DOCSLIB.ORG

CPC Outreach Journal #593

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
CPC Outreach Journal #593 USAF COUNTERPROLIFERATION CENTER CPC OUTREACH JOURNAL Maxwell AFB, Alabama Issue No. 593, 26 October 2007 Articles & Other Documents: Four Air Force Colonels Are Relieved Of Command Chain Of Errors Blamed For Nuclear Arms Going Undetected U.N. Nuclear Agency Studies Air-Raid Site Iran's Nuclear Negotiator Resigns The Best Of Frenemies Bug bomb Cheney, Like President, Has A Warning For Iran Former Nuclear Negotiator To Attend Key Talks In Rome Senior U.S. General Sees High Nuclear Threshold Nuclear talks begin in Rome with Iran defiant Project Bioshield: Actions Needed to Avoid Repeating Project BioShield: Actions Needed to Avoid Repeating Past Problems with Procuring New Anthrax Vaccine and Past Mistakes (GAO Report) Managing the Stockpile of Licensed Vaccine (GAO Report) Administration Diverges On Missile Defense U.S. May Delay Activating Missile Shield Bush Stands By Plan For Missile Defenses Photographs Said to Show Israeli Target Inside Syria Syrian Structure Resembles Reactor U.S. lacks labs to test for 'dirty bomb' contamination Gates: US Gone As Far As Possible With Russia On Iran Sanctions Are Meant To Prevent War, Bush Aides Shield Say U.S. Plays Its ‘Unilateral’ Card On Iran Sanctions Photos Show Cleansing Of Suspect Syrian Site Envoy Warns Of N. Korea Deal Fallout Britain prepared to consider more Iran sanctions Welcome to the CPC Outreach Journal. As part of USAF Counterproliferation Center’s mission to counter weapons of mass destruction through education and research, we’re providing our government and civilian community a source for timely counterproliferation information. This information includes articles, papers and other documents addressing issues pertinent to US military response options for dealing with nuclear, biological and chemical threats and attacks. It’s our hope this information resource will help enhance your counterproliferation issue awareness. Established in 1998, the USAF/CPC provides education and research to present and future leaders of the Air Force, as well as to members of other branches of the armed services and Department of Defense. Our purpose is to help those agencies better prepare to counter the threat from weapons of mass destruction. Please feel free to visit our web site at http://cpc.au.af.mil/ for in-depth information and specific points of contact. Please direct any questions or comments on CPC Outreach Journal to Jo Ann Eddy, CPC Outreach Editor, at (334) 953-7538 or DSN 493-7538. To subscribe, change e-mail address, or unsubscribe to this journal or to request inclusion on the mailing list for CPC publications, please contact Mrs. Eddy, [email protected]. The following articles, papers or documents do not necessarily reflect official endorsement of the United States Air Force, Department of Defense, or other US government agencies. Reproduction for private use or commercial gain is subject to original copyright restrictions. All rights are reserved Washington Post October 20, 2007 Pg. 3 Four Air Force Colonels Are Relieved Of Command 65 Others Also Punished for Nuclear Error By Walter Pincus, Washington Post Staff Writer Four Air Force colonels have been relieved of their commands and more than 65 lower-ranking officers and airmen have been disciplined over a series of errors that led to a B-52 flight in August from North Dakota to Louisiana with six nuclear-armed cruise missiles that no one realized were under the plane's wing. "This was an unacceptable error that resulted in an unprecedented string of procedural failures," Maj. Gen. Richard Y. Newton III, assistant deputy chief of staff for operations, said yesterday in reporting on a six-week Air Force probe. "Our investigation found that there has been an erosion of adherence to weapons handling standards" at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota, where the flight began, and at Barksdale Air Force Base in Louisiana, Newton said. Rep. Ellen O. Tauscher (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Armed Services strategic forces subcommittee, said yesterday that she is "satisfied" with the report and impressed that Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates has asked the department's science board to take a wider view. Newton said the problems began with a breakdown in the formal scheduling process used to prepare the AGM-129 cruise missiles in question for decomissioning. The AGM-129 missiles carry nuclear weapons and have stealth capability. But in March, the Pentagon decided to retire it in favor of an older AGM-86, which can carry nuclear or conventional weapons. Part of the preparation involved removing the W-80 nuclear warhead and replacing it with a steel dummy on missiles to be flown aboard B-52s to Barksdale for destruction. An electronic scheduling system was employed to keep track of the missiles -- using the identification numbers of racks containing six of them -- so that crews knew which missiles had had their nuclear warheads removed and were ready to be shipped out, several sources said. On the morning of Aug. 29, the loading crew at Minot used a paper schedule that was out of date when they picked up 12 missiles from a guarded weapons storage hangar, six with dummy warheads and six that they did not realize had nuclear warheads. Newton told reporters the trailer that would carry the pylons to the B-52 arrived early, and its crew did not inspect the missiles as they should have before loading them on the trailer. The driver called the munitions control center to verify the numbers, but the staff there failed to check them. At the aircraft, the crew that loaded the pylons, one under each wing, failed again to check the missiles, which have a small glass porthole to make clear whether a dummy or nuclear warhead is installed. The next morning, Aug. 30, the plane's navigator failed to do a complete check of the missiles, as required, looking under only one wing and not the one where the nuclear-armed missiles were. "We hold ourselves accountable to the American people and want to ensure proper corrective action has been taken," Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne, who made an inspection trip out to Minot, said yesterday. Newton said that the 5th Bomb Wing commander at Minot, Col. Bruce Emig, was removed from command, along with his chief munitions officer and the operations officer of the B-52 unit at Barksdale. The munitions squadron commander at Minot was relieved of command shortly after the incident. The flight in question was the sixth of 12 planned ferrying missions, but the rest have been suspended. Air Force Major Gen. Polly A. Peyer has been asked to examine potential individual culpability, Newton said. He did not rule out other disciplinary action, including courts-martial. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/10/19/AR2007101902512.html (Return to Articles and Documents List) Los Angeles Times October 20, 2007 Chain Of Errors Blamed For Nuclear Arms Going Undetected An Air Force inquiry says weapons officers failed five times to check missiles before they were flown across the country to another base. By Peter Spiegel, Los Angeles Times Staff Writer WASHINGTON — Air Force weapons officers assigned to secure nuclear warheads failed on five occasions to examine a bundle of cruise missiles headed to a B-52 bomber in North Dakota, leading the plane's crew to unknowingly fly six nuclear-armed missiles across the country. That August flight, the first known incident in which the military lost track of its nuclear weapons since the dawn of the atomic age, lasted nearly three hours, until the bomber landed at Barksdale Air Force Base in northern Louisiana. But according to an Air Force investigation presented to Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates on Friday, the nuclear weapons sat on a plane on the runway at Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota for nearly 24 hours without ground crews noticing the warheads had been moved out of a secured shelter. "This was an unacceptable mistake," said Air Force Secretary Michael W. Wynne at a Pentagon news conference. "We would really like to ensure it never happens again." For decades, it has been military policy to never discuss the movement or deployment of the nuclear arsenal. But Wynne said the accident was so serious that he ordered an exception so the mistakes could be made public. On Aug. 29, North Dakota crew members were supposed to load 12 unarmed cruise missiles in two bundles under the B-52's wings to be taken to Louisiana to be decommissioned. But in what the Air Force has ruled were five separate mistakes, six missiles contained nuclear warheads. According to the investigation, the chain of errors began the day before the flight when Air Force officers failed to inspect five bundles of cruise missiles inside a secure nuclear weapons hangar at Minot. Some missiles in the hangar have nuclear warheads, some have dummy warheads, and others have neither, officials said. An inspection would have revealed that one of the bundles contained six missiles with nuclear warheads, investigators said. "They grabbed the wrong ones," said Maj. Gen. Richard Newton, the Air Force's deputy chief of staff in charge of operations. After that, four other checks built into procedures for checking the weapons were overlooked, allowing the plane to take off Aug. 30 with crew members unaware that they were carrying enough destructive power to wipe out several cities. Newton said that even though the nuclear missiles were hanging on the B-52's wings overnight without anyone knowing they were missing, the investigation found that the Minot's tarmac was secure enough that the military was never at risk of losing control of the warheads. The cruise missiles were supposed to be transported to Barksdale without warheads as part of a treaty that requires the missiles to be mothballed.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Cyborg Insect Drones: Research, Risks, and Governance
    CYBORG INSECT DRONES: RESEARCH, RISKS, AND GOVERNANCE By: Heraclio Pimentel Jr. 12/01/2017 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................................................... 1 I. BACKGROUND: THE RESEARCH ................................................................................................................................................ 2 A. Emergence of HI-MEMS .................................................................................................................................................. 2 B. Technical Background .................................................................................................................................................... 3 C. The State of the Technology ......................................................................................................................................... 4 D. Intended Applications of HI-MEMS ............................................................................................................................ 6 II. RISKS: DUAL-USE APPLICATIONS OF HI-MEMS ................................................................................................................ 8 A. HI-MEMS Pose a Risk to National Security ............................................................................................................. 9 B. HI-MEMS Pose a Threat to Personal Privacy .....................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • The Pentagon Bio-Weapons
    The Pentagon Bio-Weapons https://southfront.org/pentagon-bio-weapons/ ANALYSIS #USAEditor's choice DilyanaGaytandzhieva is a Bulgarian investigative journalist and Middle East Correspondent. Over the last two years she has published a series of revealed reports on weapons smuggling. In the past year she came under pressure from the Bulgarian National Security Agency and was fired from her job in the Bulgarian newspaper Trud Daily without explanation. Despite this, Dilyana continues her investigations. Her current report provides an overview of Pentagon’s vigour in the development of biological weapons. Twitter/@dgaytandzhieva (Here is a topic long suspected, but never ‘brought to light’ until now. Don't expect to see such an article in the Main Stream media [MSM] as it would be censored and/or heavily edited before being published. The level of details provided by the author makes her case irrefutable! Those that would like better documentation, can go to the website cited, as virtually EVERY photo, document, map, etc., is enlargeable.. Downloaded from the above website on Feb 10, 2018 ~ Don Chapin) The US Army regularly produces deadly viruses, bacteria and toxins in direct violation of the UN Convention on the prohibition of Biological Weapons. Hundreds of thousands of unwitting people are systematically exposed to dangerous pathogens and other incurable diseases. Bio warfare scientists using diplomatic cover test man-made viruses at Pentagon bio laboratories in 25 countries across the world. These US bio-laboratories are funded by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) under a $ 2.1 billion military program– Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP), and are located in former Soviet Union countries such as Georgia and Ukraine, the Middle East, South East Asia and Africa.
    [Show full text]
  • Float Like a Butterfly;
    FLOAT LIKE A BUTTERFLY; STING LIKE A BEE Float Like a Butterfly: Sting Like a Bee charts the historically complex interspecies relationship developed over millennia between Human and Bee societies and traces the ever shifting metaphors of governance and social organisation that the Bee colony has provided. The paper examines the intertwined trajectories of the Bee and the Chemical industry in their parallel roles in Agriculture and Warfare and concludes with an illustration of the Author's personal engagement with the hive-mind in his efforts toward the co-creation of artworks. Author: Nigel Helyer ut of the eater came forth meat and out of the strong came forth sweetness. [1] O September 1st 2013: As I write some over- caffeinated almost-adult sits in a Texan bunker plotting the target coordinates for a series of drone strikes on Syrian military targets. With some foresight they may avoid liquidating the Sarin gas stockpiles close by the Jordanian border, a collateral damage disaster utterly remote from the worldview and experience (and therefore judgement) of the juvenile games-jockeys who fly these virtual weapons. Their puppet masters, the Nigel Helyer hive-mind of the Pentagon is abuzz with swarming Float Like a Butterfly; Sting Like a Bee, 2013 algorithms developed for them by the Rand Corporation in a 125 page document espousing strategies based upon an almost total misunderstanding of the behaviour of bee swarms. Swarming and the future of conflict November 28th 2013: Looking back, a deal was struck, the world focussed upon the chemical Swarming is a powerful metaphor currently applied warfare issue with a relatively fast and efficient to contemporary military strategy.
    [Show full text]
  • Entomological Warfare- an Overview
    https://krishiscience.in/ Mawtham et al., 2020 KS-1558 Popular article ENTOMOLOGICAL WARFARE- AN OVERVIEW M. M. Mawtham* and C. Gailce Leo Justin1 Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Coimbatore-641003, Tamil Nadu, India 1Anbil Dharmalingam Agricultural College and Research Institute, Tamil Nadu Agricultural University, Tiruchirappalli-620027, Tamil Nadu, India *Corresponding author: [email protected] Received: Aug 30, 2020; Accepted: Oct 22, 2020 Introduction Entomological Warfare (EW) is a type of Biological Warfare (BW) that uses insects as war weapons, tools of terrorism and creating nuisance from ancient period to modern period. Minimum 12 insect orders have been used as biological weapon, which are classified into three categories based on damages viz., direct and indirect. In the first category, insect toxins were weaponized, particularly in Hymenoptera to inflict pain to assailants and second category involves use of insect as pests of agricultural crops which cause severe economic damage. In the third, disease transmitting insect vectors like Anopheles mosquitoes (transmitting malaria), etc. were used. Insect borne pathogens of humans, livestock and agricultural crops constituted more risk in bioterrorism. In the 14th century, Asia Minor plague transmitted through fleas (Black Death) was one of the earliest events of using insect as biological weapons during World War II (Chaudhry et al., 2017). This paper clearly discusses the ways in which insects have been used as biological warfare. Ancient and modern history Ancient people know about using insects as weapons to attack and to protect themselves from enemies, where hornet was used to dislodge entrenched enemies. In Persian practice, dipteran flies were used to torture prisoner, by forcing the flies to cause diarrhoea until the enemies succumbed to myiasis and septic.
    [Show full text]
  • Bioethics in War, Biological Weapons and Genetic Means of Warfare
    Bioethics in War, Biological Weapons and Genetic Means of Warfare Sorour Farrokh Ahmadi Faculty of Law McGill University, Montreal A thesis submitted to McGill University in partial fulfillment of the requirements of the degree of Master of Laws December 2019 ©Sorour Farrokh Ahmadi, 2019 “We have built the weapons We have ripped the chests Lest we accuse the words Maybe “war” wanted to be the name of a flower…” - Mohammad Afandideh, Iranian Poet i Table of Contents Abstract -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1 Résumé --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 2 Acknowledgments -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 3 Introduction --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 4 Chapter One: Biological and Genetic Weapons ------------------------------------------------------- 7 A. Biological weapons -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 1. Early Developments ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 2. Modern Use of Biological Warfare and Bioterrorism ---------------------------------------- 14 B. Genetic Means of Warfare ----------------------------------------------------------------------- 21 1. Genetic Engineering ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 21 i. Genetic Engineering
    [Show full text]
  • Iaj 10-2 (2019)
    Vol. 10 No. 2 2019 Arthur D. Simons Center for Interagency Cooperation, Fort Leavenworth, Kansas FEATURES | 1 About The Simons Center The Arthur D. Simons Center for Interagency Cooperation is a major program of the Command and General Staff College Foundation, Inc. The Simons Center is committed to the development of military leaders with interagency operational skills and an interagency body of knowledge that facilitates broader and more effective cooperation and policy implementation. About the CGSC Foundation The Command and General Staff College Foundation, Inc., was established on December 28, 2005 as a tax-exempt, non-profit educational foundation that provides resources and support to the U.S. Army Command and General Staff College in the development of tomorrow’s military leaders. The CGSC Foundation helps to advance the profession of military art and science by promoting the welfare and enhancing the prestigious educational programs of the CGSC. The CGSC Foundation supports the College’s many areas of focus by providing financial and research support for major programs such as the Simons Center, symposia, conferences, and lectures, as well as funding and organizing community outreach activities that help connect the American public to their Army. All Simons Center works are published by the “CGSC Foundation Press.” The CGSC Foundation is an equal opportunity provider. InterAgency Journal FEATURES Vol. 10, No. 2 (2019) 5 Situating Weapons of Mass Destruction in our Interagency Thinking Arthur D. Simons Center Amy J. Nelson and John Mark Mattox for Interagency Cooperation The Lewis and Clark Center 100 Stimson Ave., Suite 1149 7 Enhanced Research into Synthetic Biology Fort Leavenworth, Kansas 66027 Sean R.
    [Show full text]
  • 2013 5 Special Issue Agroterrorism
    P a g e | 1 CBRNE-Terrorism Newsletter – October 2013 (Special Collection) www.cbrne-terrorism-newsletter.com P a g e | 2 CBRNE-Terrorism Newsletter – October 2013 (Special Collection) EDITOR’S COMMENT This is a collection of papers focusing on agro-terrorism. Food chain is a potential terrorist target and the long way from farm to spoon provides many gaps that can cause serious damage to social web and state infrastructure. No high level lethal biological agents can be used and the impact could be tremendous both in human lives and livestock and in national economy. Agroterrorism Agroterrorism, also known as Agriterrorism, is a malicious attempt to disrupt or destroy the agricultural industry and/or food supply system of a population through "the malicious use of plant or animal pathogens to cause devastating disease in the agricultural sectors". It is closely related to the concepts of biological warfare and entomological warfare, except carried out by non-state parties (although this might happen as well). It may also take the form of hoaxes and threats intended to create public fear of such events. Insects: tougher than anthrax Source:http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/10/21/insects_tougher_than_anthrax/ Microscopic agents such as smallpox, ebola, and anthrax have become synonymous with bioterrorism. But insects can be more practical and effective. Producing sufficient quantities of viruses or bacteria can be technically challenging, the process is extremely hazardous, and it is difficult to find a way to disperse the product effectively. Getting particles of the right size to stay aloft as an aerosol is not simple, and if the winds shift an otherwise effective attack is neutralized.
    [Show full text]
  • Editing Biosecurity: Needs and Strategies for Governing Genome Editing
    Editing Biosecurity: Needs and Strategies for Governing Genome Editing Jesse Kirkpatrick Gregory D. Koblentz Megan J. Palmer Edward Perello David A. Relman Sarah W. Denton December 2018 Institute for Philosophy and Public Policy STUDY OVERVIEW In 2017, researchers from George Mason University and Stanford University initiated a two-year multidisciplinary study, Editing Biosecurity, to explore critical biosecurity issues related to CRISPR and related genome editing technologies. The overarching goal of the study was to present governance options and recommendations to key stakeholders, and to identify broader trends in the life sciences that may alter the security landscape. In characterizing the landscape, and in the design of these options and recommendations, the research team focused on how to manage the often-competing demands of promoting innovation and preventing misuse, and how to adapt current, or create new, governance mechanisms to achieve these objectives. The four study leads and seven research assistants for Editing Biosecurity were assisted by a core research group of fourteen subject-matter experts with backgrounds in security, the life sciences, policy, industry, and, ethics. The centerpiece of the study was three invitation-only workshops that brought together the study leads and the core research group for structured discussions of the benefits, risks, and governance options for genome editing. To support these workshops and the final report, the study leads prepared two working papers on risk assessment and governance, respectively, and commissioned five issue briefs on key topics. Acknowledgements Generous support for this research was provided by the Smith Richardson Foundation. The study leads wish to thank Sarah W.
    [Show full text]
  • Insects As Biological Weapons
    orism terr & io B B i f o o d l e a f e n n r s u e o Chaudhary, et al., J Bioterror Biodef 2017, 9:1 J Journal of Bioterrorism & Biodefense ISSN: 2157-2526 DOI: 10.4172/2157-2526.1000156 Research Article OMICS International Insects as Biological Weapons Fahad Nazir Chaudhry*, Muhammad Faheem Malik, Mubashar Hussain and Nayab Asif Department of Zoology, University of Gujrat, Hafiz Hayat Campus, Pakistan *Corresponding author: Fahad Nazir Chaudhry, Department of Zoology, University of Gujrat, Hafiz Hayat Campus, Gujrat, Pakistan, Tel: + 410-735-6409; E-mail: [email protected] Received date: April 22, 2017; Accepted date: July 26, 2017; Published date: July 31, 2017 Copyright: © 2018 Chaudhary FN, et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. Abstract This study was conducted at University of Gujrat during 2017 to 2018 as a term paper for Master of Philosophy. The data regarding use of Insects as Biological Weapons was reviewed and compiled as a review paper from various published articles of international reputed journals annual/environmental reports of recognized organization and e-books. Use of entomological weapons is a wide field of research. Insects were used as biological weapons from ancient times and this concept is very old. Different insects can be used for this purpose by different ways. Insects can be used as biological weapons against crops, animals and human beings. Insects may be used as direct pests against crop or they may be used as vectors to spread diseases in animals and human beings.
    [Show full text]
  • 11 May, 2017 Item No. 4.232
    AC - 11th May, 2017 Item No. 4.232 AC - 11th May, 2017 Item No. 4.232 AC - 11th May, 2017 Item No. 4.232 AC - 11th May, 2017 Item No. 4.232 CONTENTS 1. Preface 2. Preamble 3. Pedagogy 4. Tables of Courses, Topics, Credits and Workload 5. Theory Syllabus for Semester V (Course code USACEENT501) 6. Practical Syllabus for Semester V (Course code USACEENT5P1) 7. Theory Syllabus for Semester VI (Course code USACEENT601) 8. Practical Syllabus for Semester VI (Course code USACEENT6P1) 9. References and Additional Reading( USACEENT501& USACEENT601) 10. Scheme of Examination (Theory & Practical) 11. Practical Skeleton paper Semester V and Semester VI 12. Annexure I: Suggested topics for Assignment (Semester V) 13. Annexure II: Suggested Field Visits (Semester VI) 14. Annexure III: Suggested Topics for Projects (Semester VI) 15. Annexure IV: Learners’ space 16. Annexure V:Play and Ponder 17. Model Theory Question Paper Semester V & Semester VI AC - 11th May, 2017 Item No. 4.232 PREFACE Applied Component was introduced for T. Y. B. Sc. class in the academic year 1979-80 with a view to enhance the essence for employability. The syllabus is a blend of concepts with four electives. It gives me immense pleasure to present these four applied component courses namely Marine Science, Fishery Biology, Economic Entomology and Environmental Science under the umbrella of BOS in Zoology. In the syllabi of these applied components, applied topics having commercial propositions have been incorporated that further ads to the enhancement of entrepreneurial potential and skills amongst the learners. In the past our syllabus focused mainly on theory as a way of providing knowledge base and preparation for students.
    [Show full text]
  • Jeffery A. Lockwood. Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects As Weapons of War
    Journal of Military and Strategic VOLUME 13, ISSUE 1, FALL 2010 Studies Jeffery A. Lockwood. Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects as Weapons of War. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2009. Dr. Paul Hansen, Department of Anthropology, University of Calgary While the title alone is enough to intrigue any curious reader, the content and delivery of Six-Legged Soldiers: Using Insects as Weapons of War does not disappoint. The main strength, though some might argue weakness, of Lockwood’s monograph is its wide-ranging scope. The writer is careful to point out in the Preface that he is not a historian, military or otherwise. He is an entomologist setting out to discuss 100,000 years of global history by linking how insects have been used, are being used, and may in the future be used towards military ends. By way of my own declaration, I am not a ©Centre of Military and Strategic Studies, 2011 ISSN : 1488-559X VOLUME 12, ISSUE 3, SPRING 2010 historian or entomologist. I am an anthropologist geographically focused on Japan and theoretically focused on human-animal-technology relations. The book came to my attention because it contains three chapters on Japan’s use of ‚six-legged soldiers‛ from the 1930s through to the end of the Second World War and this topic coincides with my own research interest in security (very widely and philosophically construed) in contemporary Japan. Personal reasons for approaching the book aside, I suggest that most readers would agree it is a masterfully written book. It appeals to a general audience through taking what could be, to a non-military historian, a dull read full of dates and documents alongside what could be, to a non-entomologist, an incompressible barrage of Latin names and genetic explanations, and cleverly fuses them into an enjoyable and thought provoking account with hooks, humour, and humility.
    [Show full text]
  • Wireworm Control
    FALL 2014 WIREWORM CONTROL IS BIFENTHRIN THE ANSWER? Best Practices for Minimizing Bruising FIELD DAYS Researchers Showcase Plot Trials Across the Country THE BENEFITS OF BRANDING AEROPONIC PRODUCTION A NEW WAY TO GROW POTATOES Variable Rate Irrigation Publications Mail Agreement #40030841 Publications Mail Agreement SPUDSMART.COM CASE IH MAGNUM ROWTRAC The most powerful Magnum tractor yet - the Rowtrac provides leading horsepower and fuel efficiency, with the benefits of a wheeled machine but flotation perks of a tracked model. Whether you are tilling, planting, seeding or harvesting, the Magnum Rowtrac comes in two models available with 8.7L engine that boasts 340 or 380 HP. Minimal soil disturbance when turning - less compaction and more traction, this machine offers you the performance of a Steiger, brought to you in a fixed framed row crop tractor. Visit Rocky Mountain Equipment today for the full performance details and benefits of owning a Case IH Magnum Rowtrac. Rocky Mountain Equipment DEPENDABLE IS WHAT WE DO. 1-855-RME-1427 ROCKYMTN.COM SpudSmart.indd 1 14-09-23 11:34 AM spudsmart.com your online potato business resource contentsfall 2014 Features 04 WIREWORM CONTROL The elusive Silver Bullet. 06 A NEW WAY TO GROW Could aeroponic seed potato production be the way of the future? 12 POTATO SHOWPLACE A look inside the Canadian Potato Museum in O’Leary, P.E.I. 18 MAKING A NAME How potato-based businesses can benefit from branding. 22 NUTRITION IN A COMPACT PACKAGE Ontario researchers studying health benefits of pigmented potatoes, and how to promote them. 24 A CHANGE OF SCENERY Airport hosts Potato Growers of Alberta South Field Day.
    [Show full text]