Cir.1997) (quoting Telecommunications Research & Action v. FCC (TRAC), 750 F.2d 70, 80 (D.C.Cir.1984) (citations omitted)).
The IDCPA required a literature review of relevant stress-related research, a three-year series of dolphin necropsy samples obtained by commercial vessels, a one-year review of relevant historical demographic and biological data, and an experiment involving the repeated chasing and capturing of dolphins by means of intentional encirclement. 16 U.S.C. § 1414a(a). At the time of the Initial Finding, NMFS had commenced and completed only the literature review. NMFS, which had not conducted any research on the three required studies, provided brief overviews on and updates of the three studies (necropsy study, one-year historical study, and chase and recapture project) in the report.
(1) Necropsy Study: The necropsy study "involves placing trained necropsy technicians onboard commercial tuna vessels to collect tissue samples from dolphins killed in the ETP fishery." Report at 5. "Collection of these tissue samples requires that technicians be placed onboard non-U.S. tuna vessels fishing on dolphins because U.S. vessels currently do not fish on dolphins in the ETP." Id. "Mexico had agreed to participate in the necropsy sampling program," and "work with NMFS to conduct a pilot necropsy study." Id. at vi, 5. In a December 10, 1998, necropsy meeting, Mexican representatives "repeatedly express[ed] strong commitment to facilitating the necropsy program to the full extent possible" and identified four appropriate fishing vessels, along with reporting that additional vessels would be available in the future. By the time of the Initial Finding, the only activity related to the necropsy study that had taken place was a three-day training session for technicians in January 19-21, 1999.
The Secretary argues unconvincingly that NMFS could not obtain necropsy samples due to a lack of cooperation. NMFS did not request cooperation in a timely fashion, waiting until May 1998, seven months after the IDCPA directed NMFS to begin the study, to first request assistance. Thereafter, the record and Report to Congress indicate Mexico's continued enthusiasm and willingness to cooperate. Moreover, the "lack of cooperation argument" does not explain why NMFS could begin necropsy sampling only after, rather than before, the Initial Finding. Finally, given Mexico's cooperation, the Secretary fails to show that the study's alleged complexity prevented NMFS from promptly commencing the study and obtaining preliminary data.
(2) One-Year Historical Study: "The intent of the historical and demographic data project is to assess the potential of existing archived samples from the fishery for determining fishery-related stress in ETP dolphins and to proceed with the most promising apparent avenues of research utilizing the samples." Report at 6. "The [sample] archive includes several thousand samples for each year and consists of reproductive organs, teeth, blood stains, and skin. In addition, over 500 biopsy samples (skin samples taken by retrievable dart) were taken during the 1998 abundance survey in the ETP." Id. NMFS noted that "[t]hese samples, while not necessarily ideal for all purposes, represent a readily available source of material for examination." The record does not demonstrate, and the Secretary cannot explain, why readily available preliminary results from the one-year historical study were not used for the Initial Finding.
(3) Chase and Recapture Research Project: "The chase-recapture samples are intended to provide information about dynamic changes in physiological systems affected by chase, capture and release." Report at 7. NMFS held a planning workshop for the chase and recapture research project in July 1997, before the IDCPA was enacted. In the Report to Congress, NMFS asserted that because of the "especially complex" nature of this project, it would "initiate additional formal research planning in mid-1999" and conduct the experiment between February and April 2001. NMFS did not explain why it chose to wait two years before initiating additional research planning. And NMFS's assertions about complexity do not explain why it could not have obtained preliminary results.
Congress mandated that the agency make an Initial Finding on the basis of the specific research prescribed in 16 U.S.C. § 1414a, including stress studies. The record fails to show any compliance or valid excuse for the failure to comply. The Secretary's emphasis on other work completed before the Initial Finding, including the mandatory abundance study, the stress literature review, and environmental variability analysis is irrelevant. Completion of other studies does not relieve the Secretary from progressing with clearly mandated studies. Applying the TRAC factors, it is clear that the Secretary unreasonably delayed the stress studies.
The agency invoked the lack of stress-related information to trigger a change in the dolphin-safe label standard. This puts the cart before the horse. The agency was required by law to conduct stress research as a prerequisite to its decision making. By failing to obtain and consider preliminary data from any of the mandated stress research projects before the Initial Finding, the Secretary unreasonably delayed action. 5 U.S.C. § 706(1). In addition, by failing to obtain and consider preliminary data from any of the mandated stress research projects in its Initial Finding, the Secretary abused his discretion, and acted arbitrarily and capriciously and not in accordance with the law, 5 U.S.C. § 706(2)(A) & (D). See Southwest Ctr. for Biological Diversity, 100 F.3d at 1448 (agency action may be arbitrary and capricious where the agency has "entirely failed to consider an important aspect of the problem").
The Best Available Scientific Evidence Standard
Scientific findings in marine mammal conservation area are often necessarily made from incomplete or imperfect information. The Secretary and Earth Island agree that the Initial Finding was to be determined using the "best available evidence" standard. Cf. Conner, 848 F.2d at 1454 (with best available data standard Congress required agency to consider the scientific information presently available and intended to give "the benefit of the doubt to the species"); Am. Tunaboat Ass'n v. Baldrige, 738 F.2d 1013 (9th Cir.1984) (discussing best available evidence standard under MMPA); Earth Island Inst. v. Brown, 865 F.Supp. 1364, 1373 n. 10 (N.D.Cal.1994) (discussing MMPA and concluding that there is no "indication that Congress intended to render all depletion determinations irrelevant simply because the available data may not always be complete or precise"). However, the Secretary determined that there was insufficient information to determine whether the fishery was having a significant adverse impact on the ETP dolphin stock. That determination was contrary to law and an abuse of his discretion.
The Endangered Species Act requires agencies to make determinations on the basis of the best scientific data available. Thus, a review of ESA case law provides insightful and analogous provisions and analysis. In Conner v. Burford, 848 F.2d 1441, 1454 (9th Cir.1988), this court held that an agency's claim of insufficient information to prepare comprehensive biological opinions violated the ESA requirement that opinions use best data available, and ordered the agency to comply with the ESA requirement. See also Greenpeace v. Nat'l Marine Fisheries Serv., 55 F.Supp.2d 1248, 1261-62 (W.D.Wash.1999) (best scientific data available standard requires less than conclusive proof; Secretary must issue biological opinion); Defenders of Wildlife v. Babbitt, 958 F.Supp. 670, 679-81 (D.D.C.1997) (Secretary must determine whether any species is threatened or endangered using the best available evidence).
As shown in the Report, the available information from the mandated abundance study and the stress literature review indicated that the fishery was having a significant adverse impact on the dolphin stocks. The abundance survey revealed that the dolphins were not recovering at expected levels, while the stress literature indicated that "stress resulting from chase and capture in the ETP tuna purse-seine fishery could have a population level effect on one or more dolphin stocks." The record and the Report do not provide any contradictory conclusions, and NMFS was unable to attribute the failure to recover to any source other than the fishery. In fact, NMFS specifically ruled out the only potential non-fishery explanation for the slow population recovery-a large scale change in the ocean environment. Here, all of the evidence indicated that dolphins were adversely impacted by the fishery.
Given the best available evidence standard and IDCPA's statutory mandate to determine whether or not the chase and netting of dolphins are having a significant adverse impact on the depleted ETP dolphin stocks, the Secretary cannot use insufficient evidence as an excuse for failing to comply with the statutory requirement. See, e.g., Conner, 848 F.2d at 1454; Comm. for Humane Legislation Inc. v. Richardson, 540 F.2d 1141, 1150 (D.C.Cir.1976) (NMFS's assertion that "there is no evidence that the porpoise populations would substantially increase or decrease as a result of the ... reissuance of general permit" to set nets on dolphins was "not responsive" to statutory mandate). By claiming insufficiency of evidence, the Secretary acted contrary to law and abused his discretion. 5 U.S.C. § 706(2).
IV. Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the district court's grant of summary judgment for Earth Island is AFFIRMED.


The 950733 Contemporary Accent Cabinet with Geometric Design by Scott Living at Ruby Gordon Home in the Rochester, Henrietta, Greece, Monroe County, New York area. Product availability may vary. Contact us for the most current availability on this product.


Our mission is to meet our customer's total expectations by providing quality insurance products at a fair price to our valuable retail broker network and their insureds in a service oriented manner.
Since 2004, Shield Commercial Insurance Services has specialized in providing insurance products through our extensive broker network. We do not provide services directly to the public, only through our appointed brokers. We have forged relationships with highly rated insurance carriers in order to provide the highest quality product available in the marketplace. We have made it our mission to provide our brokers the simplest path to obtaining these products through the use of cutting edge technology and personal quality customer service. The majority of our staff has been with us from the founding of the company. You will find them extremely knowledgeable and friendly. We pride ourselves on making every effort to ensure you are completely satisfied each and every time you have contact with us.
If you are new to Shield we welcome you. If you are a current partner we thank you.


Let us help make planning your next getaway easy.
Explore around and allow us to take the guess work out of planning and start counting down the days to your beach escape!
Where would we suggest you travel to next?
We're passionate about the beach and have traveled along many coastlines. We can give you our personal recommendations on hotels, airlines, restaurants, things to do and much more.
Here are some of our favorite places.
We want traveling to be fun and affordable. We've got your back and will be constantly checking to assure you the best price.
Ready to see your trip itinerary? We've made it easy. We'll book your trip and send you your unique travel itinerary.
No problem, we'll keep it updated for you!
We have options for you to make sure you're covered.
Check out your options here.
The staff at Your Beach Travels made my trip planning so easy!


text:
Environmental organization holds fundraising concert
Laura Tichy-Smith
Special to Coastal Life
It's not often you get the chance to contribute to the genesis of something that could have a major impact upon your community. On Saturday, Sept. 12, you have the chance to attend the startup fundraising concert for Cypress Cove Conservancy, a new environmental organization with the mission to purchase and preserve listed and endangered species habitat land in Southwest Florida.
"We know many people moved here because of the beautiful natural ecosystem, but in 15 years, it will be like we're living in Miami," said Bobbie Lee Gruninger, president of the new Cypress Cove Conservancy.
Gruninger said the new organization has completed the paperwork necessary to become a nonprofit and now needs to raise the funds to file the application and begin operations. She said the startup donations become tax deductible retroactively once nonprofit status is granted.
The suggested donation for the startup party admission is $25, although Gruninger said the organization would accept smaller donations, particularly from environmentally minded people who might be willing to volunteer. She also said the group would be happy to accept larger admission donations.
Although there already are a number of other environmental organizations in the area, she said this new one is needed to fulfill a specific purpose not addressed by the others.
"I've been on lots of different environmental organization boards," Gruninger said. "We fight to protect pieces, but overall, we're losing the battle. The only way to protect the land from development pressures is to own it."
Gruninger said the protection of a specific piece of land prompted the formation of the new organization. A 200-acre piece of private property known for rare plant species as well as for sightings of bears, panthers and red-cockaded woodpeckers that is located near the Florida Panther National Wildlife Refuge has come onto the real estate market. The elderly owner wants the land preserved, but developers have shown interest in the property.
"I have tried to get the 200 acres purchased for two years," Gruninger said. "Conservation Collier has it on their list, but they don't have the funds. I tried The Trust for Public Land, but they don't have the money. The Conservancy of Southwest Florida doesn't buy land. Developers are trying to buy it. Eventually that land is going to be gone, and it will be over."
Gruninger said the organization's plan is to start by purchasing the initial 200 acres for conservation and then piece together other parcels to create a corridor for wildlife. She said these preserves for wildlife are needed because development incursions into the wildlife's habitat are creating human-wildlife conflicts in which the wild creatures that have been displaced from their homes frequently suffer harm. Gruninger said regional off-site mitigation areas funded by developers and intended to offset the environmental impact of development do little to reduce the territorial conflicts.
"It lets developers buy mitigation credits hundreds of miles away, but that doesn't help the animals," she said. "That's why they are running through the subdivisions."
Two bands will be donating their time to the fundraiser — Freedom Evolving, a world blues and native chill band from Naples, and Natural Spirit, an eclectic, rhythmic Florida folk duo from Lehigh Acres.
"Our main focus is the environment," said Heidi Heinrich of Natural Spirit. "We live on the edge of Lehigh, so we're surrounded by nature. We always encourage audience participation at our shows. We hand out instruments, such as shakers, tambourines and drums, and teach Native American chants. That's the original American folk music."
Heinrich said Natural Spirit is part of a long tradition of Florida folk musicians who have sung about the natural beauty of the state. As such, she said that the philosophy of Native Spirit's music aligns with the work of the Cypress Cove Conservancy.
"Bobbie Lee is not a flash in the pan," Heinrich said. "Ellen Peterson (the late local environmentalist) trained her, and she's here for the long haul. We've seen so many beautiful places we love fall under the bulldozer. If people were more aware, we could live with nature, like with installing cougar underpasses. But because we're not coexisting, we need to buy the land. It's not cheap to buy land, but it's the best way to preserve it."
Gruninger said people shouldn't feel powerless to protect nature because they only have small amounts of money to donate.
"It all adds up," she said. "This is a grass-roots organization, and we're looking for it to be big. If we add up all the small amounts of money, we'll have millions to buy land. We're trying to do something positive to make an impact for future generations."
The new organization needs volunteers, particularly those with talents in running marketing, fundraising and social media campaigns.
"Please come and tell us about yourself," Gruninger said. "Come to the party to meet us and find out what we're about. This organization is about bringing people together to do something really great for our community and for the future of this area."
Connect with this writer: @Laura TichySmith (Twitter)
What: Cypress Cove Conservancy Startup Party
When: 4-9 p.m. Saturday, Sept. 12
Where: Northeast of Naples (directions provided upon making reservations)
Reservations: 777-0186; bleegruninger@comcast.net
Suggested donation: $25 (includes hors d'oevurs)
Info: cypresscoveconservancy.com
Suggested: Beach chair or blanket, insect repellent, light jacket

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaCommonCrawl


Home Match Our Spurs team to face Man Utd – What's yours?
Our Spurs team to face Man Utd – What's yours?
Spurs face Manchester United today and Mauricio Pochettino could have the opportunity to field his strongest side.
If Jan Vertonghen has passed his fitness test he will be available to face United. There is a debate as to whether it makes sense to disrupt the back four considering that Kevin Wimmer has been playing so well in Vertonghen's absence, but we can't see the point of postponing the inevitable if the Belgian is fit.
The other change we'd like to see is Erik Lamela returning to the right in place of Heung-Min Son. Here's our Spurs team to face Manchester United. What's yours?
That's the dream team alright but I'd be surprised if MoPo drops Wimmer for Verthongen straight off the bat in a game of this importance, bearing in mind how long Verts has been out for.
That's as good a team as any in the PL. All we need now is similar strength off the bench.


Every end marks a new beginning. And if you are a Bengali or have lived in Bengal, you can totally relate to this statement and the pompous celebrations the Bengali Naba Varsha brings in its wake every April. Fondly called Poila Basakh, this occasion calls for carrying forward the age-old, yet fast fading, Bengali traditions, whether in rituals or delicacies.
On Poila Basakh that signifies the first day of the first month of the year (according to Bengali calendar) which this year will fall on April 15, 2018, the people of West Bengal, regardless of race, religion or political color greet each other openly, often with sweets and savories. Many also visit temples and other religious places seeking God's blessings for a happy and prosperous new year.
As a form of cultural event people take out morning processions called Pravat Feri, chanting religious mantras, along with spiritual songs, sung by participants. People invite friends and relations for a sumptuous dinner at night too. In fact, the whole day is spent in happy and peaceful ambience, men and women temporarily overlooking the ravages of contemporary hectic life.
While Poila Basakh is a celebratory occasion, the heat and humidity of April also make it a breeding ground for unhealthy diseases arising from kitchen insects such as roaches. I as a mother am extra conscious when it comes to cleanliness and hygiene in my cooking space as bad health or disease can occur if you consume food cooked in unhygienic kitchen. So, make sure your kitchen is one of the cleanest spaces in your home. Only keeping your utensils cleans is not enough; you have to rid your kitchen of roaches and other harmful bacteria. Generally, cockroaches hide in cracks and crevices which can generally not be reached during regular kitchen cleaning. Therefore, I make sure that I clean the kitchen thoroughly and I use Godrej Hit, which is now available in a fresh fragrance, as it is not only effective in terminating these disease spreading cockroaches, but its long nozzle helps me to disinfect even the deepest corners in the kitchen.
While I am not originally a Bengali, being married and then moving to and residing in Kolkata has made me a Bengali at heart. So every year, on the occasion of Poila Basakh, I make a special Bengali delicacy, which my husband has been enjoying ever since he was a child. Continuing the legacy, I will be preparing the dish this year as well, which my kids also enjoy. If you are wondering how to make your Poila Basakh special and flavourful, you too can try my recipe out.
Take a large bowl and pour maida in it.
Add salt, sugar and 2 tsp oil into it.
By gradually using enough and sufficient water make stiff but pliable dough.
Make small balls of the dough and spread little oil on it so that while rolling it will not stick with the rollers.
Take one ball of dough and roll it out into 5 to 6 inches round.
Heat oil in a pan until it becomes very hot. Put luchi and slightly press the top of it with a spatula so that it will swell up like a ball.
This should take only a few seconds. Flip the luchi over and cook the other side until golden brown.
Serve hot with curries,meethi cholar dal or vegetables.
1) You can Cover the dough with damp cloth and set aside.


text:
Q: How can I know how many archived logs are saved? In /var/log/apt, I am seeing:
$ /var/log/apt $ ls -l
total 100
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  3343 Feb 14 22:34 history.log
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  2156 Jan 31 06:03 history.log.1.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  1288 Dec 31 11:14 history.log.2.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root  3232 Nov 27 07:22 history.log.3.gz
-rw-r--r-- 1 root root 18813 Oct 31 07:11 history.log.4.gz
-rw-r----- 1 root adm  20475 Feb 14 22:34 term.log
-rw-r----- 1 root adm   4862 Jan 31 06:03 term.log.1.gz
-rw-r----- 1 root adm   3685 Dec 31 11:14 term.log.2.gz
-rw-r----- 1 root adm   9058 Nov 27 07:22 term.log.3.gz
-rw-r----- 1 root adm  12452 Oct 31 07:11 term.log.4.gz

It looks like history.log is being archived once a month.
Because history.log and its archives are important to me, I want to know:

*

*how many archives will be stored before the oldest is deleted?

*where is this information located?

*can I change the settings to increase the number of logs stored? (Going from the file sizes and my usage of apt-get, I am not concerned about disk space.)

Thank you.

A: That is all handled by logrotate. Read man lograte, and look at your /etc/logrotate.conf.

A: Useful information is in /etc/logrotate.d. To see how logs relating to apt are handled, look at /etc/logrotate.d/apt. On my system, I see:
$ /etc/logrotate.d $ cat apt
/var/log/apt/term.log {
  rotate 12
  monthly
  compress
  missingok
  notifempty
}

/var/log/apt/history.log {
  rotate 12
  monthly
  compress
  missingok
  notifempty
}

And, according to http://manpages.ubuntu.com/manpages/saucy/man8/logrotate.8.html, rotate 12 would mean that logrotate would be run twelve times at monthly intervals before the oldest archive is deleted.
Obviously then, editing /etc/logrotate.d/apt to modify rotate 12 to a desired value is the solution in this case.

redpajama_set_name: RedPajamaStackExchange


Legislation to impose a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax on motor vehicles that travel 5,000 or more miles per year died when the legislature adjourned for the year.
Legislation to impose a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax on motor vehicles that travel 5,000 or more miles per year died when the legislature adjourned for the year. The VMT tax would have been calculated by charging $0.01 per mile driven during the inspection period minus the estimated fuel taxes paid by the vehicle's owner. The actual VMT would have been measured using an annual odometer inspection. As gas tax revenues decrease due to hybrid and electric-vehicle ownership, states are looking for new sources of funding for pet projects.


This 21:9 UltraWide QHD display offers visual comfort and ensures amazing viewing pleasure. There is no color shift or distortion of color at all. Inspired by the beauty and power of nature, the ArcLine completes the design with a refined aesthetic flair.
21:9 UltraWide QHD display offers visual comfort and ensures amazing viewing pleasure. There is no color shift or distortion of color at all.
You are guaranteed an immersive artwork. Color calibration tests are conducted on the production line to ensure color accuracy.
LG 34UC88 - LED monitor - curved - 34"


text:
Blade Runner 2049 : The Politics of Hollywood Hacks
Columnist Fired for Stating Sex Is Binary
How Not to Do It . . .
Pro-Life New England Patriots Player Benjamin Watson to Release Abortion Documentary
Idaho Legislator to Introduce Bill Banning Biological Males from Women's Sports
What Is the Point of the 'Women's March'?
In Defense of Zachary Evans: A Reply to David French
Denver Post Columnist Claims He Was Fired for Insisting There Are Only Two Sexes
MLK Day Thoughts: It's Not the Economy, Stupid
Please, Can We Pause for the Death of a Wife and Mother of Two?
In Montreal, Egyptian Mummies, in 3-D, Have Secrets to Share
People Make New Orleans
Who's Itching to Watch a New Documentary about Hillary Clinton?
Happily Ever After — Even in Hollywood
By Armond White
About Armond White
Follow Armond White on Twitter
Ryan Gosling in Blade Runner 2049 (Photo: Alcon Ent.)
Dystopia fatigue sets in, and boredom results.
The highly stylized 1982 science-fiction film Blade Runner was probably an influence on 2046, Wong Kar-wai's wondrous, poetic art-movie investigation into a science-fiction writer's romantic history with several women. Now it appears that 2046 has, in turn, influenced the reboot of remake-crazy Hollywood's Blade Runner, which appends a random date to its otherwise pointless title: "Blade Runner 2049."
Here, the conflict between human police and replicants (rogue robots who long to be human) gets replayed by K (Ryan Gosling), an officer whose trek into the future's vast wastelands repeats the same mission — and the same turquoise-tinted miasma — depicted in the original film. Once again, the job is to terminate unruly replicants, but this time they must stop an impending revolution.
The replicants in Blade Runner 2049 present no political allegory (unless panic-stricken viewers see Antifa clones — inhuman despoilers of liberty — under every bed), but their conflict with K revives a problem that already existed in the first film, based on Philip K. Dick's novel Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?: The man-vs.-robot concept is banal except to those who admire Dick's dystopian fantasy as prophecy.
There is a political problem when sci-fi fantasy trivializes technological complexity (whether social media or artificial intelligence) and then makes matters of intercommunication and self-knowledge, such as K's internal crisis, a tiresome predicament. Hollywood fails its social and artistic purpose. Yet something about Blade Runner appeals to the imagination of sci-fi fans who can't get enough of it and to filmmakers such as Wong and now director Denis Villeneuve, who get caught up in its chic, mysterious clichés.
In Blade Runner 2049, dystopia fatigue is unavoidable: Pollution and culture-mixing of whites, blacks, Asians, and Latinos still plague mankind's future, although K takes it all in stride (in his flying patrol car). K is so hopelessly alienated that his only relief is to employ a hologram, Joi (pouty Ana de Armas), who willingly goes from domestic servant to sex worker. In the most interesting stunt, Joi and a hooker-spy named Luv (Sylvia Hoeks) form an interlink to dupe K into simulating physical intimacy. But this disingenuous scene will disappoint anyone who remembers how Wong's 2046 delved into desire, sexuality, and personal ethics through a man's sensual recalling of his troubled love life (plus the passionate, unforgettable performances by Tony Leung, Ziyi Zhang, Gong Li, and Faye Wong). To depict human sexuality less sensitively than Wong does (and as simplemindedly as in Ex Machina) minimizes Blade Runner's poetic potential, and it doesn't enlarge Villeneuve's artistic potential, either.
Look at the failure in cultural terms: Ridley Scott's reputation was made 35 years ago by Blade Runner's canny mix of sci-fi and film-noir nostalgia. Its story roused anxiety about the past and future as embodied by replicant-hunter Deckard — Harrison Ford, direct from Star Wars and Raiders of the Lost Ark, in his first major adult role.
The illusion of zeitgeist seriousness was based primarily on the visual extravagance Scott learned from his work as an advertising wizard. That first nighttime cityscape of a despoiled, rain-drenched Los Angeles was breathtaking, like a dense, upside-down vision of a faraway galaxy. Scott made the basic detective plot sumptuous and visually textured. He furnished aesthetic surprises in the retro/futurist design, and either pathos or tragedy in the hunted-down replicants themselves — Sean Young's teary Rachael, Daryl Hannah's muscular Pris, Joanna Cassidy's voluptuous Zhora, and Rutger Hauer as the platinum blond arch-replicant Roy Batty, who, like the most compelling film-noir villains, seemed a projection of the hero's dark side, given fallen-angel profundity in a poetic farewell speech.
Yet Blade Runner's legacy was trashed by Scott himself when he authorized a "director's cut" that repudiated the film's poignancy by making Deckard just another replicant. I saw Scott confess his hypocrisy at a Museum of Modern Art tribute from the advertising industry — he renounced any artistic commitment to the film and upheld the prerogative of studio executives who altered the narrative simply to exploit additional sales.
Thus, Blade Runner is, infamously, the most compromised of any modern film project that some regard as an artistic work. Scott's role as producer of Blade Runner 2049 confirms that this sequel, like his director's cut, will also be a dubious proposition. The human-or-replicant question doesn't satisfy the current zeitgeist ruled by Marvel and Pixar, because the art-or-junk issue remains unresolved. (That same crisis plagues Zack Snyder's removal from DC Comics films.)
Blade Runner 2049's problem stems from more than its nearly three-hour length. It starts with director Villeneuve, a once-promising surveyor of political and spiritual matters (Incendies, Prisoners, Sicario) who is now taking his place in the long history of hackdom, alongside Scott. Villeneuve does nothing with K's initial thought: "To be born is to have a soul, I guess." The impassive Gosling lacks the existential cool needed to carry that "soul" line. He's told, "You've never seen a miracle." But K's human–replicant opposition, staged as a loud, brutal fight with Dave Bautista as a scarily imposing replicant, doesn't answer that challenge. Scott made Blade Runner look miraculous; but, except for a couple of extraordinary images (falling snow melting in the palm of K's calloused hand and a pet dog watching as drones carry his master off into the distance), Villeneuve never strikes the moral terror that has distinguished his best films.
When K's encounter with Ford's Deckard finally occurs, Villeneuve forfeits the emotional power of the parent-child reunion one expects for a series of ridiculous last-minute hazards. This ending is cheap. When a subsidiary character announces, "There's a bit of every artist in their work," it doesn't justify Villeneuve selling out his usual grasp toward profundity. (The subplot of an underground revolution led by Hiam Abbass as a one-eyed radical evokes Incendies, but it's a frustrating distraction.)
Because Villeneuve has submitted to Scott's director's-cut pseudo-profundity, he loses the chance to make Blade Runner 2049 mean something in the current moral upheaval, in which dystopia and the distance between humans and apparatchiks are everyday realities. Ultimately, Villeneuve's sequel is more ultra-hack Scott than visionary Wong. Blade Runner's awesomeness is gone.
The Florida Project represents a new low in class condescension. Director Sean Baker follows Halley (Bria Vinaite), an unwed mother covered in tats and lip-piercings and wearing ripped Daisy Dukes, who hustles to pay her bill at a low-rent resident motel on the outskirts of Disney World in Orlando. Baker's style is familiar from TV's "ratched" reality shows. Tangerine, his 2016 debut famously shot on an iPhone, similarly gawked at Los Angeles transsexuals as fascinating, irresponsible sociopaths.
Baker's new exploitation mode includes lurid, nursery-school pastels and ragamuffin kids who curse, vandalize, and set fires. Halley's foul-mouthed daughter Moonee (Brooklynn Prince) apparently never goes to school, but Baker teaches us the delights of childhood poverty when Moonee and her motel peers consume jelly sandwiches and look at rainbows and fireworks from afar. This juvenile emphasis exposes Baker's dishonesty; it's classic liberal patronizing to regard poor folk as children. When the do-gooder motel manager Bobby (Willem Dafoe) criticizes Halley, she screams, "You're not my father!" — implicitly blaming patriarchy for her slatternly behavior. When Halley dislodges her sanitary napkin and throws the bloody item at Bobby, she evidently earns Baker's admiration for being a Nasty Woman.
Halley passes immature self-pity on to her daughter, whom Baker rewards with a trip to Disney World in a closing fantasy scene. It's intended to jerk tears, like feeding a hungry child, but Moonee's unstructured freeloader life already amounted to living Disney World everyday, so the fantasy ending is pointless.
Baker loves irresponsible, antisocial types, and his method is similarly undisciplined. Most scenes are wild confrontations, and even those end wordlessly, with a shrug. Baker's most expressive gimmick is his zooming in for a close-up of Halley's tonsils as she screams an obscenity at the unfair world — a world to which she and Baker contribute nothing.
Armond White, a film critic, writes about movies for National Review and is the author of New Position: The Prince Chronicles. @3xchair
More in Film & TV
Happily Ever After — Even in Hollywood	Happily Ever After — Even in Hollywood
1917: War as Video Game and Ceremony	1917: War as Video Game and Ceremony
Don't Do Dolittle	Don't Do Dolittle
Movie Awards: So Male, So White, So What?	Movie Awards: So Male, So White, So What?


text:
Councilwoman Shivali Shah
Proudly Representing Ward 2 in Mount Rainier, MD
How to Be Heard
Word From The Ward
Halloween Edition
Police Investigation Edition
Shivali's Word from the Ward- Police Investigation Edition
With the announcement of Chief Michael Scott's retirement, the questions on everyone's mind are
What is happening with the city's investigation into the police department?
Who will be our next chief of police?
Why can't we know more now?
You are receiving the "Word from the Ward" because you are on my email list. I represent Ward 2, but in a city of this size, most issues are issues of concern throughout the city. The Word from the Ward recipient list consists of residents of Ward 2 as well as residents of Ward 1, business owners, and other individuals interested in the area. If you would like to be added or removed from the list, please let me know.
If you have any questions for me, please email me at Shivali@ShivaliShah.com.
(My council email address: SShah@MountRainierMD.org forwards to the above address).
Or you may email your entire council at Council@MountRainierMD.org – this email address forwards your email to the personal email address of all 5 members of council (Miles, Knedler, Chesek, Benitez, and Shah).
I do not regularly check public social media like public listservs, message boards, Facebook and Twitter and even then may not get to read everything. But I DO respond to my email and direct requests to meet to discuss issues of concern to our community.
Thank you to those who contacted me personally – via email, in person, or via telephone- to ask me questions or share your concerns about the police department. The answers to these questions are of interest to our entire community so I wrote it in this format instead of responding individually. The statements made here are my own and do not represent (or not represent) those of anyone else. I have aggregated some of the questions I have received and done my best in putting together some useful information. This does not cover all that I have to say on the matter or all that there is to say on the matter. This is part of an on-going discussion.
Update on the Police Dept Investigation
The investigations in the Mount Rainier Police Department are ongoing. I understand that it feels like it has taken a long time. However, sometimes police investigations can take months or longer. There is no finite period of time.
Some have expressed the feeling that it would be better to wait until after the investigations are over to talk about any of it. I understand the many good reasons for waiting- there is a lot we cannot answer, we do not want any interference with the investigations, we have to respect the privacy of the employees involved, and other good and reasonable reasons. However, I respectfully disagree for 2 reasons:
The amount of time these investigations have been taking and may continue to take is too long for the public to wait to have general context, and
There is some information that we can share that is not confidential or protected. This information will help give context even if it cannot answer ALL questions.
For me, as long as information does not fall into one of these 3 categories, it should be shared with the public-
does not needlessly violate the privacy of the MRPD employees involved,
does not needlessly expose the city to reasonable litigation, and
does not interfere or potentially interfere with the current investigations.
Some things require context which is hard to do via this medium, but I will do the best I can. What I am writing is not ALL there is to say on any of the individual matters, but it will at least give some more information about the current situation.
Question: What is happening at the moment with the investigation into MRPD?
Answer: It is our responsibility to make sure that allegations that have been brought before us are adequately investigated. Currently, the Mayor and Council have authorized 2 investigations into the Mount Rainier Police Department: financial and personnel. We are not conducting the investigations ourselves, but rather have secured the right type of third party entities / professionals to conduct these investigations so that they can present us with findings.
The city can only conduct administrative investigations, not criminal. The city is not in a position to "file criminal charges" against anyone. That is the job of other government bodies.
Question: Are criminal charges begin brought against anyone?
Short Answer: It is too soon to tell. We need to wait until the investigations are over.
Long answer: After we were made aware of the allegations, we directed our city attorney to contact the State's Attorney's Office for Prince George's County. At that point, in the first couple of weeks of April, we had no idea what would be uncovered and we wanted to be prepared. We also wanted to make sure that any documents that could be considered evidence were handled properly and remained secure.
So, to be clear, the State's Attorney's Office did NOT find out on their own or through the media and come knocking on our door. Our city attorney initiated contact with the State's Attorney's Office for Prince George's County at our instruction and on our behalf (and well before the media reported anything on April 23). We wanted to make sure we were doing what we needed to in case evidence was uncovered that rose to the level of criminal charges being filed against any person.
At the moment, the State's Attorney's Office is aware of the basic outline of the issues involved. They are not actively investigating at the moment. They have spoken about the nature of the issues involved with our city attorney and some staff members, including members of the police department. They are awaiting the results of the city's investigations as well.
Once we are presented with findings from the investigations, we can share them with the State's Attorney's Office. From there, they will make a determination about how their office will proceed.
Question: So if the State's Attorney is not actively investigating right now, who is?
Investigation into Financial Matters
In the closed session meetings of Mayor and Council dated April 6 and April 10, 2018, information on financial irregularities in MRPD were brought before us. On April 11, 2018, seven members of the MRPD were put on administrative leave: the Chief of Police, 4 administrative staff, and 2 sworn officers. Only one of these officers was a patrol officer. First Sergeant Stephen Malley, a 30 year veteran of the MRPD, became Acting Chief. Despite the rumors that were spread, our patrol capacity remained unchanged. Even though we could ask neighboring jurisdiction for patrol assistance, in this case, there was no need. The administrative office of the MRPD, however, was closed for a period of time. After a couple of weeks, it was reopened with the return of 2 of the administrative employees.
The Mayor and Council directed staff to get bids and recommend a forensic accounting firm to help with the investigation into financial matters in the police department. Since then, the city has retained an accounting firm that is now reviewing police department documents, policies, and procedures and interviewing staff on a specific set of financial matters within the police department. Certain documents and equipment have been removed from the MRPD and have been secured elsewhere to maintain integrity of the investigation.
In the course of the city looking into the initial financial matter brought before us, other financial issues came to light. These are being investigated also.
Investigation into an Equal Employment Opportunity Type of Complaint
About the same time, an Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) type of complaint was filed against several employees of the MRPD.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission protects federal employees and job applicants from discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information. It also protects federal employees from retaliation if an employee opposes employment discrimination, files a complaint of discrimination, or participates in the EEO complaint process.
The City of Mount Rainier is a small municipal body, not federal, and does not have an equivalent EEO Commission. (Neither does any other small city). After being advised by our city attorney, the Mayor and Council directed our city attorney to research and make recommendations to hire an investigator experienced in EEO and related investigations to conduct interviews and an investigation for the City of Mount Rainier. Since then, the City has retained such an investigator and that investigator is in the process of conducting the investigation and will present findings to the City. After the findings are made available to us, we can provide an Executive Summary to the public.
Question: Has a complaint been filed in this matter outside the city level?
Answer: No.
Law Enforcement Officers' Bill of Rights
Sworn police officers are afforded protections under the LawEnforcementOfficers'BillofRights(LEOBR). LEOBR is meant to protect law enforcement officers during an investigation that could lead to discipline by providing a proscribed framework. It mandates that the investigation must be done within particular parameters before the employer can make a decision about disciplining an officer and before the employer can actually discipline the officer. Among other things, it means that they can only be investigated by other law enforcement officers.
Of the MRPD members who were on administrative leave, we have several types of employees involved.
Sworn police officers- Sworn police officers are protected under LEOBR. Most of the officers in our department are also members of the Fraternal Order of Police (FOP), also known as the police union.
Administrative staff- administrative staff in the MRPD are civilian employees. They are not police officers. They are currently not in the union. They do not fall under the LEOBR system. In that sense, they are more akin to the employees in every other city department.
Chief of Police- The position of Chief of Police is a special case. Though a sworn officer, the chief of police is an at-will position in the city and is not subjected to LEOBR.
The city attorney has secured the assistance of another police department in Maryland, but outside Prince George's County, to conduct the interviews of the two sworn officers so that their rights under LEOBR may be respected.
Question: What is going on with those employees on Paid Administrative Leave?
Answer: 2 of the staff members who were on administrative leave have returned to work. Now that Chief Scott has retired, as of today, there are 4 members of the Police Dept still on paid administrative leave. 2 of them are police officers, 2 are administrative staff.
Question: Why can't we know exactly what the allegations are or against whom allegations have been made? These are public employees, and a matter of public concern, and so this should be public information.
Answer: The Maryland Public Information Act (PIA) governs the inspection of government records and sharing of government information with the public. The PIA generally favors greater public access. There are, however, exceptions; some are discretionary, some are mandatory.
Section 4-311 of the PIA states that personnel records are a mandatory exemption to the disclosure requirement which impose an affirmative obligation on the city to deny inspection. This means the "custodian of records" (in this case, the city of Mount Rainier) must deny the request for information and does not have a choice in whether they provide the information. Some cases illustrate the point and are controlling on this issue: In Montgomery County v. Shropshire, the court stated that the personnel exemption included records "relating to hiring, discipline, promotion, dismissal, or any other matter involving an employee's status."[1] In Baltimore County Police Department v. State, the investigation of employee misconduct was considered a personnel record that qualified under the personnel record exemption.[2] Information about a complaint filed against an employee is not disclosable.[3] Allegations of misconduct, the complainant and the person(s) alleged to have perpetrated the misconduct would fall under this exemption.
Other exempted records include adoption records, welfare records, information pertaining to a person's finances, and medical or psychological information about an individual.
Another exemption which is relevant here is the investigative records exemption. Under section 4-351(b), the custodian of information may not answer a request that
Interfere with a valid and proper law enforcement proceeding,
Deprive another person of a right to a fair trial or an impartial adjudication,
Constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy,
Disclose the identity of a confidential source, or
Prejudice an investigation.
While there is an ongoing investigation, only a limited amount of information may be made public out of a need to maintain the integrity of the investigation. Once the investigative portion is over, then we will still be limited by the personnel exemption, but not the investigative one
Question: What is going on with the Chief of Police position?
Answer: When 7 members of the police department were placed on administrative leave on April 11, 2018, so that the afore-mentioned investigations could be arranged and take place, First Sergeant Stephen Malley was the next most senior member of the department eligible to be asked to take on the role of Acting Chief during this time. He accepted the responsibility.
Chief Michael Scott announced his retirement on June 1, 2018. Acting Chief Malley will continue to be Acting Chief until the city can conduct an official search for a new police chief. Conducting a search does not preclude a member of the current police department from becoming the next chief. Current members of our police force are more than welcome to apply for the position. Familiarity and relationships with the community and our current police department members is valuable. However, it would be a disservice to the community if we did not search widely for the best possible candidate.
Speaking just for myself, I believe it is in our best interest to conduct a search for the next (permanent) Chief of Police as soon as possible. I do not think we should necessarily wait until the investigations are over because it is hard to tell how long they will last. Plus, the department needs all the support it can get to return to a place of stability. At the very least these investigations will present us with recommendations on improvements to the department. We need someone that can effectively lead the department through the tough times it is experiencing now and can be an agent for positive change in the future. We need someone who can begin implementing these improvements while taking the interests of a variety of stakeholders into account. These stakeholders include the residents of the city, the businesses of the city, the women and men who work hard every day and night for the police department, the leadership of the police union, the city manager, mayor and council, directors and staff members of other departments in the city, and outside law enforcement and other agencies. We need a leader who can balance all these interests and
create and implement a vision for the future of our police department.
I guess this whole document is a personal note, but this is a little more personal than the rest – While I am a lawyer, this is not my area of the law. As a city council member. I defer to our city attorney on such matters. After taking the Public Information Act training yesterday and having spoken to the experts, I defer to them as well.
I have asked our city attorney and other professionals numerous times and in different ways how to communicate certain information I wish the public to hear without violating the individual employee's privacy rights, jeopardizing an ongoing investigation, or opening up the city or myself as an individual to a reasonable lawsuit. (I say "reasonable" because anyone can file a lawsuit about anything. I do not count fear of a frivolous lawsuit a legitimate enough reason to not speak.) Once we had staff with human resources experience on board, I have asked them as well. If you know me, you know I exhausted all these people with my questioning.
I agree that more information needs to be shared. Not just about what is happening now, but about what happened in the recent past. I have put on our agenda for our next worksession to discuss directing the Public Works Director and Finance Director to create reports on the changes that have been implemented since they have taken their positions. As for the Police Department, they are in the middle of 2 investigations and need a little more time. As for the Code Enforcement Department, we are looking for a new Director and when we have a new Director, it will be more appropriate to have that discussion then. There are other changes too, and I am open to discussing prioritizing making more public changes in other departments too, but, for me, the reports from the Finance Department and the Public Works Department are very important.
The information that comes out of these reports may not be popular and may not be the answers people wanted to hear, but it is important to know how your tax dollars are being spent. However, I am only one of five. I cannot make these decisions in isolation. However, I do not expect to receive opposition on these requests from my fellow councilmembers. My colleagues are just as interested in transparency. We may have different ways of expressing it, but we all believe in openness, transparency, and want what is best for the community.
Note on Sources, Attributions, and Assistance: All parts of this statement have been approved (with minor edits made) by our city attorney, except for (1) the section on the Public Information Act and (2) the "Personal Note."
I wrote the Public Information Act section after attending a training on the Maryland Public Information Act on June 12, 2018 (yesterday) at the 2018 Maryland Municipal Summer Conference. The training was taught by Judge David E. Carey, District Court of Maryland for Harford County and Maryland Assistant Attorney General Jeffrey Hochstetler. Mr. Hochstetler is one of the legal advisers for the Ombudsman on Public Information Act requests. The instructors answered my specific questions and taught a great session, but they have not reviewed what I have written here.
All mistakes and misstatements are unintentional and are fully my responsibility.
SHIVALI SHAH, Esq.
City of Mount Rainier
1 Municipal Plaza, Mount Rainier, MD 20712
SShah@MountRainierMD.org
WWW.MountRainierMD.org
[1] Montgomery County v. Shropshire, 420 Md. 362, 378 (2011)
[2] Baltimore County Police Department v. State, 158 Md. App. 274, 282-283 (2004).
[3] 78 Opinions of the Attorney General 291 (1993). G
E-mail me: Shivali
Follow me: Facebook
© 2020 Councilwoman Shivali Shah — Powered by WordPress


text:
Home » Movies » Kung Fu Panda
Jason Delacey May 2, 2019 42579
As I write this, I am pretty blown away by the fact that the first Kung Fu Panda movie is over 10 years old. This has been a very successful franchise for DreamWorks. Not only has there been two sequels. Kung Fu Panda also spawned a TV series and of course a ton of merchandise ranging from t-shirts, action figures, and video games.
How to Stream or Download Kung Fu Panda
The movie can be streamed or it can be downloaded from iTunes. You should also have a look at the sequels Kung Fu Panda 2 and Kung Fu Panda 3.
Kung Fu Panda Movie Review
Let me start by saying that the original Kung Fu Panda holds up very well. One thing that I like about this movie is that after the first 20 minutes or so the movie makes you think it is another dumb comedy. Kung Fu Panda does have some great humor in it, but it is also a really cool kung fu and coming of age tale as well.
Jack Black stars as the main character Po. Po is a bit of a clumsy loser, but he has a good heart. An ancient and evil warrior called, Tai Lung is released and through a series of mishaps. Po is labeled as the Dragon Warrior!
This is what makes him join the Furious Five. These guys are awesome and they are Tigress, Monkey, Crane, Viper, and Mantis. They are led and trained by the wise old master, Shifu. The team and the master did not want Po as the Dragon Warrior and they put him right through the wringer trying to get him to quit.
Well, he does not and he eventually wins them over and becomes a real part of the team. Seeing Po become more self-assured and believe in himself and being willing to work hard is a great message for kids. The movie does have a lot of very funny moments in it, but there are also some nice messages for kids to take on board.
The Furious Five along with Po must do all they can to stop Tai Lung! One other thing that Kung Fu Panda does very well is the action scenes. It really does play out like an old kung fu movie and the part when Tai Lung escapes from his prison is one of the most epic action scenes of any kid's movie.
Kung Fu Panda looks like a million bucks, even for a movie that is now over ten years old I think it holds up very well. The kung fu setting is a lot of fun and I love how much emotion the animators were able to show on the different animals faces.
The voice cast is great. Along with Jack Black, we also have talents such as Ian McShane, Dustin Hoffman, Angelina Jolie, Lucy Lui, Jackie Chan, and David Cross. So, the movie as you can see has a wonderfully talented cast. These folks really do bring the characters to life and give the movie a lot of personality.
I have always enjoyed Kung Fu Panda, it is a movie my son would watch at least a few times a week. I do not think this is the strongest entry in the series, but it is still a lot of fun. I do feel that this is a movie that you really do have to watch and get the kids to watch too. The Kung Fu Panda series works best when you watch all the movies in the right order.
Kung Fu Panda is a 3D animated comedy movie. Download it now and see how fat bear Po Ping became a kung fu master.
User Rating: 5 (2 %s votes)
www.dreamworks.com
full movie online
Tags: Animated Comedy MoviesAnimated Movies
Rudyard Kipling's The Jungle Book (1994)
Bedknobs and Broomsticks


text:
About The Herald
Contact The Herald
Contra Costa Herald
News Of By and For The People of Contra Costa County, California
Leveling of COVID-19 transmission in Contra Costa allows some businesses to reopen Friday
August 26, 2020 By Publisher Leave a Comment
Hair salons, gyms, fitness centers may begin operating outdoors, hotels and short-term rentals may open
From Contra Costa Health Services, Office of the Director
Daily hospitalizations due to COVID-19 and the percentage of COVID-19 tests returning positive remained steady or fell slightly in Contra Costa County during early August, reflecting recent local progress in slowing the spread of a deadly virus. The seven-day rolling average number of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 in Contra Costa dropped slightly, from 103 on Aug. 5 to 96 on Aug. 24. The average percentage of tests administered in the county that come back positive, meanwhile, has fallen from 8.8% on Aug. 6 to 7.4% on Aug. 24.
These key data indicators for the pandemic remain at dangerously high levels in Contra Costa, which remains on the California Department of Public Health's county monitoring list, but are not currently increasing as they did in June and July.
Given the improvement, Contra Costa County today makes small changes to its social distancing health order to allow certain business sectors to begin operating again outdoors. The changes align Contra Costa's policy with recently updated state health guidelines:
— Personal care services that do not involve close contact with the face, such as nail salons and massage, may begin operating outdoors in accordance with the state-issued industry guidelines and checklist.
— Gyms and fitness centers may begin operating outdoors in accordance with their own state guidelines and checklist.
— Hotels and short-term rentals in the county may open for personal or recreational travel, not just for essential business purposes.
These updates to the health order are effective Friday, August 28. Hair salons and barbers have already been permitted to perform limited work outdoors in the county, with no reported outbreaks.
Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) does encourage businesses to adjust reopening plans because of poor air quality in the county from Northern California wildfires. The county has issued a health advisory about smoke, encouraging all residents to stay inside when possible with doors and windows shut. For air quality updates and forecasts, visit the Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
While recent issues at the state level skewed local testing data in late July and early August, Contra Costa Health Services (CCHS) has confidence in data related to hospitalization and number of new positive cases because they are directly reported to the county by local health providers and clinics.
"Based on what we are able to see, we can be cautiously optimistic that there is a gradual downward trend in county cases, testing positivity rates and hospitalizations," said Dr. Chris Farnitano, county health officer. "We need everyone to understand this is a reason to keep up what we are doing and not let down our guards."
Previous health orders remain in effect. Contra Costa Health Services urges residents to continue wearing face coverings when they go out or are near people outside their households, observe physical distancing, stay home from work or school when they do not feel well and wash their hands thoroughly and often.
Details of the update, including the full text of the order, are available at cchealth.org/coronavirus.
Filed Under: Business, Health, News
Copyright © 2021 · Contra Costa Herald · Site by Clifton Creative Web