Port O'Connor TX. I'm going with a small Texas port city behind Matagorda Island, on Matagorda Bay. Not that far from Corpus Christi by boat. I worked out of there for several years, and loved the people and the place. Just like being at home, actually. They had a shell shop, a convenience store, a library which gave me a library card, a post office, and Hurricane Junction bar. Plus assorted docks and fuel stops for boats, and the friendliest Coast Guard outpost ever, with a rollover boat. I hold the distinction, according to the Coasties, of being the only oil field vessel to fly an Earth Day flag ...Green Peace vessels not included of course. Port O'Connor Texas, was reincarnation of Indianola, "Mother of West Texas", until that town was destroyed by hurricanes back in the 1800s. Camels were imported through Indianola and taken to the southwest deserts where Americans promptly shot them. I thought it was a great idea myself....the camels, not the killing thereof.

Of course, if you don't like it, it has to be a right wing conspiracy. Lol From the link I left above ~ American Council on Science and Health: "Additionally, the evidence regarding the effect of DDT on eggshell thinning among wild birds is contradictory at best. The environmentalist literature claims that the birds threatened directly by the insecticide were laying eggs with thin shells. These shells, say the environmentalists, would eventually become so fragile that the eggs would break, causing a decline in bird populations, particularly among raptors (birds of prey). In 1968 two researchers, Drs. Joseph J. Hickey and Daniel W. Anderson, reported that high concentrations of DDT were found in the eggs of wild raptor populations. The two concluded that increased eggshell fragility in peregrine falcons, bald eagles, and ospreys was due to DDT exposure.9 Dr. Joel Bitman and associates at the U.S. Department of Agriculture likewise determined that Japanese quail fed DDT produced eggs with thinner shells and lower calcium content.10 In actuality, however, declines in bird populations either had occurred before DDT was present or had occurred years after DDT’s use. A comparison of the annual Audubon Christmas Bird Counts between 1941 (pre-DDT) and 1960 (after DDT’s use had waned) reveals that at least 26 different kinds of birds became more numerous during those decades, the period of greatest DDT usage. The Audubon counts document an overall increase in birds seen per observer from 1941 to 1960, and statistical analyses of the Audubon data confirm the perceived increases. For example, only 197 bald eagles were documented in 194111; the number had increased to 891 in 1960.12 At Hawk Mountain, Pennsylvania, teams of ornithologists made daily counts of migrating raptors for over 40 years. The counts��"published annually by the Hawk Mountain Sanctuary Association��"reveal great increases in most kinds of hawks during the DDT years. The osprey counts increased as follows: in 1946, 191; in 1956, 288; in 1967, 457; and in 1972, 630.13 In 1942 Dr. Joseph Hickey��"who in 1968 would blame DDT for bird population decline��"reported that 70 per-cent of the eastern osprey population had been killed by pole traps around fish hatcheries.14 That same year, before DDT came into use, Hickey noted a decline in the population of peregrine falcons.15 Other observers also documented that the great peregrine decline in the eastern United States occurred long before any DDT was present in the environment.16,17 In Canada peregrines were observed to be “reproducing normally” in the 1960s even though their tissues contained 30 times more DDT than did the tissues of the midwestern peregrines allegedly being extirpated by the chemical.18 And in Great Britain, in 1969, a three-year government study noted that the decline of peregrine falcons in Britain had ended in 1966 even though DDT levels were as abundant as ever. The British study concluded that “There is no close correlation between the decline in population of predatory birds, particularly the peregrine falcon and the sparrow hawk, and the use of DDT.”19 In addition, later research refuted the original studies that had pointed to DDT as a cause for eggshell thinning. After reassessing their findings using more modern methodology, Drs. Hickey and Anderson admitted that the egg extracts they had studied contained little or no DDT and said they were now pursuing PCBs, chemicals used as capacitor insulators, as the culprit.20 When carefully reviewed, Dr. Bitman’s study revealed that the quail in the study were fed a diet with a calcium content of only 0.56 percent (a normal quail diet consists of 2.7 percent calcium). Calcium deficiency is a known cause of thin eggshells.21��"23 After much criticism, Bitman repeated the test, this time with sufficient calcium levels. The birds produced eggs without thinned shells.24 After many years of carefully controlled feeding experiments, Dr. M. L. Scott and associates of the Department of Poultry Science at Cornell University “found no tremors, no mortality, no thinning of eggshells and no interference with reproduction caused by levels of DDT which were as high as those reported to be present in most of the wild birds where ‘catastrophic’ decreases in shell quality and reproduction have been claimed.”23 In fact, thinning eggshells can have many causes, including season of the year, nutrition (in particular insufficient calcium, phosphorus, vitamin D, and manganese), temperature rise, type of soil, and breeding conditions (e.g., sunlight and crowding)." Al

Tags 401 to 500, houzz format: Tag# 401: Ozarks Region FAQ Tag# 402: New to Gardening FAQ Tag# 403: Integrated Pest Management FAQ Tag# 404: Butterfly Garden FAQ Tag# 405: Growing Tomatoes FAQ Tag# 406: Rose Propagation FAQ Tag# 407: Growing from Seed FAQ Tag# 408: Ponds & Aquatic Plants FAQ Tag# 409: African Violets FAQ Tag# 410: Mid-Atlantic Gardening FAQ Tag# 411: Plumeria FAQ Tag# 412: Bonsai FAQ Tag# 413: Gesneriad FAQ Tag# 414: Hypertufa FAQ Tag# 415: Herbalism FAQ Tag# 416: Garden Accoutrements FAQ Tag# 417: Gardening in Shade FAQ Tag# 418: Clematis FAQ Tag# 419: Woodlands FAQ Tag# 420: Harvest FAQ Tag# 421: Weeds FAQ Tag# 422: Round Robin Exchange FAQ Tag# 423: Citrus FAQ Tag# 424: Cacti & Succulents FAQ Tag# 425: Hot Pepper FAQ Tag# 426: Rose Forums FAQ Tag# 427: Greenhouses & Garden Structures FAQ Tag# 428: Japanese Gardens FAQ Tag# 429: Hosta FAQ Tag# 430: Tropicalesque Garden FAQ Tag# 431: Seed Exchange FAQ Tag# 432: Asian Vegetables FAQ Tag# 433: Georgia Gardener FAQ Tag# 434: Winter Garden FAQ Tag# 435: Fruit & Orchards FAQ Tag# 436: Soil FAQ Tag# 437: Plant Exchange FAQ Tag# 438: Name That Rose FAQ Tag# 439: Florida Gardening FAQ Tag# 440: Upstate New York FAQ Tag# 441: Trees FAQ Tag# 442: Gardening with Kids FAQ Tag# 443: Iris FAQ Tag# 444: Professional Gardener FAQ Tag# 445: Camellia FAQ Tag# 446: Fuchsia FAQ Tag# 447: Garden Clinic FAQ Tag# 448: California Gardening FAQ Tag# 449: Tips & Techniques FAQ Tag# 450: Pennsylvania Gardening FAQ Tag# 451: Passiflora FAQ Tag# 452: Garden Junk FAQ Tag# 453: Dried & Pressed Flowers FAQ Tag# 454: Clivia FAQ Tag# 455: Organic Rose Growing FAQ Tag# 456: Lawn Care FAQ Tag# 457: New England Gardening FAQ Tag# 458: Daylily FAQ Tag# 459: Maples FAQ Tag# 460: Allium FAQ Tag# 461: Terrariums FAQ Tag# 462: Organic Gardening FAQ Tag# 463: Hydrangea FAQ Tag# 464: Cottage Garden FAQ Tag# 465: Geranium FAQ Tag# 466: Name That Plant FAQ Tag# 467: Arizona Gardening FAQ Tag# 468: Annuals FAQ Tag# 469: Seed Saving FAQ Tag# 470: Square Foot Gardening FAQ Tag# 471: Native Plants FAQ Tag# 472: Shrubs FAQ Tag# 473: Master Gardeners FAQ Tag# 474: Perennials FAQ Tag# 475: Antique Roses FAQ Tag# 476: Canna FAQ Tag# 477: Hydroponics FAQ Tag# 478: Winter Sowing FAQ Tag# 479: Carnivorous Plants FAQ Tag# 480: Roses FAQ Tag# 481: Trash To Treasure FAQ Tag# 482: Stained Glass & Mosaics FAQ Tag# 483: Electrical Wiring FAQ Tag# 484: Computer Help FAQ Tag# 485: Laundry Room FAQ Tag# 486: Recipe Exchange FAQ Tag# 487: Kitchens FAQ Tag# 488: Quilting FAQ Tag# 489: Crafts and Decorations FAQ Tag# 490: Pets FAQ Tag# 491: Appliances FAQ Tag# 492: Cooking FAQ Tag# 493: Flooring FAQ Tag# 494: Heating & Air Conditioning FAQ Tag# 495: Other Tag# 496: Reader's Paradise Tag# 497: Home Decorating Conversations Tag# 498: Herbs - Australia Tag# 499: Gardening in New Zealand Tag# 500: Gardening in Oz

A few years ago I was in a feed store looking at traps for G hogs. One custumer told me that they have a way of dealing with groundhogs (GH) that begin destroying plants or digging. She did not want to elaborate, but clearly she shot and killed them. A lot of people feel forced to do this. Here is why people choose to shoot them. They can destroy a lot of plantings — flowers or vegetables (that represent a sizable investment in money, time and labor and a lot of people count on gardens to supplement groceries. They can be very tough to trap. They are wary. Even if and when you trap them, your choices are limited. Wildlife regulations usually prohibit releasing them on property that is not your own. You can destro the critter once it’s trapped, but there are few easy, humane ways to do this. Submerging the trap into a deep barrel of water is not kind to the critter as it will suffer as it deowns over several minutes. So, in many places, people use their 22. There’s plenty of space for them in the woods, but GHs don’t do woods. They like open spaces with hedgerows, or developed land where homeowners have made food gathering easy — gardens, vegetables, annuals, perennials. I have videos of GH dining on tall garden phlox and milkweed. If it would just eat weeds, and not plantings, and did not dig up the drip line areas of our home’s foundation, I might feel less annoyed. One year every single butternut sqaush was ”sampled.” If someone is charging a dear price to remove critters, they should check and tend their own traps or arrange a discount with a homeowner if they expect the residents to help him out. I was told by wildlife people that relocating critters is not necessarily a kindly solution. It stresses the animal to suddenly be dumped into another animal’s territory. It has none of its own burrows of food supply and may have left young behind. I don’t see any easy solutions. There are no shortages of GH (woodchucks).