Curiousity got the better of me ...

Safest is a battery-powered, pulsing (as opposed to continuous) electric
fence controller bearing Underwriters Laboratories label ANSI/UL69 (Electric
Rence Contollers) One town's regulations specified that the current pulse
a maximum of 60 times a minute with the duration of each pulse a max of
1/10 second and be 25 milliamps or less. This is on the high side; the
newer controllers have pulse duration around 1/1000 second. Voltages seem
to run in the 5K-7K range. The shorter pulse duration also has the
advantage of not heating dried vegetation to combustion temperature.

"William W. Plummer" wrote in
news:JVLoc.660$Dz.92685@attbi_s52:


"Fay" wrote in message
...
snip
This reminds me of a neighbor a few years ago when he saw two kids
breaking into his storage building. When he called the police he was
told they didn't have a car ton send right away, but would get there
when they cvould. He called them back in a couple of minutes and told
them not to hurry that he just shot the two intruders. They show up
in about 3 minutes and caught the two kids. The police ask why he
lied about shooting the kids.
Filing a false report usually has a stiff penalty. How did you avoid
being charged?

He said well I got lied to by you when you said you had no car to send
out.
Two wrongs don't make a right. You can't justify your crime this way.

Why not? Flimsier excuses have been used to justify more obvious crimes.

Would it have been better to just shoot the kids? You don't have to kill
them, just a couple of bullets in the legs. They'll have a harder time
stealing next time, gimping around being crippled and what not. Of
course if you're a bad shot and hit one in the head, save it for the
judge.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

Are we on the same planet? I'm referring to your TOWN'S animal control
department. I've never heard of those people charging a citizen for
removing
an animal.

It's not unheard of. We had a baby raccoon trapped in our garage behind
pegboard last summer. The town wouldn't touch the situation and referred us
to a private contractor. Cost us $145 to have the guy take it out and
release it in our yard.

BTW, after seeing how pi$$ed off that animal was, there's no way I'd try to
release one from a trap myself. And this was a raccoon that was only about 3
months old. Better left to professionals.
--
JennP.

I'd have spent a dollar on letting the car idle for a half gallon of gas, or
so, then removed the carcass.....

Mark (just trying to save you $144 next time) Dunning

"JennP" wrote in message
news:4Sdrc.767$JC5.195590@attbi_s54...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

Are we on the same planet? I'm referring to your TOWN'S animal control
department. I've never heard of those people charging a citizen for
removing
an animal.

It's not unheard of. We had a baby raccoon trapped in our garage behind
pegboard last summer. The town wouldn't touch the situation and referred
us
to a private contractor. Cost us $145 to have the guy take it out and
release it in our yard.

BTW, after seeing how pi$$ed off that animal was, there's no way I'd try
to
release one from a trap myself. And this was a raccoon that was only about
3
months old. Better left to professionals.
--
JennP.

On Sat, 22 May 2004 03:16:52 GMT, "mark dunning"
wrote:

I'd have spent a dollar on letting the car idle for a half gallon of gas, or
so, then removed the carcass.....

Mark (just trying to save you $144 next time) Dunning

reading in misc.rural.

fun part is that depending on how new the car is, that might not work.
since about 1995, the car computers have been smart enough to stop the
engine when the oxygen level falls below 16% or so...and with the
modern cat cons, that might not have the carbon monoxide level high
enough for more than a head ache.

ck
--
country doc in louisiana
(no fancy sayings right now)

"charles krin" wrote in message
...
| On Sat, 22 May 2004 03:16:52 GMT, "mark dunning"
| wrote:
|
| I'd have spent a dollar on letting the car idle for a half gallon of gas,
or
| so, then removed the carcass.....
|
| Mark (just trying to save you $144 next time) Dunning
|
| reading in misc.rural.
|
| fun part is that depending on how new the car is, that might not work.
| since about 1995, the car computers have been smart enough to stop the
| engine when the oxygen level falls below 16% or so...and with the
| modern cat cons, that might not have the carbon monoxide level high
| enough for more than a head ache.

Actually the variation in O2 levels as controlled by the computer is not
that great. Regardless it is the blood's affinity for CO that is the danger
and CO levels way lower than can be minimally produced by an internal
combustion engine are sufficient to kill after prolonged exposure. The key
is time. I should also mention that CO is heavier than O2 so the atmosphere
at the bottom of the rat hole will be have increasingly concentrated CO
levels. If all else fails the critter will have one h*ll of a head ache.

Not Me wrote:
snip
I should also mention that CO is heavier than O2 so the atmosphere
at the bottom of the rat hole will be have increasingly concentrated CO
levels. If all else fails the critter will have one h*ll of a head ache.

C = 12, O = 16, N = 14

CO = 28, O2 = 32, N2 = 28

R,
Tom Q.

"Tom Quackenbush"

| I should also mention that CO is heavier than O2 so the atmosphere
| at the bottom of the rat hole will be have increasingly concentrated CO
| levels. If all else fails the critter will have one h*ll of a head ache.
|
| C = 12, O = 16, N = 14
|
| CO = 28, O2 = 32, N2 = 28

The real world physics/dynamics is not quite that simple but sufficient to
say CO is heavier than air and will settle to the lowest level i.e. the
bottom of the rat hole.

Not Me wrote:
"Tom Quackenbush"

| I should also mention that CO is heavier than O2 so the atmosphere
| at the bottom of the rat hole will be have increasingly concentrated CO
| levels. If all else fails the critter will have one h*ll of a head ache.
|
| C = 12, O = 16, N = 14
|
| CO = 28, O2 = 32, N2 = 28

The real world physics/dynamics is not quite that simple but sufficient to
say CO is heavier than air and will settle to the lowest level i.e. the
bottom of the rat hole.

Are you sure you're not thinking of CO2?

Carbon monoxide is obviously lighter than air (but not by much). If
you don't believe me, Google for "carbon monoxide lighter air".

R,
Tom Q.

"Not Me" wrote in message
...

"Tom Quackenbush"

| I should also mention that CO is heavier than O2 so the atmosphere
| at the bottom of the rat hole will be have increasingly concentrated CO
| levels. If all else fails the critter will have one h*ll of a head
ache.
|
| C = 12, O = 16, N = 14
|
| CO = 28, O2 = 32, N2 = 28

The real world physics/dynamics is not quite that simple but sufficient to
say CO is heavier than air and will settle to the lowest level i.e. the
bottom of the rat hole.

Brownian motion will cause gases to mix. You don't see the O2 and N2 that
compose most of our "air" separating.

Xref: kermit rec.gardens:280490 misc.rural:132646 misc.consumers.house:106973 alt.home.repair:481263

"William W. Plummer" wrote in
news:yPntc.35081$af3.1824427@attbi_s51:


"Not Me" wrote in message
...

"Tom Quackenbush"

| I should also mention that CO is heavier than O2 so the
| atmosphere
| at the bottom of the rat hole will be have increasingly
| concentrated CO levels. If all else fails the critter will have
| one h*ll of a head ache.
|
| C = 12, O = 16, N = 14
|
| CO = 28, O2 = 32, N2 = 28

The real world physics/dynamics is not quite that simple but
sufficient to say CO is heavier than air and will settle to the
lowest level i.e. the bottom of the rat hole.

Brownian motion will cause gases to mix. You don't see the O2 and N2
that compose most of our "air" separating.

But isn't it true that there exists some "heavy" gas that will tend to
collect at a lowest elevation? I don't remember exactly what carbon
monoxide does, but it's possible that I've also heard that it sinks
(compared to say something like helium which obviously wants to rise).

The question is whether CO is one of those gases.

On Wed, 26 May 2004 08:23:48 -0400, "Not Me" wrote:



Actually the variation in O2 levels as controlled by the computer is not
that great. Regardless it is the blood's affinity for CO that is the danger
and CO levels way lower than can be minimally produced by an internal
combustion engine are sufficient to kill after prolonged exposure. The key
is time. I should also mention that CO is heavier than O2 so the atmosphere
at the bottom of the rat hole will be have increasingly concentrated CO
levels. If all else fails the critter will have one h*ll of a head ache.


actually, carbon monoxide, at mol wt 28 (same as N2) is slightly
lighter than air (avg formula wt approx 30).

and there have been a number of documented human survivors from failed
CO suicide attempts because the engines shut down before the air in
the garage became lethal.

and cigarette smokers frequently tolerate levels of carboxy hemoglobin
that would debilitate folks who didn't smoke.

ck
--
country doc in louisiana
(no fancy sayings right now)

On Thu, 27 May 2004 16:36:23 GMT, Salty Thumb
wrote:


But isn't it true that there exists some "heavy" gas that will tend to
collect at a lowest elevation? I don't remember exactly what carbon
monoxide does, but it's possible that I've also heard that it sinks
(compared to say something like helium which obviously wants to rise).

The question is whether CO is one of those gases.

Is not...Oxygen (O2, molecular wt 32) will settle slowly...Carbon
Dioxide (CO2, molecular wt 44) settles fairly well...Propane (C3H8,
also molecular wt 44), settles well enough to cause major problems if
a leak occurs.

ck
--
country doc in louisiana
(no fancy sayings right now)