DOCSLIB.ORG

Environmental Assessment Rudyard

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Environmental Assessment Rudyard Environmental Assessment Rudyard United States Department of Agriculture Forest Service Eastern Region Hiawatha National Forest June 2013 Responsible Official: Stevan Christiansen W1900 West US 2 St. Ignace, MI 49781 (906) 643-7900 ext. 113 (906) 643-7611 (TDD) (906) 643-8759 (Fax) [email protected] Additional Information: Brad Cooper W1900 West US 2 St. Ignace, MI 49781 (906) 643-7900 ext. 111 (906) 643-7611 (TDD) (906) 643-8759 (Fax) i Cover picture: Rudyard vicinity map. The Rudyard Project Area is approximately 34,000 acres and is located on the Eastside of the Hiawatha National Forest in Mackinac and Chippewa Counties, Michigan. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, sex, religion, age, disability, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, status as a parent (in education and training programs and activities), because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any public assistance program, or retaliation. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs or activities.) If you require this information in alternative format (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.), contact the USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (Voice or TDD). If you require information about this program, activity, or facility in a language other than English, contact the agency office responsible for the program or activity, or any USDA office. To file a complaint alleging discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call Toll free, (866) 632-9992 (Voice). TDD users can contact USDA through local relay or the Federal relay at (800) 877-8339 (TDD) or (866) 377-8642 (relay voice users). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer. The maps contained within this document are reproduced from geospatial information prepared by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. By removing the contents of this package or taking receipt of these files via electronic file transfer methods, you understand that the data stored on this media is in draft condition. Represented features may not be in an accurate geographic location. The Forest Service makes no expressed or implied warranty, including warranty of merchantability and fitness, with respect to the character, function, or capabilities of the data or their appropriateness for any user's purposes. The Forest Service reserves the right to correct, update, modify, or replace this geospatial information without notification. For more information, contact the Forest geographic information system (GIS) Coordinator, Hiawatha National Forest, Supervisor’s Office 906-428- 5800. ii TABLE OF CONTENTS Chapter 1 – Purpose and Need for Action ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Document Structure ........................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1 1.3 Relation to Forest Plan ......................................................................................................................... 2 1.4 Purpose and Need for Action ................................................................................................................ 3 1.5 Proposed Action ................................................................................................................................... 6 1.6 Decision Framework ............................................................................................................................ 7 1.7 Tribal Consultation and Public Involvement ......................................................................................... 8 1.8 Issues .................................................................................................................................................... 9 Chapter 2 – Alternatives, Including the Proposed Action ....................................................................... 12 2.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 12 2.2 Alternatives Considered in Detail ...................................................................................................... 12 2.3 Mitigation Measures (Design Criteria) Common to All Action Alternatives ....................................... 19 2.4 Comparison of Alternatives ............................................................................................................... 21 Chapter 3 – Environmental Consequences ............................................................................................. 30 3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................................... 30 3.2 Past, Present, and Reasonably Foreseeable Future Actions .............................................................. 30 3.3 Air Quality .......................................................................................................................................... 36 3.4 Fire Ecology and Fuels ........................................................................................................................ 38 3.5 Soils .................................................................................................................................................... 43 3.6 Water Quality and Quantity ............................................................................................................... 49 3.7 Wetlands ............................................................................................................................................ 54 3.8 Vegetation ......................................................................................................................................... 60 3.9 Non-Native Invasive Plants ................................................................................................................ 71 3.10 Threatened, Endangered, and Sensitive Plants ................................................................................ 82 3.11 Wildlife and Terrestrial Management Indicator Species ................................................................. 91 3.12 Fisheries .......................................................................................................................................... 102 3.13 Recreation ..................................................................................................................................... 104 3.14 Visual Quality ................................................................................................................................ 119 3.15 Heritage Resources......................................................................................................................... 131 3.16 Transportation ............................................................................................................................... 134 3.17 Socio-Economics ............................................................................................................................ 140 3.18 Environmental Justice .................................................................................................................... 144 iii Chapter 4 – Consultation and Coordination ......................................................................................... 147 4.1 Agencies Consulted.......................................................................................................................... 147 4.2 Persons Consulted ........................................................................................................................... 147 4.3 List of Preparers ............................................................................................................................... 147 References ........................................................................................................................................... 149 Glossary ............................................................................................................................................... 158 Acronyms ............................................................................................................................................. 166 Appendices Appendix A – Response to Scoping Comments Appendix B – Site-specific Activities and Design Criteria Appendix C – Silviculture and Transportation Appendix D – Laws and Policy Appendix E – Biological Evaluation Appendix F – Hiawatha National Forest Non-native Invasive Plant List Appendix G – Maps Vicinity Map Proposed Action Map Alternative 1 Map Watersheds Map Ecological Landtypes Map Management Areas Map Appendix H – Past, Present, and Foreseeable Future NEPA Projects Appendix I – Non-significant Forest Plan Amendments 1 & 2 iv CHAPTER 1 – PURPOSE AND NEED FOR ACTION 1.1 Document Structure _______________________________________________________ The Forest Service has prepared this Environmental Assessment in compliance with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and other relevant federal and state laws and regulations. This Environmental Assessment
Load more

Recommended publications
  • 100 Years of Michigan State Parks
    1 ourmidland.com 2 Page 2 | Week of May 6 -11, 2019 Which state park was Michigan’s first? As the DNR celebrates the 100th anniversary of Michigan state parks system, a natural question arises – what was Michigan’s first state park? Well, the answer depends on how you interpret the question and isn’t simple. The 2019 state parks centennial celebration is centered around the formation of the Michigan State Park Commission by the state Legislature on May 12, 1919. The commission was given responsibility for overseeing, acquiring and maintaining public lands and establishing Michigan’s state parks system. One of the state’s earliest purchases was the site of Interlochen State Park in 1917. Although the land was purchased prior to 1919, Interlochen was the first public park to be transferred to the Michigan State Park Commission in 1920 and is considered Michigan’s first state park. However, many consider Mackinac Island as Michigan’s first state park, which is also true. Approximately 25 years before legislation estab- lished the state park commission, the federal government gifted the Mackinac Island property it owned to the state in 1895. The island was designat- ed as Michigan’s first state park under the Mackinac State Park Commission. Because Mackinac Island is operated under the Mackinac State Park Commission and was not placed under the Michigan State Park Commission, there is more than one answer to the “first state park” question. Interlochen State Park The Michigan Legislature paid $60,000 for the land that became Interlochen State Park, located southwest of Traverse City, in 1917.
    [Show full text]
  • VGP) Version 2/5/2009
    Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) VESSEL GENERAL PERMIT FOR DISCHARGES INCIDENTAL TO THE NORMAL OPERATION OF VESSELS (VGP) AUTHORIZATION TO DISCHARGE UNDER THE NATIONAL POLLUTANT DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM In compliance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended (33 U.S.C. 1251 et seq.), any owner or operator of a vessel being operated in a capacity as a means of transportation who: • Is eligible for permit coverage under Part 1.2; • If required by Part 1.5.1, submits a complete and accurate Notice of Intent (NOI) is authorized to discharge in accordance with the requirements of this permit. General effluent limits for all eligible vessels are given in Part 2. Further vessel class or type specific requirements are given in Part 5 for select vessels and apply in addition to any general effluent limits in Part 2. Specific requirements that apply in individual States and Indian Country Lands are found in Part 6. Definitions of permit-specific terms used in this permit are provided in Appendix A. This permit becomes effective on December 19, 2008 for all jurisdictions except Alaska and Hawaii. This permit and the authorization to discharge expire at midnight, December 19, 2013 i Vessel General Permit (VGP) Version 2/5/2009 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 William K. Honker, Acting Director Robert W. Varney, Water Quality Protection Division, EPA Region Regional Administrator, EPA Region 1 6 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, 2008 Signed and issued this 18th day of December, Barbara A.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1464 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1132
    § 1132 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1464 Department and agency having jurisdiction of, and reports submitted to Congress regard- thereover immediately before its inclusion in ing pending additions, eliminations, or modi- the National Wilderness Preservation System fications. Maps, legal descriptions, and regula- unless otherwise provided by Act of Congress. tions pertaining to wilderness areas within No appropriation shall be available for the pay- their respective jurisdictions also shall be ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- available to the public in the offices of re- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation gional foresters, national forest supervisors, System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- priations be available for additional personnel and forest rangers. stated as being required solely for the purpose of managing or administering areas solely because (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classi- they are included within the National Wilder- fications as primitive areas; Presidential rec- ness Preservation System. ommendations to Congress; approval of Con- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined gress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Ea- A wilderness, in contrast with those areas gles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado where man and his own works dominate the The Secretary of Agriculture shall, within ten landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where years after September 3, 1964, review, as to its the earth and its community of life are un- suitability or nonsuitability for preservation as trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- wilderness, each area in the national forests tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness classified on September 3, 1964 by the Secretary is further defined to mean in this chapter an area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its of Agriculture or the Chief of the Forest Service primeval character and influence, without per- as ‘‘primitive’’ and report his findings to the manent improvements or human habitation, President.
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L
    Page 1517 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1131 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 10, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) Sec. 1132. Extent of System. § 1110. Liability 1133. Use of wilderness areas. 1134. State and private lands within wilderness (a) United States areas. The United States Government shall not be 1135. Gifts, bequests, and contributions. liable for any act or omission of the Commission 1136. Annual reports to Congress. or of any person employed by, or assigned or de- § 1131. National Wilderness Preservation System tailed to, the Commission. (a) Establishment; Congressional declaration of (b) Payment; exemption of property from attach- policy; wilderness areas; administration for ment, execution, etc. public use and enjoyment, protection, preser- Any liability of the Commission shall be met vation, and gathering and dissemination of from funds of the Commission to the extent that information; provisions for designation as it is not covered by insurance, or otherwise. wilderness areas Property belonging to the Commission shall be In order to assure that an increasing popu- exempt from attachment, execution, or other lation, accompanied by expanding settlement process for satisfaction of claims, debts, or judg- and growing mechanization, does not occupy ments. and modify all areas within the United States (c) Individual members of Commission and its possessions, leaving no lands designated No liability of the Commission shall be im- for preservation and protection in their natural puted to any member of the Commission solely condition, it is hereby declared to be the policy on the basis that he occupies the position of of the Congress to secure for the American peo- member of the Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • The Watersheds of Northeast Michigan
    The Watersheds of Northeast Michigan What is a Watershed? Did you know that everywhere you are, you’re within a watershed? A watershed is an area of land that contains a common set of streams, rivers and lakes that all drain into a larger waterbody. Watershed boundaries follow natural features of the landscape, such as a ridgeline or a height-of-land (see diagram at right). Watersheds include both the water features within the area, as well as the land surrounding those water bodies. As a result of the connected nature of a watershed, all activities on the land and water can affect the condition of the larger watershed. A watershed can be divided into progressively smaller watersheds, which are often referred to as subswatersheds. For example, the Klacking Creek Watershed is one of many subwatersheds that can be identified within the larger Rifle River Watershed. Likewise, the Rifle River Watershed itself is part of the larger Lake Huron Watershed. Watershed diagram: www.upperdesplainsriver.org Huron Pines is a nonprofit 501(c)(3) organization and an equal opportunity provider. Our dynamic staff of ecologists, geographers, biologists and environmental educators think big and act quickly to ensure that Northeast Michigan’s watersheds and wild places will stay healthy and resilient for future generations. Located right in the center of the Great Lakes system, we have the unique privilege and responsibility to protect our treasured lands teeming with wildlife, and to sustain the world’s most important source of fresh water. Learn more at
    [Show full text]
  • Page 1480 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION § 1113 (Pub
    § 1113 TITLE 16—CONSERVATION Page 1480 (Pub. L. 88–363, § 13, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) ment of expenses or salaries for the administra- tion of the National Wilderness Preservation § 1113. Authorization of appropriations System as a separate unit nor shall any appro- There are hereby authorized to be appro- priations be available for additional personnel priated to the Department of the Interior with- stated as being required solely for the purpose of out fiscal year limitation such sums as may be managing or administering areas solely because necessary for the purposes of this chapter and they are included within the National Wilder- the agreement with the Government of Canada ness Preservation System. signed January 22, 1964, article 11 of which pro- (c) ‘‘Wilderness’’ defined vides that the Governments of the United States A wilderness, in contrast with those areas and Canada shall share equally the costs of de- where man and his own works dominate the veloping and the annual cost of operating and landscape, is hereby recognized as an area where maintaining the Roosevelt Campobello Inter- the earth and its community of life are un- national Park. trammeled by man, where man himself is a visi- (Pub. L. 88–363, § 14, July 7, 1964, 78 Stat. 301.) tor who does not remain. An area of wilderness is further defined to mean in this chapter an CHAPTER 23—NATIONAL WILDERNESS area of undeveloped Federal land retaining its PRESERVATION SYSTEM primeval character and influence, without per- manent improvements or human habitation, Sec. which is protected and managed so as to pre- 1131.
    [Show full text]
  • PARKS and RECREATION DIVISION FIELD DIRECTORY Alpha Order
    PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION FIELD DIRECTORY Alpha Order Michigan Department of Natural Resources November 19, 2018 1 DISTRICTS AND UNITS SUPERVISOR/ACCT ASSISTANT TELEPHONE/FAX NUMBERS PARKS AND RECREATION DIVISION FIELD DIRECTORY November 19, 2018 DISTRICTS AND UNITS SUPERVISOR/ACCT ASSISTANT TELEPHONE/FAX NUMBERS Agate Falls (Contact Baraga State Park) Public: 906-353-6558 Alanson Lock (Contact Petoskey State Park) Public: 231-548-2271 Algonac State Park Dennis Wilson, Unit Supervisor Public: 810-765-5605 8732 River Road Park & Recreation Supervisor 2 Fax: 810-765-3808 Marine City, MI 48039 [Kimberly David, Acct. Asst. – A] Private: 810-765-5029 Allegan Field Office & Const. Crew Martin Vandervelde, Unit Supervisor Public: 269-673-2584 4120 Allegan Dam Road Park & Recreation Supervisor 2 Fax: 269-686-0156 Allegan, MI 49010 [Tricia Willis, Secretary – A] Maintenance Shop: 269-673-4747 (Worksite Fort Custer Recreation Area) Construction Shop: 269-673-2584 Aloha State Park Jeremy Spell, Unit Supervisor Public: 231-625-2522 4347 Third Street Park & Recreation Supervisor 2 Fax: 231-625-8180 Cheboygan, MI 49721 [Gail Cook, Acct. Asst. – A] Private: 231-625-0211 (Worksite Cheboygan Field Office) AuGres State Harbor (Contact Tawas Point State Park) Public: 989-362-5041 Bald Mountain Recreation Area Adam Lepp, Unit Supervisor Public: 248-693-6767 1330 East Greenshield Road Park & Recreation Supervisor 2 Fax: 248-693-4227 Lake Orion, MI 48360-2307 [Julie Day Acting, Acct. Tech. – E] (Worksite Pontiac Lake) Baldwin Field Office Ron Monroe, Unit Supervisor Public: 231-745-9465 2390 West 24th Street Park & Recreation Supervisor 2 Fax: 231-745-8738 Baldwin, MI 49304 [Brenda Pylkas, Acct.
    [Show full text]
  • Social and Economic Assessment for Michigan's State Forests
    Social and Economic Assessment for Michigan’s State Forests Prepared for: Michigan Department of Natural Resources Forest, Mineral, and Fire Management Division Lansing, Michigan September 5, 2006 Prepared by: Tessa Systems, LLC East Lansing, MI Preface Public Act 125 of 2004, Section 52505, requires the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MiDNR) to seek and maintain third-party sustainable forestry certification. Forest certification requires that MiDNR forest management plans take into consideration social and economic parameters that affect future forest management operations. Currently, the MiDNR is preparing a statewide forest management plan, and each of three eco-teams are drafting ecoregional management plans. The social and economic information provided in this report will be used to assess current social and economic conditions and to develop future management directions within each of the plans. The report focuses primarily on three ecoregions: the Western Upper Peninsula, Eastern Upper Peninsula, and Northern Lower Peninsula as defined by the MIDNR along county boundaries. It covers social and economic conditions within these ecoregions in aggregate and on a county-level basis. As a result data for the areas in and around Michigan state forests are highlighted. The “Social and Economic Assessment for the Michigan National Forests” (July 25, 2003), by Larry Leefers, Karen Potter-Witter, and Maureen McDonough from Michigan State University, provides a general model for this report. The assessment report is based on secondary data. No primary data collection was done. MiDNR personnel provided unpublished data from MiDNR records. The report presents analyses of existing data and discusses relationships and trends in the variables of interest, and contains some projections based on existing literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Hiawatha Agriculture
    United States Department of Hiawatha Agriculture Forest Service 2006 National Forest 2006 Forest Plan Forest Terminology Acronyms AMS: Analysis of the Management Situation NEPA: National Environmental Policy Act ASQ: Allowable Sale Quantity NF: National Forest BA: Basal Area NFMA: National Forest Management Act BFES: Budget Formulation and Execution NFS: National Forest System System NOI: Notice of Intent Bg: Background NPV: Net Present Value BMP: Best Management Practices OG: Old-Growth CEQ: Council on Environmental Quality OHV: Off Highway Vehicle CFR: Code of Federal Regulations OML: Objective Maintenance Level cRNA: Candidate Research Natural Area PILT: Payment in Lieu of Taxes Dbh: Diameter at Breast Height PM: Particulate Matter DC: Desired Condition PNM: Primitive Non-Motorized DEIS: Draft Environmental Impact Statement PSD: Prevention of Significant Deterioration DNR: Michigan Department of Natural R9: Region 9 (Forest Service Eastern Region) Resources (also MDNR) RAP: Roads Analysis Process EA: Environmental Assessment RFSS: Regional Forest Sensitive Species EIS: Environmental Impact Statement RMV: Recreation Motor Vehicle ELT: Ecological Landtype RMZ: Riparian Management Zone EPA: Environmental Protection Agency RNA: Research Natural Area FEIS: Final Environmental Impact Statement RNV: Range of Natural Variation Fg: Foreground ROD: Record of Decision FOFEM: First Order Fire Effects Model ROS: Recreation Opportunity Spectrum FS: Forest Service RVD: Recreation Visitor Days FSH: Forest Service Handbook S: Standard (forest plan)
    [Show full text]
  • Vanishing Lake Michigan Sand Dunes: Threats from Mining
    Vanishing Lake Michigan Sand Dunes: Threats from Mining “Those dunes are to the Midwest what the Grand Canyon is to Arizona and the Yosemite to California. They constitute a signature of time and eternity. Once lost, the loss would be irrevocable.” —Carl Sandburg a publication of LAKE MICHIGAN FEDERATION Chicago • Muskegon TABLE OF CONTENTS About Lake Michigan Federation, Acknowledgements......Inside Front Cover Executive Summary.................................................................................... 1 Introduction.............................................................................................. 3 Lake Michigan Dunes Are Vital to the Region............................................ 4 Threats to Sand Dunes............................................................................... 5 Creeping Joe............................................................................................... 5 Michigan's Sand Dune Protection and Management Act Fails to Protect Lake Michigan Dunes..................................................... 8 Now You See It - Now You Don’t.................................................................12 Case Studies.........................................................................................15, 18 Farewell to Maggie......................................................................................17 Pristine Michigan Dunes Added to Wilderness State Park............................. 22 Southwest Michigan Dunes Saved by Property Owners...................................23
    [Show full text]
  • Michigan 27Th in Beachwater Quality 15% of Samples Exceeded National Standards in 2010
    MIchIgan 27th in Beachwater Quality 15% of samples exceeded national standards in 2010 Polluted urban and suburban runoff is a major threat to water quality at the nation’s coastal beaches. Runoff from storms and irrigation carries pollution from parking lots, yards, and streets directly to waterways. In some parts of the country, stormwater routinely causes overflows from sewage systems. Innovative solutions known as green infrastructure enable communities to naturally absorb or use runoff before it causes problems. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is modernizing its national rules for sources of runoff pollution and should develop strong, green infrastructure-based requirements. Michigan has more than 600 public beaches stretching along more than 600 miles of Great Lakes coastline. The Michigan Department of Natural Resources and Environment (DNRE) administers the state’s BEACH Act grant. Monitoring Results Key FIndIngS In MIchIgan In 2010, Michigan reported 632 coastal beaches (including 35 National Park Service beaches), 11 (2%) of Beachwater contamination which were monitored more than once a week, 199 (31%) (% of samples exceeding state standards in 2010) • Brimley State Park in Chippewa County (49%) once a week, 400 (63%) were not monitored, and there • St. Clair Shores Blossom Heath Beach in was no monitoring frequency information for 22 (3%) Macomb County (40%) beaches. For this section of the report, NRDC looked at • Warren Dunes Beach in Berrien County (30%) the percent of individual monitoring samples that Reported Sources of Beachwater contamination exceeded the state’s daily bacterial standard unless Statewide (number of closing/advisory days) individual samples were not reported (all reported samples • 315 (87%) unknown sources of contamination were used to calculate the 2010 percent exceedance rates, • 27 (7%) stormwater runoff including duplicate samples and samples taken outside the • 14 (4%) other sources of contamination official beach season, if any).
    [Show full text]
  • The Wilderness Act of 1964
    The Wilderness Act of 1964 Source: US House of Representatives Office of the Law This is the 1964 act that started it all Revision Counsel website at and created the first designated http://uscode.house.gov/download/ascii.shtml wilderness in the US and Nevada. This version, updated January 2, 2006, includes a list of all wilderness designated before that date. The list does not mention designations made by the December 2006 White Pine County bill. -CITE- 16 USC CHAPTER 23 - NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM 01/02/2006 -EXPCITE- TITLE 16 - CONSERVATION CHAPTER 23 - NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM -HEAD- CHAPTER 23 - NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM -MISC1- Sec. 1131. National Wilderness Preservation System. (a) Establishment; Congressional declaration of policy; wilderness areas; administration for public use and enjoyment, protection, preservation, and gathering and dissemination of information; provisions for designation as wilderness areas. (b) Management of area included in System; appropriations. (c) "Wilderness" defined. 1132. Extent of System. (a) Designation of wilderness areas; filing of maps and descriptions with Congressional committees; correction of errors; public records; availability of records in regional offices. (b) Review by Secretary of Agriculture of classifications as primitive areas; Presidential recommendations to Congress; approval of Congress; size of primitive areas; Gore Range-Eagles Nest Primitive Area, Colorado. (c) Review by Secretary of the Interior of roadless areas of national park system and national wildlife refuges and game ranges and suitability of areas for preservation as wilderness; authority of Secretary of the Interior to maintain roadless areas in national park system unaffected. (d) Conditions precedent to administrative recommendations of suitability of areas for preservation as wilderness; publication in Federal Register; public hearings; views of State, county, and Federal officials; submission of views to Congress.
    [Show full text]