AuntJen, I agree that differing opinions can definitely work in a marriage, but it depends on what those differences are. Politics is one thing I could see people having lovely discussions regarding their differences. Religion too - to some degree. Money - way differing opinions on this one I see a major issue in a marriage. If one person is a crazy spender, and the other not - even having separate accounts can't bridge this over the years. I also think if you don't have kids, you are much more accommodating of others individual preferences, beliefs etc. But once you throw in a few kids, things change. Religion is a biggie especially between Jews and Christians. There's some real fundamental differences here - how do you raise your children to appreciate both religions? I would find this very confusing to children - you have to pick one at the primary and then perhaps expose them to the other religion and allow them to choose when they're older. I too believe marriage is much more than just sex and having a good time with someone. If you don't have some core values shared between you, it makes what is already a difficult partnership over time even harder. Add a few children and all of a sudden life is alot more difficult and you start to wonder - what did I see in this guy?

I think Clint Black had it right when he said he would fire the editor of the show. That whole group of people basically had their reputations tarnished or ruined. I never rally saw anything to make me dislike Clint, but he was painted as a bad guy. Through the magic of editing, anyone can be made to look bad or good. I don't like being arund manipulative people like Annie, but you see it in business every day. Often those people are successful because they know how to catch flies with sugar. Annie knew how to push Joan's buttons and Joan reacted every time. Joan was more offensive to me because she was so foul and was mean to everyone. If it was mainly between her and Annie, it wouldn't have been so offensive.

Bingo Graywings! Thank you! As stated in my post above regarding the beans in today’s kibble. “I’ve read that the ingredients on the dog food label have to be listed by the order of the ingredients by measurement or weight (I don’t recall which) however the first item is the primary ingredient and so on; and the first 4 ingredients are what the food primarily is made of. The reason there are several kinds of beans in a dogs food isn’t because they each have a different nutritional value, they’re all protein, it’s because the weight of a single type of bean will move that ingredient to the first item listed and the meat product will look insufficient to the buyer reading the label. It’s a trick.” I couldn’t agree with Dragonfly’s comment about animal needs differing more. Every animal is different, as are it’s owner’s preferences and resources. One training method may work for one, while it won’t for another. Some people crate, some don’t. Crating was not, is not and will never be for us. I feel very fortunate that even as a puppy, our dog has never destroyed anything or purposely had accidents in the house. I can leave a roasted bird on the living room table and she’d never touch it. It’s her breed and training, she’s never needed a crate. Some people prefer Raw food over Grain Free or normal kibble. I know of someone who’s dog can’t tolerate any kind of kibble or manufactured food and a boutique mix does the trick for the little guy. IMO, Dogs have been domesticated way too long and do not have any of the same needs a wolf would. When I was talking to our Vet about all the variety of food options, his response about a lot of the specialty foods was that even if a dog does still have similar food requirements as a wolf, the life expectency of a wolf is not very long and one reason was/is because of their diet. “The pet food industry is one of the most regulated industries out there. Nearly all pet foods sold meet AAFCO standards "Most state feed laws and regulations reference to the AAFCO Official Publication as part of the nutritional adequacy labeling for pet foods. This reference is to an AAFCO-established, science-based, nutritional standard." I find this claim to be almost laughable. “Nutritional standards” must not cover animal biproducts (which can get pretty gross) and chemicals that aren’t fit for anything to consume. Sorry but that whole idea is BS.

I just don't know if this kind of leaf damage hurts the plant more or if the net energy produced from the photosynthesis in that leaf outweighs it. You might not know, but the plant does. The plant has chemical messengers that communicate with 'plant central'. When the leaf is no longer earning its keep the flow of auxin (a growth regulator/hormone) across the abscission zone slows. This reduction in the flow of auxin stimulates the formation of an abscission layer at the base of the leaf. Once the corky layer forms, the leaf is effectively cut off from the rest of the plant. No water/nutrients are supplied to the leaf, and no photosynthate (carbohydrates - the product of photosynthesis) is returned to the plant. If the leaf IS a net producer of energy, the flow of auxin is sufficient to keep the flow of water, nutrients, photosynthate, and various other biocompounds flowing across the zone, and the leaf is retained. You might not want to tolerate the spoiled foliage and choose to remove it. That's fine and not a significant setback if the plant is reasonably healthy, but for plants circling the drain, or about to, removing a leaf that's a net producer of energy should be given extra consideration before moving ahead with lopping it off. Should I move the plant further away from the window? Keep in mind I'm located in Manitoba, Canada (north of North Dakota) so winter months have much less total daylight and sun rays are less concentrated ...... Hard to say. With the photo load diminishing by the day, the o/a increase in light might offset the damage to the photosynthesizing machinery caused by the photo-oxidation (sunburn). It's possible the plant's level of vitality will increase, even while the area of damaged leaf surface increases. It's also possible that so much of the plants photosynthesizing ability is hindered by sunburn that the net result is more spoiled foliage AND less food production. I suppose I'd have a better feel for which way I'd go if I could actually look at the plant. With as many Ficus as I have, I have a much better than average feel for what the species and any plant in particular will tolerate. To some degree, that can be projected so as to apply to your plants and to those of others, but a lot of what goes into making those "what will it tolerate" decisions are based more than a little on nuance. A healthy plant will stoically tolerate a lot of adversity. Far, far more than the average grower might ever imagine, but that's not a call to test the limits. Still, my inclination would be to leave it where it is, rotate the plant every week, monitor moisture levels, while keeping an eye out for the AREA affected by sunburn to increase. If it does - the light is too bright. Personally, my end game would culminate in moving the plant outdoors into full sun next June when temps allow and let nature take it's course. That doesn't mean I'm setting you up for a 'flip a coin to determine if chances are the plant lives or dies'. The leaves will burn, fall off, and be replaced by a flush of new and pristine leaves - assuming you keep the plant reasonably healthy between now and then. Al