Fishing and hunting /

Description based on: 1896.

The Sporting repository : containing horse racing, hunting, coursing, shooting, archery, trotting and tandem matches, cocking pedestrianism, pugilism, anecdotes on sporting subjects, interspersed with essays, tales, and a great variety of miscellaneous articles.

"This edition is limited to 500 copies".

Wildlife and America : contributions to an understanding of American wildlife and its conservation /

Cosponsored by U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Forest Service, and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

California hunting regulations.

Mode of access: Internet.

Not so fast: swimming behavior of sailfish during predator-prey interactions using high-speed video and accelerometry

Billfishes are considered among the fastest swimmers in the oceans. Despite early estimates of extremely high speeds, more recent work showed that these predators (e.g., blue marlin) spend most of their time swimming slowly, rarely exceeding 2 m s(-1). Predator-prey interactions provide a context within which one may expect maximal speeds both by predators and prey. Beyond speed, however, an important component determining the outcome of predator-prey encounters is unsteady swimming (i.e., turning and accelerating). Although large predators are faster than their small prey, the latter show higher performance in unsteady swimming. To contrast the evading behaviors of their highly maneuverable prey, sailfish and other large aquatic predators possess morphological adaptations, such as elongated bills, which can be moved more rapidly than the whole body itself, facilitating capture of the prey. Therefore, it is an open question whether such supposedly very fast swimmers do use high-speed bursts when feeding on evasive prey, in addition to using their bill for slashing prey. Here, we measured the swimming behavior of sailfish by using high-frequency accelerometry and high-speed video observations during predator-prey interactions. These measurements allowed analyses of tail beat frequencies to estimate swimming speeds. Our results suggest that sailfish burst at speeds of about 7 m s(-1) and do not exceed swimming speeds of 10 m s(-1) during predator-prey interactions. These speeds are much lower than previous estimates. In addition, the oscillations of the bill during swimming with, and without, extension of the dorsal fin (i.e., the sail) were measured. We suggest that extension of the dorsal fin may allow sailfish to improve the control of the bill and minimize its yaw, hence preventing disturbance of the prey. Therefore, sailfish, like other large predators, may rely mainly on accuracy of movement and the use of the extensions of their bodies, rather than resorting to top speeds when hunting evasive prey.

Be careful what you ask for : how inquiry strategy influences readiness mode

Much has been written about affecting change in the workplace, including how to help employees prepare for the process. However, little is known about how participation influences employees' emotions and attitudes at the start of an intervention. By qualitatively analyzing conversations that were triggered by an organizational change effort, we explored how different inquiry strategies influence readiness for change. We examined four inquiry strategies by combining strength or deficit frames with individual or organizational focus. Distinctive conversational patterns emerged within each strategy, which we believe influence peoples' change readiness. In this article we present four readiness modes to describe these patterns and conclude with implications for managers who seek to shape their change efforts more effectively.

Implementation of an integrated, technology-based, discovery mode assessment item involving an incubation period to enhance learning outcomes for engineering maths students

In this paper we discuss our current efforts to develop and implement an exploratory, discovery mode assessment item into the total learning and assessment profile for a target group of about 100 second level engineering mathematics students. The assessment item under development is composed of 2 parts, namely, a set of "pre-lab" homework problems (which focus on relevant prior mathematical knowledge, concepts and skills), and complementary computing laboratory exercises which are undertaken within a fixed (1 hour) time frame. In particular, the computing exercises exploit the algebraic manipulation and visualisation capabilities of the symbolic algebra package MAPLE, with the aim of promoting understanding of certain mathematical concepts and skills via visual and intuitive reasoning, rather than a formal or rigorous approach. The assessment task we are developing is aimed at providing students with a significant learning experience, in addition to providing feedback on their individual knowledge and skills. To this end, a noteworthy feature of the scheme is that marks awarded for the laboratory work are primarily based on the extent to which reflective, critical thinking is demonstrated, rather than the amount of CBE-style tasks completed by the student within the allowed time. With regard to student learning outcomes, a novel and potentially critical feature of our scheme is that the assessment task is designed to be intimately linked to the overall course content, in that it aims to introduce important concepts and skills (via individual student exploration) which will be revisited somewhat later in the pedagogically more restrictive formal lecture component of the course (typically a large group plenary format). Furthermore, the time delay involved, or "incubation period", is also a deliberate design feature: it is intended to allow students the opportunity to undergo potentially important internal re-adjustments in their understanding, before being exposed to lectures on related course content which are invariably delivered in a more condensed, formal and mathematically rigorous manner. In our presentation, we will discuss in more detail our motivation and rationale for trailing such a scheme for the targeted student group. Some of the advantages and disadvantages of our approach (as we perceived them at the initial stages) will also be enumerated. In a companion paper, the theoretical framework for our approach will be more fully elaborated, and measures of student learning outcomes (as obtained from eg. student provided feedback) will be discussed.