What's Bugging Your Trees?

Emerald Ash Borer?
Japanese longhair Beatle?
Black walnut Bud Borers?
Elm Eaters?


It seems that there is a new one every day, here in the USA.

Sadly, the informed treatment by the US Government agencies is that if you remove the trees, you remove the infestations.
Not just the trees that are actually infested -- you must also remove every tree that may be infested some day or some other day.

Now, I am no scientific observer or genius.
I am, in fact, very unscientific as an observer.

However, this treatment tactic is more than a little silly. A variation on "can't see the forest for the trees". You can't save the forests because there are too many trees in the way, or something like that. It can be likened to fighting fire with fire, I suppose. But fires and backfires both leave the survivors with nothing but Scorched Earth.
Is that really a solution?

The USDA has conceded a loss to the Emerald Ash Borer. They quit destroying the trees, and a drive down the roads reveals the death and destruction of the ash trees. Bare branches stretching skyward even as they droop, rot, and fall.
But those bare branches are reaching through the forests and banks of trees. Where the ash are failing, others are thriving -- or at least getting a little stronger; a little taller.

Two counties over, the government is stripping the land, creating erosion and mud flats instead of habitats and farmland, in an effort to stop the spread of the Asian Longhorned Beetle.
They has applied this Scorched Earth  treatment in Massachusetts and around Chicago as well.

They have destroyed hundreds of thousands of healthy uninfested trees to remove a few thousand sick ones.

And now there is a new scourge emerging, one that affects what deciduous trees are not vulnerable to the EAB or the ALB. This is the Black Walnut Borer -- and there's also some sort of fungus infection affecting these trees.

Will we have any forests left, once the government gets done 'saving' the trees?
What trees are they saving?
What trees will be left?

What will be left for you?

Defense of Laundromats

I am living in a home with a washer and dryer.
Also with five other residents.
And then there are relatives and neighbors.

I can do my laundry here, of course.
Or throw it in with he family laundry. No one will protest. (At least, not much.)
But doing my laundry on my own means scheduling it when others aren't using the laundry facilities. That doesn't happen too often!  If I toss mine into the family mix, I don't have control over when what gets washed and I may not always know if an item is clean or not.
There's also an interminable wait while the first load is in the dryer still, but the second load has been finished for a while. (A long enough time for a line of roomies, relatives and friends to be forming -- and foaming at the mouth as their lives must Wait For Laundry.)

So --  I have been choosing the laundromat. They have double load washers (and dryers)
Everything can wash at the same time.
Everything can dry at the same time.
Only one loading of the washer.
Only one transfer from washer to dryer.
Everything can dry at the same time.

But yesterday I found the best reason yet for using the laundromat.
That wonderful place is air conditioned!

Yes, in 90+ weather, high humidity, living in a tin (aluminum) can (trailer) -- doing laundry at the laundromat can be a wonderful thing!  A perfect excuse to sit in air conditioned comfort  for two hours.

What can be greater than that?
At least so far as laundry is concerned.

Speeding Up the Drive Thru

Another McDonald's focus point, according to business media, is that drive-thru times are getting . McDonald's, once one of the fastest places to get your lunch, has become one of the slowest.
Other fast food -- and notsofast food -- places have the same problem.

In the case of McDonald's, the "blame" has been put on an increasingly complex menu.
Increasingly complex orders by the customer are also a part of the problem. When McDonald's was the Speed King of lunch, it was before Burger King's "special orders don't upset us" campaign that turned many places' efficiency inside out and upside down. (And did anyone even ask those on the front lines if this was true?) In those days, you couldn't customize your sandwich the  way it's done now. In most places, you could take standard toppings off, but were often unable to add different ones.

Maybe it's time to go back to that philosophy for drive-thru orders.

I have seen, in other places, a few ideas implemented. They seem to be effective.

1) One car, one order.

2) No orders over 25$ (or 20$, or whatever is a reasonable expenditure for under 3 minutes prep, pay, and pick up times. That number can be arbitrary or can be determined by the prices and staff available. Although I have never seen it done based on time. (ie, no 20$ orders between 11 am and 1 pm, or after midnight.) It's a consideration.

3) No orders consisting of more than 10 (or 15 or 20) sandwiches, or even total number of items ordered, possibly excluding drinks from the count.

4) a limited number of changes made to menu items, as mentioned above.

5) drinks available at the pay window, for DTs with a pay window and a pick up window. Drink only orders are a big thing and take up space in lines and at windows when they can be simply handed out with the customer's change and receipt. These are among my favorite drive thrus.

Another consideration would be some kind of cell phone damper around the speakers (and cash registers inside) People pull up to the speaker and proceed to call the family or friends and read the entire menu board.
Or they just call to chit chat while they are waiting to be waited on and become too involved in personal conversation to order promptly. And, oh yes, by the way, your order taker and sometimes the entire store, including other customers, can hear every word you're saying. It's really not a good time or place for discussing your sex life or your co-workers (who may be waiting for lunch inside.)

Anyway, customer service personnel the world over would love to see such a device used. It's time consuming and confusing to take an order from someone engaged in a whole other conversation. And it sure slows things down at the drive thru, or anywhere during lunch hour.

After that, we get into fantasy equipment. Remember, I said FANTASY. These are not for real, nor should they be. They are just sometimes nice to think about.

A giant ejector spring would be nice for cars that pull up and then do not say anything when greeted and asked for their order.

A  great big timer -- one the next car in line can see -- for customers who "need a minute" or "just a sec". The timer could activate when the person inside is ready. At least that way the next guy knows the delay wasn't from inside the store.

A recorder that plays back exactly what the customer said so they could hear how funny they aren't. Or how difficult it is to hear what they are saying over the giggles and shrieks of their passengers, radios, and cellphones. Not to mention how much personal stuff they are sharing with godonlyknows who and how many.

Anyway, these are my thoughts on increasing the speed at the drive thru. Some of the ideas are serious, some are not. Some have been done in some places, others have not (to my knowledge) been tried.

If you are a customer -- and who isn't, at least occasionally -- and you think any of these or other ideas have merit, let your local store know what you would like to see and why. Customer suggestions are the strongest motivation for many changes.

Don't Disrespect Your Customer

There has been a lot in the news and on social media about McDonald's iosing customers and losing economic growth. This information mostly concerns a specific demographic -- those around 25 years old.

McD has made some surprising efforts to try and solve this problem, to reach out to this group, to come up with solutions. (One solution is/was simplifying the menu but offering more options. Yeah.)

The following is my opinion, and opinion only.

If McDonald's wishes to retain the business of the 25 year olds -- quit treating them like they are either 16 year old employees without a clue, or the 7 year old consumers they once were. This is disrespecting the customer.

Giving them only one suggestion for a drink is infantizing.  "does-ums want some cokey-coke wiss zat?" Even parenting manuals advise offering a choice. "Would you like a coke or some coffee with that?" is a much more adult interaction.

Contradicting this is the updated healthy choice happy meal option. To order a Happy Meal now, one (customer or cashier) must read through the equivalent of a preflight check list.
Which entree?
Which size entree?
Which side? (There are four choices.)
What drink?
And, when there's a choice of toys, which toy?

Some of this can be shortened by the one choice suggestion -- and did you want apple slices with that? Would you like a chocolate milk with that? --  it can leave the customer wondering about the choices not  being offered.

Again, a subtle show of disrespect.

Each customer and each order should be treated individually, not by recitation.

Suggestive selling is a part of any restaurant experience. Yet there are restaurants that allow a customer to say, "That's all." and not insist on offering something more. Let the order placing and order taking be done individually. If the customer seems insistent that "That's all" then don't insist on insisting an addition.

Who wouldn't prefer to go to a place where they are actually listened to?

Respecting the customer will bring more return visits than forceful selling of a serving of pie (that the customer has already indicated is not wanted.)
And, often, if the customer comes around, they will decide on a little more.
Or they may just decide to come back another time, because your place really does care about their experience.

The following is speculation on my part.

Another problem that McDonald's may have with this demographic is that many of them have worked for the business.

It is most likely that most of them worked for franchise stores, as they are the most prevalent. The franchise stores often do not treat their employees according to McDonald's corporation standards. And if there is an HR (human resources) problem, the corporation does not offer back-up to the employees. They tell them to contact their HR department. Many franchises are small, three or four stores, and the only HR is the bosses/owners that are already at the heart of the problem. If someone has tried to complain to corporation, they are getting desperate. It isn't easy to get through to them for general HR problems. (There are hotlines for specific unresolved conflicts.) To be told you must return to the source of the problem for a solution is (also) disrespectful.

If the 25ers haven't worked there, they have friends or relatives who have. It seems likely to me that these customers may be choosing not to go somewhere that has treated someone (they care about) badly.

In many cases, it may be as simple as that.


I have no suggestions to offer as solutions (except allow the order taker to sometimes decide if a suggestive sell is inappropriate).
I am reporting my observations and experiences, and those of people I have known.

I hope that McDonald's is considering these factors as well as menu choices, locations, and the many, many other facets there are to running a business of that size.

If they are, if they do, then it's possible for everyone to win.

Help Emelyse And Her Family

Letting Other Senses Drive

I was going to go to Tam​'s today to pick up the kids. This was around 4 pm. I started out on 32, decided to make a stop, and took out tri-county to 62. I was going to pick up 32 when I got back to it, because tri-county had ice. But I dislike 32 during the day, because of trucks and traffic, and was considering taking tri-county on into Mt Orab.
I decided I would let the traffic decide for me.
However, once there, I crossed to the center and then noticed heavy traffic coming at me. I told Tracy I should have turned.
I thought I heard a siren coming up behind me, but it must have been on 32, the radio, or my imagination.

Coming out of Sardinia, a Brown County sheriff went screaming past Heading into Sardinia,)

Coming into Mt Orab, there came a fire truck/rescue vehicle heading at us. I said to Tracy nthere must have been an accident around Sardinia, and wondered why Mt Orab was responding.

As I made the turn onto 68, here was a Ohio State Highway Patrol​ car, lights and sirens. I made my turn wide -- heavy traffic at the light at that time of day. The OSHP turned onto tri-county.
I told Tracy that maybe it was on a backroad off tri-county, because it didn't make sense that if it was on 32 they were all taking tri-county.

On the way home,  again decided to take tri-county at the last minute, but extra cautiously, because I knew something was going on along through there somehow. Even though we had frittered away some time,
if it was that bad, it would still be happening.

We heard on the radio that there was an accident that had 32 completely closed at 32 & Sardinia Mowrystown Rd, and air care was en route.  Past Steiman & tri-county, we could smell the accident.


To top that off, I just found out that my sister was the near victim of an accident way up on 125.

It was a good day to let the other senses do the driving.

(And eventually three helicopters were flown in to fly out accident victims -- of a two car crash. One car looked as if its top had been sheared off. That's all I know for now.)

DISRESPECT?

Tammy and Hazel, 1988

My stepdaughter Hazel died, heroin overdose. She was found, hospitalized, and on life support for several days.

No one told her sisters on her father's side that she was in the hospital, that she was dying, that she had died.

A friend of mine told me, and I had to tell them. (Disrespectful)

This is the sister that they -- all of Rex's family -- turned the town of Bethel upside down trying to find her so she could say goodbye to her daddy. When she got there she was more interested in zipping up her boyfriend's pants than spending time with her dad. They also just vanished from the hospital without telling anyone. We spent some time looking there, too. (Disrespectful on their part, don't you think?)


After the original news was published, Hazel was listed as the beloved daughter of her mother and her mother's 99th husband. (That number is hyperbole, not fact.)

Hazel's real father, who died without her presence, was not mentioned in the original obituary.

As if he had never existed

As if he had never been part of her life. (Disrespectful.)



I took our girls to her funeral.

If Hazel's other half sister, who in my opinion suffered the greatest loss, or her mother even spoke to my daughters, it was only in passing. (Disrespectful)

Our girls mingled, and my older daughter was asked why she was there; who was she to Hazel. (Disrespectful)
(And who the heck does that at a funeral, unless it's by invitation only?)



We sat in the back row for the service.

My daughter took her phone from her daughter (age 6) who had started playing music instead of a card game on it. She was holding it in her hand. She didn't think the child's choice of music was respectful or appropriate.

Bedamned if some blonde woman (NOT a member of the immediate family) didn't chew my daughters out about how "disrespectful:"they were for having their phones out! (Disrespectful)

I wish to hell I had known what Blondie was saying! I would have told her a thing or two about DISRESPECT! (Not to mention common courtesy and a side serving of 'mind-your-own-business.)

My girls had lost a sister, too, and were treated as if they came in off the street to get warm.

If that isn't disrespectful, what is?

I Wish I Could

I wish I could drive into a tree
.
Or follow a boat ramp into the wild and turbulent Ohio River, or maybe into the murky depths of Harsha Lake.
I probably wouldn't like drowning, though.
Too time consuming.
Too scary.

So, I'll stick with wishing I could drive into a tree.

Oh, don't worry.

I won't actually do such a thing. (Not on purpose, anyway)

I didn't do it Saturday morning, because I told Tammy we'd keep the babies for her this weekend.

I didn't do it Sunday morning, because we were keeping the babies for Tammy. (It's a little strange to keep calling Hailey a baby -- great big girl she's getting to be)

I didn't do it this morning, because I told Tammy I'd take her to the doctor on Tuesday.

I won't do it tomorrow morning, for the same reason.

After Tuesday, there will be some other reason -- probably a stupid reason to anyone else -- why I won't.

But I wish I could.
I wish I could drive into a tree.

Grimesy Campaigning

It's that time of year again.
The time if year when it matters not what one has done -- it matters what the other guy has done worse. Or can be inferred to have done worse.
"Worse" being relative.

The necessity for smear campaigns or mud slinging doesn't seem to matter.

Senator (I think) Mitch McConnell of Kentucky is a good (or bad) example of this.

Now, I can only offer an outsider (Ohioan) point of view, but it seems that Mr. McConnell has been good for Kentucky. He does his job, which is more than can be said for the majority. He has weighed the options, made deals, voted for or against many policies and projects.
All he needs to do to campaign for re-election is say "Here is what I have done for you, my people."

Instead, he has chosen to attack his opponent, Allison Grimes.

And the grounds he is using as an attack platform are dubious, at best.
One attack was that she supported Obama.
Well, she's a member of the Democrat Party. I would be much, much more disturbed if she did NOT support the majority of her party's politics. I don't know about you, but I don't want to vote for someone who does not support her own support network. Who cannot be loyal to those she promised loyalty to.
Nope, I would not want to vote someone who stands for nothing.
Not even her own standing.

Her first ads that I saw represented facts about McConnell's attendance and voting record. His supporters immediately started screaming that she had her facts wrong and besides that, who was she to cite any such facts, when her record for another position may (or may not) be just as dubious.
Reminds me of Bugs Bunny and Daffy Duck arguing over Rabbit or Duck season.

Now, the 'scandal' of Ms. Grimes is that she won't say who she voted for.
The media is making a big deal of her refusal to answer.

Shouldn't they be making a big deal of the invasion of her civil right to a secret ballot -- an American institution, especially for presidential elections.
Besides that, who cares?
No one, it seems to me, except Mr. McConnell and his supporters, who are not in favor of voters having rights, apparently.
If she voted for Obama, she supported her party. Good for her.
If she voted for someone else, she voted her conscience, Good for her.
Why is this an issue?

Ms. Grimes has, for the most part, not dignified that issue with any comment. She certainly is not making it a campaign issue. Nor a publicity point.
For that, I would almost vote for her myself.

It should only be about who will do or has done a better job. Nothing more, nothing less.
The candidates that meet that criteria will be the ones who get my vote.
In any race.
In every race.

Sawyer Brown - The Dirt Road