[Carpenter Prairie Discussion] biomass
Kevin Carpenter
kevinc at mysticplains.org
Wed Feb 3 09:43:13 CST 2010
So... presuming a fall harvest sent off to the biomass plant (with other
source of raw material feeding that plant the rest of the year...), we
would need to dry and burn the residue, and ship it back to the original
fields for ash distribution. How likely is that to occur?
Kevin
> Essentially yes, if the biomass is harvested in the fall and burned
> returning the ash back to the land should keep most nutrients at
> acceptable levels. How often? I am not really sure, however I would base
> it on soil test levels and watch the nutrient levels.
> Ash content will reflect the total content of the plants so along with P
> and K, Calcium will be quite high and some Magnesium and micronutrients.
>
> Tim
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Timothy Barksdale
> To: Reinbott, Timothy M.
> Cc: Kevin Carpenter ; Carpenter Prairie in the Mystic Plains COA ; Scott
> Woodbury ; Hamilton Native Outpost ; Frank Oberle ; Carol Davit ; Jon
> Wingo ; John Knudsen ; Jean Herman ; Aaron Jeffries ; Dwaine Gelnar ;
> Steve Mowry ; Karen Brinkman ; John Hoskins ; Bill McGuire ; Ted Cooper
> ; Steve Bruckerhoff ; Wayne Morton ; Denny Donnell ; Bill Bergh ; Tim
> Banek ; phil wire ; Dave Murphy ; Alan Leary ; Susan Hazelwood ; Ben
> Duffield ; JR Flores ; Darlene Johnson ; Mervin Wallace ; DeeCee Darrow
> ; Steve Flick ; Kelly Srigley Werner ; Allen Powell ; Gene Gardner ; Amy
> Buechler ; David Erickson ; George Seek ; John Burk ; Andrew Forbes ;
> Linda Tossing ; Stacey, Gary ; Eddie Hamill ; James Trager ; Steve
> Heyling ; Keith Jackson ; Jerry Kaiser ; Mike Currier ; Ken Struemph ;
> Brent Jamison
> Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 5:18 AM
> Subject: Re: [Carpenter Prairie Discussion] biomass
>
>
> So Mr Reinbott,
>
>
> To keep this system intact you are only needing to return the ash to the
> prairie. How frequently would this be needed and in what concentration.
> My thinking is that the ash is rather concentrated with the Potassium
> and Phosphorus - No?
>
>
> Too heavy or two frequent would create additional problems as more may
> not be better. Additionally, what other elemental (or other things)
> residues could be concentrated in the ashes?
>
>
> Tim
>
>
>
>
>
> Timothy R. Barksdale
> Birdman Productions L.L.C.
> & MundoAveLoco! L.L.C.
> P.O. Box 1124
> 65 Mountain View Dr.
> Choteau, MT 59422
>
>
> Home Office: 406-466-2111
> birdman-hd -at- 3riversdbs -dot-net
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Feb 2, 2010, at 5:48 PM, Reinbott, Timothy M. wrote:
>
>
> Kevin,
> That is a valid question. Native warm season grasses such as
> Switchgrass remove 9 lbs P205 and 46 lbs K2O per ton removed for hay.
> So 5 tons would be 45 P and 230 lbs K which is similar if you took off
> the corn grain and stover. However, the native grasses have extremely
> deep roots and are mining minerals from a very deep profile-6 ft or
> more. This is why we hardly ever see a response to Native grasses to
> P and K in the glacial till soils of Central and North MO. Ozarks and
> SW MO, maybe not.
> If harvested for biofuel after dormancy (October or later) then much
> of the P and K is recycled back to the roots and very little is
> removed. This is true for most perennial crops.
> So in a nutshell, yes if you harvest these prairies for hay and do not
> return the manure then you will remove a tremendous amount of
> nutrients from the soil and could get into trouble within a decade or
> two. For biofuel production, a much slower process but a need to
> return the nutrients from the ashes.
>
> Hope this helps,
> Tim
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Carpenter"
> <kevinc at mysticplains.org>
> To: "Carpenter Prairie in the Mystic Plains COA"
> <carpenter at mysticplains.org>
> Cc: "Scott Woodbury" <scott.woodbury at mobot.org>; "Hamilton Native
> Outpost" <hamilton at train.missouri.org>; "Frank Oberle"
> <foberle at nemr.net>; "Carol Davit" <davitleahy at earthlink.net>; "Jon
> Wingo" <djmaint at aol.com>; "John Knudsen" <john.knudsen at mdc.mo.gov>;
> "Jean Herman" <jean.herman at mo.usda.gov>; "Aaron Jeffries"
> <aaron.jeffries at mdc.mo.gov>; "Dwaine Gelnar"
> <dwaine.gelnar at mo.usda.gov>; "Reinbott, Timothy M."
> <ReinbottT at missouri.edu>; "Steve Mowry" <stevem4444 at aol.com>; "Karen
> Brinkman" <karen.brinkman at mo.usda.gov>; "John Hoskins"
> <john.hoskins at mdc.mo.gov>; "Bill McGuire" <bill.mcguire at mdc.mo.gov>;
> "Ted Cooper" <ted at tswllc.com>; "Steve Bruckerhoff"
> <steve.bruckerhoff at mo.usda.gov>; "Wayne Morton" <wayne2946 at yahoo.com>;
> "Denny Donnell" <hddonnell at hotmail.com>; "Bill Bergh"
> <bill.bergh at mdc.mo.gov>; "Tim Banek" <tim.banek at mdc.mo.gov>; "phil
> wire" <phw222 at googlemail.com>; "Dave Murphy" <dmurphy at confedmo.org>;
> "Alan Leary" <alan.leary at modot.mo.gov>; "Susan Hazelwood"
> <hazelwoods at mchsi.com>; "Ben Duffield" <duffieldben at yahoo.com>; "JR
> Flores" <jr.flores at mo.usda.gov>; "Darlene Johnson"
> <darlene.johnson at mo.usda.gov>; "Mervin Wallace"
> <mowldflrs at socket.net>; "DeeCee Darrow" <deecee.darrow at mdc.mo.gov>;
> "Steve Flick" <steveaflick at earthlink.net>; "Kelly Srigley Werner"
> <kelly_srigleywerner at fws.gov>; "Allen Powell"
> <allen.powell at mo.usda.gov>; "Gene Gardner" <gene.gardner at mdc.mo.gov>;
> "Amy Buechler" <abuechler at confedmo.org>; "David Erickson"
> <david.erickson at mdc.mo.gov>; "George Seek" <seekg at grm.net>; "John
> Burk" <jburknwtf at ktis.net>; "Andrew Forbes"
> <andrew.forbes at mdc.mo.gov>; "Linda Tossing" <ltossing at aol.com>;
> "Stacey, Gary" <staceyg at missouri.edu>; "Eddie Hamill"
> <eddie.hamill at mo.usda.gov>; "James Trager" <james.trager at mobot.org>;
> "Steve Heyling" <ashlandbirdman at yahoo.com>; "Keith Jackson"
> <keith.jackson at mdc.mo.gov>; "Jerry Kaiser" <jerry.kaiser at mo.usda.gov>;
> "Mike Currier" <mike.currier at dnr.mo.gov>; "Ken Struemph"
> <ken.struemph at dnr.mo.gov>; "Brent Jamison" <brent.jamison at mdc.mo.gov>;
> "Tim Barksdale" <curlew at 3riversdbs.net>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 5:22 PM
> Subject: Re: [Carpenter Prairie Discussion] biomass
>
>
> I have one basic question that's been bothering me:
>
> Are prairie grass yields somehow sustainable without replacing the
> nutrients taken off the land? When I say "sustainable" I mean over
> decades. Most know that one can't hay a field repeatedly without
> fertilization, if you try, you "wear the field out". I can see
> pulling
> large quantities of bio-mass off a prairie a few times (just look at
> the
> one across from Franks house any summer if you doubt that!), but what
> impact would repeated harvesting have? Yes, the macro nutrients, like
> nitrogen, can be naturally replaced, but what about the phosphorus,
> potash, calcium, and dozens if not hundreds of other minerals that are
> removed when prairie grass is harvested but recycled when prairies are
> burnt?
>
> Kevin
>
>
> Here is a later version of some more of their work on this topic.
> Happy
>
> reading.
>
>
>
> Rudi Roeslein
>
> CEO
>
> Roeslein & Associates, Inc.
>
> 9200 Watson Road, Suite 200
>
> St. Louis, MO 63126 USA
>
> [cid:image001.gif at 01CAA420.5CAD4B10]
>
> Main: +1 314 729 0055 x8807
>
> Direct: +1 314 270-8807
>
> Mobile: +1 314 280-3762
>
> Fax: +1 314 729 0070
>
>
>
> E-mail: rroeslein at roeslein.com<mailto:jhart at roeslein.com>
>
> www.roeslein.com<http://www.roeslein.com/>
>
> www.imt-mfg.com<http://www.imt-mfg.com/>
>
>
>
> From: Rudi Roeslein
>
> Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 11:04 AM
>
> To: 'Scott Woodbury'; Hamilton Native Outpost; Frank Oberle; Carol
> Davit;
>
> Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
>
> Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John Hoskins; John
> Burk;
>
> John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; David Erickson; Denny Donnell; Wayne
> Morton;
>
> George Seek; Kelly Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Alan Leary; Ted
> Cooper;
>
> Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling; Andrew Forbes; James
> Trager;
>
> Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy;
> Dave
>
> Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR
> Flores;
>
> Eddie Hamill; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen
> Brinkman;
>
> Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve
>
> Bruckerhoff; Steve Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph;
>
> staceyg at missouri.edu
>
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> Dr. David Tilman is the most cited scientist regarding this subject
> and
>
> from all of the information I have been able to gather probably not
> biased
>
> or influenced by the various interest groups. I am including a
> science
>
> article on this subject. The other factor that should be considered
> are
>
> the annual input costs, the maintenance costs, establishment costs
> and the
>
> long term cost to our environment. How many invasive species do we
> need
>
> to experiment with before we figure out that maybe nature and God
> had it
>
> figured out with our prairie.
>
> I recently attended a two day seminar on alternative bio fuels at
> the
>
> University of Illinois that ended up being a big promotional
> campaign for
>
> Miscanthus. The establishment costs were cited as being $3000.00/
> acre,
>
> and no real data on the total life cycle costs. Yields of 40tons
> per
>
> acre were being tossed around but again no real long term data to
> provide
>
> total life cycle costs. I just completed a 70 acre planting of 6
>
> different grasses and 25 forbs on my Putnam county farm and this
> will
>
> cost 10% of this Miscanthus figure and require very little in the
> way of
>
> additional input or maintenance cost in the future. An occasional
>
> cutting in the early stages of development to prevent weed
> competition
>
> and a burn or grazing interruption once established.
>
> I believe the proven attributes of a bio diverse prairie must be
>
> considered in this new movement towards more invasive species to
> degrade
>
> our remaining marginal lands and eliminate more wildlife habitat.
> The CO2
>
> sequestering capability of prairie grasses are getting studied and
> have
>
> been cited by the University of Minnesota after 20 years of studies.
>
> Their ability to store and filter water are also getting real
> scientific
>
> research and not just biased promotional advertisement. Our soil
> erosion
>
> problem in Missouri is one of the worst in the country and could be
> helped
>
> significantly by a prairie root system that can be 15 ft deep and
> not only
>
> prevent soil erosion but provide some of the most fertile soil in
> the
>
> nation. These attributes all have a real $ value and should be
> identified
>
> and quantified. Lets all get more informed on this subject,
> especially
>
> those responsible for the direction we take in this exciting new
> field of
>
> alternative energies.
>
>
>
> Rudi Roeslein
>
> CEO
>
> Roeslein & Associates, Inc.
>
> 9200 Watson Road, Suite 200
>
> St. Louis, MO 63126 USA
>
> [cid:image001.gif at 01CAA420.5CAD4B10]
>
> Main: +1 314 729 0055 x8807
>
> Direct: +1 314 270-8807
>
> Mobile: +1 314 280-3762
>
> Fax: +1 314 729 0070
>
>
>
> E-mail: rroeslein at roeslein.com<mailto:jhart at roeslein.com>
>
> www.roeslein.com<http://www.roeslein.com/>
>
> www.imt-mfg.com<http://www.imt-mfg.com/>
>
>
>
> From: Scott Woodbury [mailto:Scott.Woodbury at mobot.org]
>
> Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2009 8:32 AM
>
> To: Hamilton Native Outpost; Frank Oberle; Rudi Roeslein; Carol
> Davit;
>
> Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
>
> Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John Hoskins; John
> Burk;
>
> John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; David Erickson; Denny Donnell; Wayne
> Morton;
>
> George Seek; Kelly Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Alan Leary; Ted
> Cooper;
>
> Susan Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling; Andrew Forbes; James
> Trager;
>
> Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire; DeeCee Darrow; John Murphy;
> Dave
>
> Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; Dwaine Gelnar; Allen Powell; JR
> Flores;
>
> Eddie Hamill; Gene Gardner; Tim Banek; Darlene Johnson; Karen
> Brinkman;
>
> Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve
>
> Bruckerhoff; Steve Flick; Jerry Kaiser; Ken Struemph;
>
> staceyg at missouri.edu
>
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> This sounds great as long as long as landowners opt for a diverse
> planting
>
> in CRP. Right now the research on biomass is showing that sterile
> hybrid
>
> miscanthus yields 2-3 times as much biomass as native switchgrass,
> and
>
> therefore could bring in more money. That's comparing a pure stand
> of
>
> switchgrass to a pure stand of miscanthus. Now days' CRP isn't a
> pure
>
> stand of switchgrass. My fear is that landowners will drop CRP when
> they
>
> see that they can make more money growing miscanthus? Of course this
> can't
>
> happen until Miscanthus production becomes mechanized. Please tell
> me
>
> otherwise. I don't like the idea of miscanthus replacing CRP.
>
>
>
> Scott
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Hamilton Native Outpost [mailto:hamilton at train.missouri.org]
>
> Sent: Monday, December 14, 2009 1:56 PM
>
> To: 'Frank Oberle'; 'Rudi Roeslein'; 'Carol Davit'; 'Kevin
> Carpenter';
>
> 'Jon Wingo'
>
> Cc: 'Ben Duffield'; 'Amy Buechler'; 'Mervin Wallace'; 'John
> Hoskins';
>
> 'John Burk'; 'John Knudsen'; 'Steve Mowry'; 'David Erickson'; 'Denny
>
> Donnell'; 'Wayne Morton'; 'George Seek'; 'Kelly Srigley Werner';
> 'Linda
>
> Tossing'; 'Alan Leary'; 'Ted Cooper'; 'Susan Hazelwood'; 'Mike
> Currier';
>
> 'Steve Heyling'; 'Andrew Forbes'; James Trager; Scott Woodbury; 'Tim
>
> Barksdale'; 'Tim Reinbott'; 'phil wire'; 'DeeCee Darrow'; 'John
> Murphy';
>
> 'Dave Murphy'; 'Bill Bergh'; 'Bill McGuire'; 'Dwaine Gelnar'; 'Allen
>
> Powell'; 'JR Flores'; 'Eddie Hamill'; 'Gene Gardner'; 'Tim Banek';
>
> 'Darlene Johnson'; 'Karen Brinkman'; 'Brent Jamison'; 'Keith
> Jackson';
>
> 'Aaron Jeffries'; 'Jean Herman'; 'Steve Bruckerhoff'; 'Steve Flick';
>
> 'Jerry Kaiser'; 'Ken Struemph'; staceyg at missouri.edu
>
> Subject: RE: biomass
>
>
>
> CRP as we have known it in the past may have been a fescue field or
> a rank
>
> stand of native grasses with little diversity. Conservation is
> ready to
>
> step up to the next level and create rare and declining habitat. To
> marry
>
> biofuels with wildlife conservation has the added benefit of
> bringing
>
> disturbance into the picture. Disturbance is important to
> grasslands;
>
> fire, herbivores, and climatic extremes once acted as disturbance
> factors.
>
> The use of the mowing on the biofuel ¼ or 1/3 would be a forn of
>
> disturbance as would the burning on another ¼ or 1/3. Some of the
>
> grassland wildlife is even dependent on this disturbance. I think
> this
>
> has lots of potential.
>
>
>
> Amy Hamilton
>
> Hamilton Native Outpost
>
>
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: Frank Oberle [mailto:foberle at nemr.net]
>
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2009 2:00 PM
>
> To: Rudi Roeslein; Carol Davit; Kevin Carpenter; Jon Wingo
>
> Cc: Ben Duffield; Amy Hamilton; Amy Buechler; Mervin Wallace; John
>
> Hoskins; John Burk; John Knudsen; Steve Mowry; Amy Buechler; David
>
> Erickson; Denny Donnell; Wayne Morton; George Seek; John Burk; Kelly
>
> Srigley Werner; Linda Tossing; Steve Mowry; Alan Leary; Ted Cooper;
> Susan
>
> Hazelwood; Mike Currier; Steve Heyling; Andrew Forbes; James Trager;
> Scott
>
> Woodbury; Tim Barksdale; Tim Reinbott; phil wire; DeeCee Darrow;
> John
>
> Murphy; Dave Murphy; Bill Bergh; Bill McGuire; Dwaine Gelnar; Allen
>
> Powell; JR Flores; Eddie Hamill; Dwaine Gelnar; Gene Gardner; Tim
> Banek;
>
> Darlene Johnson; Karen Brinkman; Brent Jamison; Keith Jackson; Aaron
>
> Jeffries; Jean Herman; Steve Bruckerhoff; Steve Flick; Jerry Kaiser;
> Ken
>
> Struemph; Andrew Forbes; staceyg at missouri.edu
>
> Subject: Fw: biomass
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Policy and Policymakers
>
>
>
> In Washington, the popularity of the USDA's Biomass Crop Assistance
>
> Program has soared, with the number of qualifying facilities now
> exceeding
>
> 280<http://rs6.net/tn.jsp?et=1102878250501&s=2761&e=001GCQRvDWWio9VqdgKxH5ka5XkUUSUmFWBbXSArjKjhTtaDOpWohH_PRRKv98bxvAubhTlGoXmbGveN7sRWa6GEz4ju1VmK5fz7-OqpEpiZsRNmEHUh-ZPKMJQ_9Lmsi62vUvUvzcSOTrOW1QTo1XQ0tfM52QbPr-asoVf5UQ5iEb8wjfsZ3fSYNt0wbMkB-ANWdUk6lb7IMctDHv-k97r1T8NzZddbx0Uo1mq8IRZa-emZtr0p6VBCbXhd-zPjLC9>.
>
> The Biomass Crop Assistance Program assists agricultural and forest
> land
>
> owners and operators with matching payments for the amount paid for
> the
>
> collection, harvest, storage and transportation of eligible material
> by a
>
> qualified Biomass Conversion Facility.
>
>
>
>
>
> Conservationist,
>
> I believe the time has come here in Missouri to begin a very
>
> strategic plan
>
> on how we can become not only serious players in the biomass
> industry, but
>
> how can
>
> we improve wildlife habitat at the same time. I will emphatically
> state
>
> there is
>
> known scientific evidence that will validate this claim--especially
> all
>
> CRP lands that
>
> currently--and maybe futuristically--are enrolled in a plant
>
> material--like fescue and
>
> brome--that has very little environmental benefits.
>
> In order to move an idea forward there has to be action. And
> there is
>
> no action
>
> until there is movement. My passion and cause for our state is to
> add
>
> wildlife,
>
> environmental and green energy benefits for Northern Missouri. How
> do we
>
> add
>
> value to an economically depressed area? Firstly, like a Doctor's
> oath of
>
> promise
>
> for receiving his degree: "Never to do Harm." We need to emulate
> nature's
>
> blueprint
>
> and follow a path of least resistance. It is always more difficult
> to bend
>
> mother
>
> nature to our wants, than it is to assimilate to an ideology that
> heeds to
>
> bending
>
> with her.
>
> One known truth evident here in N. Missouri is that we can grow
>
> native grass and
>
> broadleaf legumes. Cellulosic's greatest asset is that indigenous
> plant
>
> material suited to the soil and climate adds to the success of the
>
> project. We have the potential of
>
> rebuilding CRP with an ecologically sound plant material that will
> boost
>
> biodiversity
>
> and reviving rural economies.
>
> Please do not take my word for any of this, use the science at
> hand.
>
> There
>
> are entrepreneurs willing and hoping for such an opportunity. Does
> anyone
>
> out there have any suggestions on where or how to begin this
> endeavor? We
>
> have
>
> nearly 1.5 million acres of CRP here in Missouri. One plan could be
> that
>
> once
>
> the re-established CRP acres of any single tract of ground was
> deemed
>
> ready
>
> to be engaged into a regime of biomass/wildlife management rotation,
> one
>
> forth to one
>
> third of the tract would be allowed to be harvested in the months of
>
> October
>
> through January. There would be no rental penalty for the landowner
> to pay
>
> if the plant material was used in some biomass project. The next
>
> designated portion to be
>
> harvested--rather it be one third to one forth--would be eligible
> for a
>
> late spring burn
>
> to encourage both forb growth and grass development. When there is
> plenty
>
> of
>
> thatch build-up, there are less forbs that will have vigorous
> growth. We
>
> have
>
> experienced this fact in our production fields. It works like this.
> Plants
>
> store starches
>
> and sugars in their roots systems. In early spring, if there is a
> canopy
>
> of thatch which
>
> creates enormous shade, when the emerging plant sends it first two
> basal
>
> leaves
>
> for light scouting, perennial and long lived native plants will not
> take
>
> the risk of
>
> expending large amounts of root reserves to overtake the
> canopy--just too
>
> risky.
>
> There are many possibilities that could be worked out. Currently,
>
> though, I believe
>
> we could be passing on a great opportunity to rebuild our landscape
> to a
>
> vegetation that is suited to attract and sustain our rare and
> declining
>
> wildlife, but too, the biomass entrepreneurs. It also would be good
> for
>
> pollinators, producers and weaning our
>
> nation's dependency on imported fossil fuels. I'm not saying the
> above is
>
> the perfect set of blueprints for a run away success story, however,
> I can
>
> say with wisdom and discernment that CRP could use a make-over that
> gives
>
> the customer--our hard working American taxpayers--real dividends
> for
>
> their investment.
>
> In the beginning of the Conservation Reserve Program, the goals
> of
>
> preventing soil erosion and cleaning up our streams was an
>
> industrious and very successful
>
> conservation accomplishment. We have progressed immensely in the
> field of
>
> understanding and implementing native plant communities and the
> adverse
>
> affects of toxic and invasive fescue. The research going on at
> NRCS's
>
> Plant Material Center and
>
> MU's Bradford Farm will yield much to the enhancement of a myriad of
>
> wildlife and biomass concerns. Thanks to all those partners
> supporting
>
> these exigencies. fo
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ********************************************************************************************************************************************************************
>
>
>
>
>
> The information transmitted (including attachments) is
>
> covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act,
>
> 18 U.S.C. 2510-2521, is intended only for the person(s) or
>
> entity/entities to which it is addressed and might contain
>
> confidential and/or privileged material. Any review,
>
> retransmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking
>
> of any action in reliance upon, this information by persons
>
> or entities other than the intended recipient(s) is prohibited.
>
> If you received this in error, please contact the sender and
>
> delete the material from any computer.
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> Carpenter mailing list
>
> Carpenter at mysticplains.org
>
> http://www.seaplace.org/mailman/listinfo/carpenter
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
More information about the Carpenter
mailing list