The Great Plaius and deserts of the western United States are inhabited by several species of large hares, commonly known as 'jack rabbits.' These rabbits occur almost everywhere, except in the higher mountains and in wooded regions, from the ninety-fifth meridian west to the Pacific, and from the Plains of the Saskatchewan soutliward over the table-land of Mexico to the Isthmus of Tehuantepec. The resem blance of their large ears to those of the well-known pack animal of the West lias suggested the common names of 'jackass hares,' 'jack rabbits," or 'jacks.' In some parts of California jack rabbits are called 'narrow-gauge mules' and 'smull mules,' but fortunately these absurd terms are very local, and not likely to come in general use. 1 n the Southwest and beyond the Kio Grande the large hares are called 'liebres* by the Mexicans, to distinguish them from the cotton-tail rabbits, or 'couejos.' * Several small shotgun drives took place about 1882 and 1883.-J. Ellis McLellan. » Another drive announced for April 15, IS.'^S. " Third di-ivo of the season. Another was planned for^farch 13. 1892, but no repin-t has been received. ' Six drives in all took plac(> during February, Manli. and .Vpril. in which 20,000 were killed. ' About 1,000 more estimated to have escaped. Anollier drive planned for March 18. UESULTS OF THE DRIVES. Altliougli it is practically impossible to give all the rabbit drives which have occurred in California during-the last eight years, still this list of 155 drives, including the more important ones during the twenty years from 1875 to 1895, should be sufficient to show the progress of

Purpose This is a national census of all worker cooperatives in the USA for 2017 implemented by the Democracy at Work Institute which is affiliated with the United States Federation of Worker Cooperatives, the largest worker cooperative association in the USA. The paper aims to discuss these issues. Design/methodology/approach Longitudinal survey with descriptive analysis of results. Findings The author identified 394 worker cooperatives and democratic workplaces in all areas of the country in fiscal year 2017 (though early tracking for 2018 shows at least 400 such businesses). While the typical worker cooperative is small (about nine workers and about $588,600 gross annual revenue) and either recently launched, or converted to the form, there are many notable examples of very large and/or long lasting businesses. Together they employ an estimated 6,734 workers and produce about $467m in revenue each year. The following analysis attempts to outline the basic geographic, structural, economic and demographic features of these enterprises. Research limitations/implications The author reached out to this list of businesses via e-mail and telephone contact between August and November 2018. This included both members of the US Federation of Worker Cooperatives and non-members. The author asked participants to provide information based on their fiscal year 2017 performance. The survey asked similar questions to the prior year’s survey (e.g. total revenue, total assets, total wages, net income, total workers, total worker–owners, etc.), but also included some small changes in content, format and style. In total, 105 worker cooperatives responded and either fully or substantially completed the survey questions. All non-responsive firms were verified to be in business and operate as worker cooperatives in 2017 to the best of the author’s knowledge. Regardless of whether they responded, the author assigned all businesses an industry (NAICS) classification, foundational year and primary location based on basic internet research. This allowed the author to examine the larger universe when analyzing issues around the geography, age and industry of these enterprises. Additionally, internet research also allowed the author to add some other information about a portion of the non-responding worker cooperatives (e.g. number of workers, etc.) when such information was self-reported on their websites. Originality/value This is the only census of worker cooperatives done in the USA to the author’s knowledge.

No abstract

No abstract

Microscopic study shows that Caen Stone varies in its petrographic structure between pellet-rich and bioclast-rich forms. The former is much more microporous than the latter, and tends to draw water into its structure if wetted. In historic usage, this has apparently led to more severe decay than is seen in the latter variety, which has generally displayed good durability. Examples of Caen Stone that survive on the exterior of medieval buildings have led to the material acquiring a good reputation, but less evident, poorer-quality medieval Caen Stone may also be found internally in remnant blocks, where surface decay was cut out for the insertion of new material in earlier episodes of repair. Both pellet-rich and bioclast-rich varieties are encountered in new stone available in the market, and are likely to be distinguishable in standard tests. The appended report on Caen Stone usage at the Palace of Westminster by Tim Yates which follows lends weight to this conclusion.