Thursday, November 28, 2019

Black And Decker Case Study free essay sample

Though Bamp;D leads in the other two segments, it could not capture the tradesmen segment due to the following reasons. Bamp;D was branded more as home tools; it lacked in capitalizing one of the most profitable distribution channels (membership clubs) whereas the same channel proved to be very successful for Makita (85%); the unremarkable grey color did not help Bamp;D; and while Bamp;D was focused in three segments, Makita was focused on only one segment of the market. Therefore, Joseph Galli, Vice president of sales and marketing for Bamp;D, has to decide which one of the three marketing strategies must be implemented to take, the market share in the Professional-Tradesmen segment, away from the current leader Makita. Recommendation: I would recommend Bamp;D to use the strategy of Re-branding i. e; using DeWalt name and the color yellow in order to regain Professional-Tradesmen segment market share. We will write a custom essay sample on Black And Decker Case Study or any similar topic specifically for you Do Not WasteYour Time HIRE WRITER Only 13.90 / page The reasons behind the above recommendation are explained in the following paragraphs Option 1 requires Bamp;D to focus only on the Consumer and Professional-industrial markets while ignoring tradesmen market. Since the tradesmen segment market is growing at a larger rate than the consumer and Industrial segments, alienating that market would give rise to more losses in the future. Dropping the tradesmen segment would also decrease brand awareness for Bamp;D which might increase the sales of competitors as consumers (home tools) may base their purchasing decisions on what the expert uses. Option 2 of sub-branding might theoretically raise its brand image but the potential for sub-branding may be a risky option. This is based on the fact that currently 98% of the tradespeople are aware of the brand and only 44% agree it’s ‘one of the best’. Therefore trades people will not be able to change their attitude towards the sub-brand as they recognize Bamp;D as the creator and this will not increase the market share as expected. The recommended Option 3 of Re-branding the tools with DeWalt and industrial yellow for the Professional-tradesmen segment can cast off the negative branding image from quality products. Bamp;D’s product quality is strongly competitive in the large majority of product categories when compared to the other brands. Since Bamp;D is suffering from Brand name image in this segment it would be wise to re-brand in that segment. The DeWalt received 70% awareness and also 63% agreed that it ‘Is one of the best’ in the research study thereby confirming that it is a suitable replacement name. The industrial yellow color is a bold color representing safety which is not used by any other power tool brands. Hence it would have positive associations. As the DeWalt line’s positive market perception grow, the color will be easier to identify the professional –tradesmen segment line and will be automatically associated with high quality goods. This option could eliminate the following threats. Losing market share is not applicable as it is only 9% and hence does not leave any problem; By isolating the Bamp;D name from tradesmen segment with a new brand name, the risk of damage to other two segments is minimal; and if DeWalt fails, then the retailers and consumers will associate the failure with DeWalt than with Bamp;D. Thus DeWalt should replace the Bamp;D name and change the color to industrial yellow so that the professional tradesmen segment tools can be recognized as brand new.

Sunday, November 24, 2019

Free Essays on Shacking

Within in the past years, the number of unmarried couples living together has increased dramatically. There are, however, some people who still disagree with â€Å"shacking†, claiming that it is inappropriate and irresponsible, as well as simply distasteful. These opinions are out-dated and irrational. Living with one’s partner before being wed is far from being immoral. If anything, it is one very good way to determine if the marriage will work. As in any relationship, time is of the essence and with each day there is another lessoned learned. One thing that should be learned about one’s partner is the way that he or she lives. This cannot be completely understood until the two persons in the relationship share living quarters with each other. There should be a time in every courtship that is dedicated to the experience of learning each other’s living habits because without that time, there are likely to be many problems within the home that could have been alleviated before marriage. You can only learn another person through time and patience and it can’t be disputed that it is better to learn as much as you can about the person you intend to spend the rest of your life with before that time officially begins. Many people are disgraced by the dramatic rise in the divorce rate, however, if people would spend more time dating one another, learning about their partners, and experiencing as much as possibl e with their m! ates before the wedding day them some of the problems that lead to divorce, such as incompatibility, would not be such an factor. When unmarried couples live together, it allows those persons involved to learn and grow together as a unit. It is imperative to the success of any relationship that the involved persons honor and respect each other as individuals and cherish the unity between them. Living together is a perfect way to strengthen both these aspects of a successful relationship. Many people, when ... Free Essays on Shacking Free Essays on Shacking Within in the past years, the number of unmarried couples living together has increased dramatically. There are, however, some people who still disagree with â€Å"shacking†, claiming that it is inappropriate and irresponsible, as well as simply distasteful. These opinions are out-dated and irrational. Living with one’s partner before being wed is far from being immoral. If anything, it is one very good way to determine if the marriage will work. As in any relationship, time is of the essence and with each day there is another lessoned learned. One thing that should be learned about one’s partner is the way that he or she lives. This cannot be completely understood until the two persons in the relationship share living quarters with each other. There should be a time in every courtship that is dedicated to the experience of learning each other’s living habits because without that time, there are likely to be many problems within the home that could have been alleviated before marriage. You can only learn another person through time and patience and it can’t be disputed that it is better to learn as much as you can about the person you intend to spend the rest of your life with before that time officially begins. Many people are disgraced by the dramatic rise in the divorce rate, however, if people would spend more time dating one another, learning about their partners, and experiencing as much as possibl e with their m! ates before the wedding day them some of the problems that lead to divorce, such as incompatibility, would not be such an factor. When unmarried couples live together, it allows those persons involved to learn and grow together as a unit. It is imperative to the success of any relationship that the involved persons honor and respect each other as individuals and cherish the unity between them. Living together is a perfect way to strengthen both these aspects of a successful relationship. Many people, when ...

Thursday, November 21, 2019

The huge salaries of some top athletes from an economic perspective Essay

The huge salaries of some top athletes from an economic perspective - Essay Example The paper tells that in the opinions of many researchers and media personalities, the salaries of athletes are too high. However, judging from a series of empirical studies and economic theory arguments, the opposite of this notion is true. Few players earn extremely high wages, most likely due to the innate characteristics of the sport labour markets both on the production and on demand sides. Through the introduction of broadcasting channels in the second half of the 20th century, the salaries of players have substantially grown, as people have exhibited exceeding interest in the need to watch sports as a preferable entertainment mode. Looking into the wages of the highest earning players, boxing produced the top two earners. Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao top the list with the latter earning $160million, $140 less than that earned by the former. Soccer had the third and four largest earners Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi, who pocket $79.6million and $73.8million respectiv ely. Roger Federer and Lebron James become the highest paid tennis and basketball players, earning $67 million and $64.8million respectively. The demand for labour in the sport market is a derived demand, which depends on the final product’s demand produced by the labour. The rigid supply of sport stars explains why the wages of professional sport stars is relatively high. The quality of demand and production of professional sport stars is not dependent on the increasing or decreasing numbers of consumers, though the market has a structure that can prevent practices such as free riding.

Wednesday, November 20, 2019

Identify the principal powers available to the courts in England & Essay

Identify the principal powers available to the courts in England & Wales in connection with statutory interpretation. How does t - Essay Example One system of employment tribunals that works for England, Wales, and Scotland also exists. In both England and Wales, the house of lords handles matters of highest appeals. In such cases, only the law lords are charged with the responsibility of proceeding over these cases. The Supreme Court judicature act 1873 however abolished this. This was done through the elections where the parliament passed the bill to have the Supreme Court in place. However, an amendment preserving the judicial function of the House of Lords was passed. The court was then used to handle impeachment cases in England, even though nowadays they are considered Magistrate court refers to the lower courts in which all criminal proceedings begin. Certain civil issues can also be decided in these courts, these include family matters (Probert, 2011). These courts have been meant in such a way that they can deliver justice in a swift and simple mean. In England and Wales, there are many magistrates’ courts; th e number is approximate to be over 360. The jurisdiction of these courts lays o the various powers that the legal system gives them. Offences especially those termed as summary offences are often considered small offences and are thus punishable under the powers of magistrates’ limited courts. ... Indictable offences may include rape, murder, and robbery among others. The cases here are heard by the judges at district judge in the magistrate or by three bench magistrate. The magistrate courts have no jury. The police undertake the investigation of these cases and then the prosecution is done accordingly. Defendant can chose to hire to solicitor to represent them in court. This is often catered by the state. Jurisdiction and sentencing powers of the courts In regards to issues related to criminology, the magistrate courts also used to be referred to as police courts both in England and Wales were put in place to deal with little offences at a speedy manner. Nearly all the criminal cases begin and stop at this point. Serious crimes are often taken to crown courts. It is approximated that 95% of many cases are handed at this point. Least serious criminal offences like driving cases, criminal damage of minimal damage, drug possession, vandalism, and criminal damages. All these are dealt with at summery proceedings in the magistrate court. In such cases, the defendants lack the right to jury trial and they have no formal indictment (Miller & Jentz, 2011). The verdict lies in the hands of the magistrates and judges at the courts. Sentencing powers in the magistrate courts have certain limitations. There are certain offences that have their limitations. For instance, they are capable of inflicting fines up to five thousand US dollars and can pass an imprisonment sentence. When the magnitudes of offences are big, the limitation is often raised. This means that such cases can attract high fines of up to over $ 50, 0000. There are certain cases like driving offences where the driver can be penalized by being disqualified from driving for some time. Such cases

Monday, November 18, 2019

Good mentor Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 500 words

Good mentor - Essay Example One of the most significant characteristics within a good mentor should be that he must know that all his actions and behaviors would be taken on by the people who believe in him and follow him staunchly. This means that he must be aware of the fact that his proponents have a positive vibe about him and there should be no negativity involved within the following domains that crop up on a regular basis. The good mentor should always be sure that he is being followed by the people around him or even when he is not being watched by someone. There is always someone who keeps a tap on him because indeed he is a good mentor at the end of the day. Another characteristic of a good mentor is that he will put his money where his mouth is. This would suggest for his truthfulness because he is being followed by a large cross-section of the society and thus his words and statements need to be taken on by people who belong to varied genres and strata (Cox, 2000). Hence it is a given that these people know the truthfulness aspect is present within the mentor and that he firmly believes in the same premise nonetheless. The element of honesty is being seen as closely related with a good mentor because if he does not believe in being honest and truthful about his own dealings, the people that follow him would start getting alienated from him and their distance would increase as a result of the same undertakings. This mentor will also keep association with the people who strongly advocate for him and who mean serious compliance with him and his respective domains. It would mean that he is honorable for the people in giving them sound advice and offers them a word for whatever they think about him and the different world affairs. This mentor can only become a good one if he knows the proper and true meaning of remaining forthright with his own domains, and thus links his positive self with the people that are around him or lie in close

Friday, November 15, 2019

Hedgerow Management in Pastoral Landscapes

Hedgerow Management in Pastoral Landscapes Abstract Hedgerows are an important part of the British landscape, providing both food and shelter for a number of taxa. As part of the UK government’s Environmental Stewardship (ES) Scheme, farmers are granted subsidies for, amongst other things, ‘enhanced hedgerow management’. Although hedgerow management under ES is expected to have beneficial effects for taxa such as invertebrates and birds, less is known about the effects ES management will have on small mammal communities. The aim of this study was to investigate whether this ‘enhanced hedgerow management’ is affecting hedgerow characteristics in pastoral landscapes and whether small mammal abundances are increased under ES managed hedgerows. ‘Conservation buffer strips’ (2m+ unimproved grassy margins) were investigated as a possible improvement to ES hedgerow management. Using live trapping methods, I investigated small mammal abundances in ES managed hedgerows compared with non-ES managed hedgerows. Wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus and bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus were the most abundant species, with some captures of field voles Microtus agrestis and common shrews Sorex araneus. Small mammal abundances were increased in ES managed hedgerows, however, the presence of a ‘conservation buffer strip’ was more significant in increasing small mammal densities. ES management showed no definite effect on the hedgerows’ characteristics. Introduction Agricultural intensification since the 1940s has led to widespread and significant reductions in the biodiversity of many agricultural areas. This drive for greater yields has been linked with the population decreases seen in many species of farmland specialists and non-specialists who often inhabit farmland (Robinson and Sutherland, 2002). Farmland habitats can be categorised into non-linear habitats such as set-aside, cropped fields and woodland areas, and linear habitats, generally field boundaries, such as ditches, banks, streams and hedgerows. These field boundaries remain relatively undisturbed areas and are therefore significant wildlife corridors within otherwise inhospitable agricultural landscapes (Tew, 1994). Although there continued to be a reduction in total area of hedgerows within the UK during the 80s and early 90s, the last decade has seen small increases in the area of hedgerow as their conservation significance became more documented (Barr and Gillespie, 2000). This increase in the number of hedgerows has been driven by government backed grants. Countryside Steward (CS), set up in 1991 encouraged selected farmers to enhance and conserve the wildlife within their farms, a large part of this involved the laying of new hedgerows. The CS schemes have now been superseded by the Environmental Stewardship Schemes. More recently, hedgerow grant pilot schemes have been set up in a number of regions to encourage landowners, both farmers and non-farmers to manage their hedgerows more effectively; these grants are available to pay for gapping up, hedge laying or coppicing. Small mammals in pastoral land are largely confined to hedgerows or other non-crop features and are therefore particularly vulnerable to intensification (Bates and Harris, 2009). Small mammal species constitute the main prey biomass for a number of species of mammals and birds, and therefore small mammal abundance directly influences the abundance and diversity of predator species contributing to the complexity of local food webs (Korpimaki and Norrdahl, 1991). There remains some debate on the importance of linear habitats for small mammals, with some suggesting that they cannot support viable populations, that those found in hedgerows are ‘sink’ populations (Tattersall et al. 2004). However, there is evidence that small mammal abundance and diversity does not depend on the linear or non-linear character of the habitat and that linear habitats can support viable populations (Gelling et al. 2007). Thus, in large expanses of uninhabitable grassland, field boundary hedgerows are of great importance for maintaining small mammal populations in an agricultural landscape, but differing farming practices can lead to a huge variety in the quality of these habitats As the emphasis of farming has shifted there have been a number of agri-environment schemes introduced across Europe with the aim of reversing the effects of previous intensification and enhancing agricultural land for wildlife (Kleijn and Sutherland, 2003). The UK introduced a new set of farming standards in 2005 with farmers now guaranteed subsidy payments, known as ‘cross-compliance’, as long as they follow a set of prescribed conditions aimed at improving the environmental value of their farms. A compulsory code of good practice will preclude farming land within 2 m of the centre of a hedge (DEFRA, 2005a). Beyond cross-compliance subsidies, farmers can also apply to put their farmland into Environmental Stewardship (ES). ES is a tiered system, with Entry-Level ES designed to allow most farmers access to the payments by compiling a farm management plan that aims to improve the features of their farm for wildlife and to maintain/improve the scenic value of the British countryside. The enhanced hedgerow management option within ES requires that the farmer cut the hedge no more than once every 2 years, that hedgerows are cut during the winter and that cutting be staggered across the farm. The combined aim of these prescriptions is to ensure that at least some of the hedgerow is allowed to flower every summer (Defra, 2005b). Properly managed hedgerows are valuable features, playing a key role in enhancing the wildlife value of farmland. Flowering hedgerows are an important source of food and shelter for a number of birds (Hinsley and Bellamy, 2000). Studies suggest that the ES schemes will have a beneficial effect, mainly for taxa such as invertebrates and birds (Kleijn and Sutherland 2003), Whittingham (2007) emphasizes the importance of monitoring the effects of ES to ensure that the scheme’s prescriptions meet the needs of a greater range of species. It is much less well understood how the changes to hedgerow management will effect small mammal abundance, and it is important that there is greater understanding of the factors that influence small mammal populations since small mammals provide the major source of prey biomass for many larger predators (Love et al., 2000). Small mammals also play a role in a range of important ecosystem processes (Hayward and Phillipson, 1979). Previous studies have established the main effects of varying hedgerow management within arable landscapes (Shore et al. 2005). Arable environments provide cover for small mammals due to the height and density of the crop. Small mammals have been shown to make substantial use of the field at certain times of the year (Tattersall et al. 2001; Tew et al. 2000; Todd et al. 2000). However, no small mammal species have been shown to make use of agriculturally improved pastoral fields at any time of year (Montgomery and Dowie 1993). Grazed pastoral land provides very little cover, restricting the movements of resident small mammal communities. Therefore, hedgerow management in predominantly dairy and cattle areas will likely have a large influence on the success of small mammal populations (Gelling et al. 2007). In particular, the level of ground cover vegetation along the hedgerow and the presence of some form of non-farmed margin can significantly affect the small mammal abundance (Bates and Harris 2009, Gelling et al. 2007). The 2m margin prescribed by ‘cross compliance’ is irrelevant in terms of providing cover within pastoral landscapes. Although the 2m margin remains uncut and clear of interference from the farmer (no fertilisers), year round grazing will mean that little cover is offered right up to the base of the hedgerow. Therefore, whereas ES management may boost small mammal numbers within arable areas (Shore et al. 2005), the value of ES hedgerow management within pastoral landscapes is less well understood. I utilised a number of hedgerow sites to compare hedgerow structure and small mammal communities on ES farms versus non-ES farms. For each farm, one site was selected to be representative and one to include a significant (2m plus) conservation buffer strip of unimproved, non-grazed grass/shrubland. I aimed to investigate (i) how ES management effects the hedgerow characteristics, in particular the level of ground cover for small mammals (ii) whether these ES prescriptions are providing any significant benefit for small mammal densities and (iii) as the movements of small mammals within pastoral landscapes are so restricted, could small mammal assemblages in hedgerows be significantly improved by including an unimproved, non-grazed, grassy margin or ‘conservation buffer strip’ (2+m from the edge of the hedgerow). Methods Sites The study was conducted over 20 different farms spread across County Durham and Northumberland. The farms were selected due to their suitability for this study, each farm containing both a hedgerow site with a conservation buffer strip and at least one without. All farms selected were representative in terms of habitat of those within the local area. A hedgerow was defined as a continuous line of woody vegetation no more than 3m tall. Hedgerow Survey The farms were paired, with one ES farm neighbouring a non-ES farm, making 10 farm pairs and 20 farms in total. Hedgerow surveys were carried out throughout June 2009. 10 hedgerows were randomly selected on each farm. All hedgerows on each farm were surveyed using an edited version of the Defra Hedgerow Survey Form and handbook (DEFRA, 2007). Each hedgerow was measured to determine its cross-sectional area. The character of the hedgerow was scored by reference to a series of standard diagrams, noting the level of available ground level cover for small mammals (1=little or no vegetation cover at ground level, 2=gappy cover at ground level, 3=constant vegetation cover from hedgerows at ground level). Additional variables were recorded, including whether the hedge had been flailed (mechanically cut) recently, i.e. during the previous winter, the number of standard and veteran trees and the number of woody species within the hedgerow. The data sets for cross-sectional area, level of grou nd vegetation cover and the number of woody species were averaged to produce an overall mean value for each farm. The number of flailed hedgerows was summed to give an overall percentage of hedgerows flailed on each farm. Trapping Procedure Previous trapping studies have shown that, unlike in arable land, small mammals within pastoral land stay almost entirely within the hedgerows and therefore hedgerows can be treated as linear habitats (Gelling et al. 2007). Trapping was carried out in two major trapping sessions, mid-April to June and mid-July to August, 2009. Within each of the 20 farm sites I selected a representative hedgerow and a hedgerow flanked by an unimproved 2m+ grassy margin, designated a conservation buffer strip, making a total of 40 trapping sites. Where possible the hedgerow sites were selected randomly, however, each ES site was required to have been managed according to the prescriptions of Stewardship farming, i.e. the hedgerows were cut not more than once every two years and the farmers adhered to the prescribed 2m margin of non-interference (2m from the centre of the hedge) (DEFRA 2005a, DEFRA 2005b). Every hedgerow selected was flanked by improved or semi-improved grassland for the grazing of dai ry cattle and/or the production of silage. At each site, a 104m section of isolated hedgerow (not directly connected to woodland) was selected.13 Longworth traps were placed at ground level within the hedgerow, at 8m intervals. Traps were provisioned with hay, apple, oat grains and dried mealworm. The traps were set at dusk and checked at dawn and dusk for three days. All targeted animals that were captured were fur-clipped to help identify re-captures. Species, sex and weight were recorded for each animal before release at the point of capture. Analysis Hedgerow characteristics were recorded and analysed using a paired measures multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) (SPSS 17.0.2). I had multiple dependent variables that I wished to analyse, however, using multiple one-way ANOVAs to try to do this would have raised the probability of a Type I error (Gibson et al. 2007). Therefore the data was investigated using a MANOVA which controls the experiment-wide error rate. Multiple dependent variables that were related (e.g. Cross sectional area of hedge and amount of ground cover, etc.) were analysed in one test, with the hedgerow management (ES managed or non-ES managed) being treated as the two levels of the treatment factor (Gibson et al. 2007). There was a total of 4 dependent variables; the mean cross-sectional area, the percentage of flailed hedgerows, the average number of woody species and the mean level of ground cover. For each trapping session the relative density was estimated as the minimum number alive (MNA), or the total number of individuals caught over the three days. Species richness was calculated as the number of different species caught. Using General Linear Modelling (GLM; Minitab 15), I examined the relationships between small mammal densities and a number of predictor variables. The dependent variables I investigated were the overall total small mammal density (MNA) and the total biomass of all small mammals caught within 104m. I also investigated the density of each individual species, constructing similar models for the number of captures and biomass for each individual species. I focused on wood mice Apodemus sylvaticus and bank voles Clethrionomys glareolus. There were also some captures of field voles Microtus agrestis and common shrew Sorex araneus, these data were not investigated individually but were included in the total density of small mammals and the total biomass. The pr edictor variables considered were the presence/absence of ES management, the presence/absence of a conservation buffer strip and the number of standard and veteran trees within the hedgerow. The relationships were analysed using a backward stepwise GLM, with all main predictors and their first order interactions initially included within the model. The insignificant interactions were then removed. Each trapping session was carried out over 3 days on 4 sites on neighbouring farms, the variation between trapping locations and times was taken into account by including the variable ‘block’ within the initial model, however, it was found to have no significance and was therefore removed from the final model. There are well documented seasonal variations in small mammal abundance (Alibhai and Gipps 1985; Flowerdew 1985; Butet et al. 2006), therefore, as there were two major trapping seasons (mid-April to May and Mid-June to July) I included the variable ‘season’ in all models. The number of captures of field voles and common shrew were too low to allow thorough analysis; however, the number of captures for each species was investigated using a Kruskal-Wallis test (Minitab 15) to determine the relationship between the presence of a buffer strip and their individual abundance. Results The total number of catches was 276 individual small mammals of four different species, during 240 trap sessions (dusk till dawn and dawn till dusk). The most abundant species were wood mice, making up 45% of the captures, 11% of which were juveniles, with a total capture of 122 individuals (61 in the first season of trapping and 61 in the second season). 32% (89 individuals) of captures were bank voles, none of which were juveniles, with 26 captures in season 1 and 53 captures in season 2. 17% of captures (48 individuals) were common shrews and 6% (17 individuals) were field voles. Table 1. Summary of the number of captures for each species Total Wood mice Captured – Season 1 (juveniles) / Season 2 (juveniles) Bank vole – Season 1 / Season 2 Field vole – Season 1 / Season 2 Common shrew – Season 1 / Season 2 Total – Season 1 / Season 2 Total N trapped throughout study 122 – 61 (2) / 61 (11) 89 – 36 / 53 17 – 4 / 13 48 – 28 / 20 276 – 129 / 147 Percentage of total 44 33 6 17 100 Percentage of hedgerows present 93 46 23 45 Effect of ES Management and Buffer strips A total of 40 hedgerows were surveyed with 20 hedgerows under ES hedgerow management and 20 hedgerows under non-ES management. ES sites had been under ES hedgerow management for 2 years or more. The measured dimensions of the hedgerow were used to estimate the hedgerow cross sectional area. Analysis using a paired measures MANOVA found no significant difference in the size of ES managed hedgerows to the size of non-ES managed hedgerows (F(1,9)=0.847, P=0.381). ES management also had no significant effect on the percentage of flailed hedgerows within the farm (F(1,9)=0.019, P=0.889). The woody species diversity within hedgerows was not significantly different between ES managed hedgerows and non-ES managed hedgerows (F(1,9)=3.047, P=0.115). There was a significant positive association of the presence of ES hedgerow management with the level of woody vegetation cover at ground level (F(1,9)=10.613, P=0.010). Table 2. Comparisons of hedgerow characteristics on ES managed farms versus non-ES managed farms. Data were analysed using a paired MANOVA. Mean (SE) Hedgerow characteristic Description of measurement ES Non-ES F(1,9) P Area Average cross sectional area/m2 2.99 (0.12) 2.83 (0.14) 0.847 0.381 Flailed Percentage of hedgerows that had been recently flailed (flailed during previous Winter) 26.00 (2.21) 25.00 (6.54) 0.019 0.893 Species diversity Number of woody species 3.16 (0.24) 2.73 (0.27) 3.047 0.115 Small mammal cover Average Area of small Mammal cover (1=little or no vegetation cover at ground level, 2=gappy cover at ground level, 3=constant vegetation cover from hedgerows at ground level) 2.63 (0.87) 2.13 (0.11) 10.613 0.010 Small Mammal Assemblages Backward stepwise general linear modelling was used to analyse the data. The results showed that buffer strips have a significant effect on the total number caught within the hedgerow (F(1,35)= 16.29, P A GLM for total biomass showed similar results with Season (F(1,34)=0.83, P=0.369) and the number of standard trees (F(1,34)=1.12, P=0.298) both having no significant effect on the total biomass. ES management had a positive association with total biomass (F(1,34)=4.92, P=0.033), as did the presence of a buffer strip (F(1,34)=27.62, P Wood mice were the most common species trapped, contributing 45% of the captures. The factors affecting wood mice captures were analysed using a backward stepwise GLM. Season had no significant effect (F(1,34)=2.36, P=0.134). Unlike the model involving ‘total captures’, ES management (F(1,34)=0.07, P=0.798) and Buffer Strip (F(1,34) A backward stepwise GLM was constructed for both ‘bank vole captures’ and ‘the total bank vole mass’, both models produced similar results. Season had no effect on bank vole captures (F(1,35)=2.06, P=0.160) and total bank vole mass (F(1,35)=1.66, P=0.206). The presence of ES management on the hedgerow had a significant positive effect on the number of bank vole captures (F(1,35)=7.15, P=0.011) and on the total bank vole mass (F(1,35)=5.91, P=0.020). The presence of a buffer also had a significant effect, increasing the number of bank vole captures (F(1,35)=34.90, P Table 3. Summary statistics from general linear models Model Variables F P Adj. R2 Total Captures Season F(1,35)=1.09 0.305 53.79% ES Managed F(1,35)=5.23 0.028a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=16.29 Standard Trees F(1,35)=0.91 0.346 Total Biomassc Season F(1,34)=0.83 0.369 65.32% ES Managed F(1,34)=4.92 0.033a Buffer Strip F(1,34)=27.62 Standard Trees F(1,34)=1.12 0.298 Season*Buffer Strip F(1,34)=3.18 0.083b Wood Mice Captures Season F(1,34)=2.36 0.134 79.72% ES Managed F(1,34)=0.07 0.798 Buffer Strip F(1,34) Standard Trees F(1,34)=79.65 Season*Standard Trees F(1,34)=4.81 0.035a Total Wood Mice Massd Season F(1,35)=1.36 0.252 69.06% ES Managed F(1,35)=0.26 0.616 Buffer Strip F(1,35)=0.05 0.831 Standard Trees F(1,35)=49.03 0.003a Bank Vole Captures Season F(1,35)=2.06 0.160 54.76% ES Managed F(1,35)=7.15 0.011a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=34.90 Standard Trees F(1,35)=4.41 0.043a Total Bank Vole Masse Season F(1,35)=1.66 0.206 50.74% ES Managed F(1,35)=5.91 0.020a Buffer Strip F(1,35)=28.11 Standard Trees F(1,35)=2.32 0.137 a – Significant to the 95% confidence level b – Significant to the 90% confidence level c Total Biomass was square root transformed before analysis. d Wood Mice Mass was square root transformed before analysis. e Bank Vole Mass was square root transformed before analysis. A total of 17 field voles were captured, with all 17 trapped in hedgerows flanked by a conservation buffer strip. A total of 48 Common shrews were trapped, 81% of which were caught in hedgerows not flanked by a buffer strip Table 4. Non-target species captures. Effect of buffer strip, analysed using Kruskal-Wallis test. Total Captures Species Buffer Strip Present No Buffer Strip H P (adjusted for ties) Field vole 17 0 8.30 0.004 Common shrew 9 38 12.73 Discussion Hedgerow characteristics are known to affect small mammal numbers. Hedgerows with many gaps and a lack of ground cover support significantly lower small mammal populations (Gelling et al. 2007). Small mammals will select against hedgerows with a lack of vegetative cover due to the increased risk of predation (Orrock et al. 2004). Our results suggest that ES farms produce denser hedgerows with more cover at the ground level than non-ES farms. This is reflected in the small mammal survey which shows a somewhat strong association between small mammal numbers and ES hedgerows. However, having surveyed the farms and the farmers, I acknowledge that a wide number of variables affect the characteristics of the hedgerow. I suggest that the state of the hedgerows for small mammals is more significantly affected by the mindset of the farmer. Those farmers who have moved onto the Entry level ES scheme are generally those who most actively manage their farm. One supporting piece of data for this theory, is the number of flailed hedgerows on ES farms compared to non-ES farms. The hedgerow survey found that there were no differences in the number of recently flailed hedgerows within ES farms compared to non-ES farms, therefore, even though the cutting of hedgerows on ES farms is restricted, it still occurs as often on the ES farms within this survey than on the non-ES farms. The suggestion is that those farmers who are on the ES scheme are more actively involved in managing their farm, including their hedgerows, therefore hedgerows on ES farms commonly provide denser vegetation, less gaps and more cover at ground level. The typical ES farmer is more actively managing the hedge as a boundary or barrier to cattle than the typical non-ES farmer. The author suggests this conclusion having discussed hedgerow management with the farmers as part of the hedgerow survey and having a background in agriculture, however, it is also recognised that this topic goes beyond the scope and ava ilable data of this investigation. Hedgerows can be thought of as corridors linking woodland habitat, allowing small mammal migration (Soule and Terbough 1999), however, within the British pastoral landscape, hedgerows are often acting as the sole habitat for small mammals (Fitzgibbon 1997). My investigation found that the ratio of juvenile to adult wood mice increased during the season, with greater numbers present later in the summer, this is consistent with the observations of others (Alibhai and Gipps 1991, Flowerdew 1991). The breeding season for most small mammals begins in spring and ends in late summer, therefore it is natural that more juveniles are present in hedgerows as the summer progresses and they travel outward to establish their own home ranges. The presence of fully grown, breeding adults in both seasons of trapping indicates that animals are resident within the hedgerows, providing support for the argument that linear habitats can provide suitable habitat to support viable populations of small mamma ls. My results show that the total small mammal abundance and therefore the availability of prey biomass for predators is increased in hedgerows under ES management. The results of the hedgerow survey suggest that there is greater ground level vegetation cover in ES hedgerows. An increase in the amount of physical habitat creates greater foraging opportunities and can increase small mammal abundance (Gelling et al. 2007). Small mammals prefer hedgerows with greater ground level cover as they provide better refuge from predators (Orrock et al. 2004). Whereas the benefits of ES management for small mammal abundance remain unclear, this investigation highlights the importance of buffer strips. The value of unimproved grassy margins, in arable landscapes, for small mammal numbers has already been shown (Shore et al. 2005). This study suggests that the presence of a buffer strip along a hedgerow can provide a much improved habitat to support larger small mammal numbers in hedgerows within pastoral landscapes. Grassy margins are a refuge for small mammals beyond the hedgerow; they allow increased safety for foraging and greater shelter (Orrock et al. 2004). To understand the variation in the numbers trapped of each species, we need to establish an understanding of the differing ecological requirements for each species. The two most abundant species were the wood mouse and the bank vole. The results show that wood mice are found in greater numbers in hedgerows containing standard/veteran trees. This conclusion is supported by previous studies which have shown that trees within hedgerows are beneficial for wood mice (Montgomerie and Dowie, 1993). Mice often take shelter in burrows formed beneath trees/within tree roots which may suggest why this species was found more commonly within hedgerows containing standard/veteran trees (Montgomerie and Dowie, 1993). Wood mice are a generalist species occupying a wide variety of habitat (Flowerdew 1993). They general occupy a relatively large home range and travel extensively, consuming a wide range of food sources depending upon season and availability (Flowerdew 1993). This is reflected in the re sults, with wood mice having been trapped in 93% of all the hedgerows. The results also show that wood mice abundance is not affected by ES management for hedgerows, nor is it significantly improved by the presence of a buffer strip. Wood mice have been shown to avoid hedgerows with major gaps, and wood mouse captures have been shown to increase with proximity to woodland (Gelling et al. 2007). Wood mice have relatively large home ranges and the suggestion is that individuals rarely stay long within any one hedgerow; rather they travel through, utilising hedgerows for foraging and shelter between woodland (Montgomery and Dowie 1993; Gelling et al 2007; Todd et al 2000; Tew et al. 2000). Therefore, ES management and the presence of buffer strips have little effect on the number of wood mouse captures; more important is the proximity to woodland or the presence of trees within a hedgerow which provide the preferred shelter for the wood mouse (Todd et al. 2000; Tew et al. 2000). Bank voles are a more specialist species, and generally occupy much smaller home ranges than do wood mice. They are burrowers, using ground vegetation to create runs and pathways in deciduous habitats (Morris 1982; Alibhai and Gipps 1985). Bank voles are a major prey resource for a number of raptors and bank vole abundance has been shown to significantly affect raptor populations (Korpimaki and Norrdahl, 1991). Other studies have found that bank vole numbers are positively associated with the size of hedgerows (Pollard Relton, 1970; Tew, 1994; Bellamy et al., 2000). Grassy margins of 2m plus have been shown to significantly increase bank vole numbers in arable fields (Shore et al. 2005), my results show that this conclusion extends to pastoral landscapes with bank vole numbers being significantly increased by the presence of an unimproved grassy margin or conservation buffer strip. The results also suggest that ES management improves hedgerows for bank voles, with bank vole abundanc e found to be significantly higher on ES hedgerow sites. Bank voles are found in much greater abundance in areas which provide thick ground vegetation and suffer little disturbance (Tew 1994), my results suggest that this is partially provided by ES management, however, the creation of grassy margins along hedgerows could significantly improve bank vole abundance in pastoral landscapes. The creation of margins could also be significant in the conservation of field voles. Field vole numbers in the UK are in decline believed to be due to the loss of rough grass habitat in intensively managed arable regions (Harris et al., 1995; Love et al., 2000). Field voles are specialists and depend upon rough, ungrazed grassland within woodland and hedgerows. Field voles are generally only found within areas of long grass (Alibhai and Gipps, 1991b). Very few captures of field voles were recorded within this experiment, however all field voles captures occurred within hedgerows flanked by conservation buffer strips. The presence of a buffer strip may provide the field voles’

Wednesday, November 13, 2019

Islamic Religion Essays -- Islam Religion Religion Essays History

Islamic Religion Islam has been characterized inequitably by historians and the media as a religion of violence. Islam was mainly spread through Arab territorial conquests. Upon examination, it is not fair to make the generalization that Islam is a religion of violence. One can see when looking at world religion on a whole that Islam was no more violent than any other religion. In fact, not only is Islam not a fundamentally violent philosophy, but we can also see that many other religions normally considered "non-violent," such as Christianity or Hinduism, have been spread through bloody conquest. Thus, in searching for a universal constant of history, we should not fall into the "fallacy of abstractions," and assume that because of isolated incidents and conflicts of territorial ambitions, that all religions have violent tendencies. Throughout the centuries Islam has been a victim of circumstance. It has been perceived by many as oppressive and cruel. This belief originated over a thousand years ago, when Islamic people first threatened the western world. As they slowly undermined Byzantine authority, Christians became terrified of their presence, resulting in widespread animosity and aversion. Hindus and Buddhists from the South Asian subcontinent lived under Islamic law for hundreds of years. Eventually, in the twentieth century, split the region into angry factions. Mohammed, the prophet of Islam, was a great warrior. This invariably led defeated people to believe that he begot a cult of war and violence. Over the centuries, it has developed the ability to instill a sense of holy purpose onto its believers and soldiers, where they go into a battle of certain death for their faith in the holy war. The holy war is still a potent source of conflict and aversion, as many of the problems in the Middle East center around the issue of Islamic Fundamentalism and the holy wars. Originally, Islam was perceived by western historians as a religion of violence and conquest, "by preying on the caravans of the Quraish, Mohammed weakened them to the point of submission† (Anonymous, 1996). In fact, Mohammed was a warrior, aristocrat, and brilliant strategist, a stark contrast to many other holy men of history. He was forced to both defend his cities and force submission. Because of the strong military powers of his religious predecessors and oppresso... ...hile Hinduism remained relatively non-violent throughout the centuries, when the first Muslim invaders appeared and they clashed in both a philosophical and violent sense. Hindu violence returned in the mid-twentieth century, when they finally regained control of India. They smashed a Muslim temple at Ayodhya, and Sikh and Tamil rebel groups rebel against their authority. What is even more notable about Hinduism, is its rigid caste system, in which peoples have set social classes that are totally unchangeable and are products of the religion. The untouchables were considered as low as animals, and forced to do menial work such as sweeping and leather working. They were forced into a life of separatism and the rest of Hindu culture either ignored them completely or hated them. On the other side of the world, in Central America, the Aztec people were powerful warriors, who swept across the Mexican plains, conquering villages and whole peoples. Their religion consisted of brutal hum an sacrifices of enemy slaves, in fact the sacrifices grew so many in number that they were watching their population decline significantly, which eventually allowed the Spanish invaders to dominate them.