<a href=www.orlandosentinel.com>OrlandoSentinel.com By Pamela J. Johnson | Sentinel Staff Writer Posted April 27, 2003

Armored-catfish study For the first time, the state is conducting a "life-history study" on the species of armored catfish called brown hoplo and its possible effects on other fish in the St. Johns River. The study, which tracks what they eat and how they reproduce, is expected to be completed by year's end.

CHRISTMAS -- Each morning, they arrive for a full day of fishing. On weekends, a long line forms at the boat ramp.

The dedicated fishermen aren't fishing the upper St. Johns River for bass, bluegill or black crappies.

At sunset, they will pack their coolers with armored catfish -- "trash fish" to most locals.

"I wouldn't feed it to my cat," said a disgusted Frank Peacock, an airboat operator from Christmas. "They taste nasty."

But armored catfish is considered a delicacy for fishermen originally from Guyana, who travel from as far as New York to cast their nets in search of them.

That is angering longtime anglers, who say the newcomers have taken over the Highway 50 Boat Ramp in east Orange County and illegally stripped the upper river of game fish with their nets.

Nearly 1,000 people have signed a petition urging state officials to "Stop the Rape and Death of our River by Cast Netters."

The armored-catfish fishermen say they have the proper permits to be there and that the upper St. Johns River is one of the few areas in Florida where the fish can be found.

Fishermen from Guyana at the upper St. Johns River said that armored catfish is in high demand in South American communities in the United States and can be sold for about $10 a pound.

But they said they catch the armored catfish -- covered with tiny dark brown platelets that make them appear dressed for battle -- only to feed their extended families. The fish, also widely found in Trinidad, Martinique, Venezuela, Brazil, Peru and Paraguay, is boiled and the scaly outer skin is removed. It's soaked in lemon juice, stewed in curry and served with rice.

"It's better than ahi tuna," Radesh Arjoon, 32, a truck driver who immigrated from Guyana and lives in DeLand, said recently at the boat ramp. He learned that the upper St. Johns River was a hot spot for armored catfish a year ago, when he lived in New York City.

Arjoon said he has had one run-in with a fisherman who accused him of taking game fish -- which legally can only be caught with a fishing rod.

"They don't like us, and I don't know why," said Arjoon, pouring a few bucketsful of the fish into a cooler after an eight-hour day.

He said his weekly catches feed his wife and three children and sometimes his friends. "With a little curry," he added, "it's really, really good."

Peacock has no use for the fish. He said he routinely went bass fishing in the upper river until the armored catfish and cast netters came along, wiping out the game fish. "No one bothers to bass fish here anymore," he said.

Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission officials say the tropical fish was most likely introduced to the area two years ago by illegal aquarium dumping.

"I wish the cold weather we had would've killed them all," Peacock said of the armored catfish.

In a petition that he sent to state officials, Jon Sharp, a retired technical writer from Christmas, said that a severe drought had left water levels extremely low on the St. Johns River when the armored catfish and the cast netters appeared. Because the water was so low, he said, the nets caught not only catfish, but loads of game fish such as bass and bluegill. But the cast netters didn't throw back the game fish, as legally required, he said.

"The cast netters say they are after armored catfish," Sharp said. "Maybe so, but what happened to all the other fish?"

State officials say there is no evidence that the number of game fish has decreased in the upper river.

"We've done the studies, and there is no smoking gun," said Bob Eisenhauer, a state fisheries biologist based in Melbourne. A year ago, the state analyzed the amounts of different fish species at the upper river and determined that there was no significant decline in game fish, he said.

As a result of the complaints, state law enforcement officers stepped up patrol in the area. In several months, officers issued a handful of citations to cast netters taking game fish or fishing without the proper license.

"We extended a lot of time and effort in responding to the complaints," said Andy Love, a regional commander for the state Fish & Wildlife law-enforcement division. "And we shot down their accusations."

Officer Brian Baine, who works with Love, remembered hiding in bushes and watching the cast netters unload their catch. "I checked them and checked them," Baine said. "And I never could make an arrest."

Baine and others think that the conflict between Florida fishermen and those from other countries is a result of a culture clash.

"Here are these strangers coming in throwing their nets, some of them speaking little English," Baine said. "They just don't like them."

"That's the biggest bunch of baloney I've ever heard," said John Long, an airboat operator from Christmas. "We just don't like what they're doing. I've been fishing here for 40 years, and now you can't even catch supper."

Pamela J. Johnson can be reached at pjohnson@orlandosentinel.com or 407-420-5171.

www.kansas.com Posted on Tue, Mar. 18, 2003 Associated Press

DALLAS - A new source of income - or debt - could soon be a mouse click away for PC gamers.

Players 18 years and older can win cash or prizes while playing against each other in the online World War II action game Return to Castle Wolfenstein.

It's part of a deal between YouPlayGames and two Texas companies - Even Balance, Inc. of Houston and Id Software, Inc. of Mesquite.

After registering with YouPlayGames, gamers can place their wager.

The cost of entry generally will range from a few cents to a few dollars for each kill or injury players incur on their opponents, YouPlayGames creator Chris Grove said Tuesday.

No money limits have been set, but that could change, Grove said.

Another feature will let gamers cap how much money they can lose in 24 hours.

"If two players want to play a game for $100 a life, then we'll open up a server for that," he said.

Grove said prizes eventually will include games, vacations and money.

YouPlayGames' system remains in beta-testing but should be released later this month.

Subscribers will have to connect to online matches hosted on YouPlayGame's servers, and for security reasons use Even Balance's Punkbuster anti-cheat software.

Negotiations are under way to bring the cash-for-kiling scheme to other games, and eventually, online consoles like Xbox and PlayStation2, Grove said.

YouPlayGames is headquartered on the Caribbean island of Curacoa in the Netherlands Antilles, just off the coast of Venezuela.

U.S. players in 11 states won't be able to wager any money due to laws against fee-based online gaming. The states are Arizona, Arkansas, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Iowa, Louisiana, Maryland, Nevada, Tennessee and Vermont.

On the Net www.evenbalance.com www.youplaygames.com www.idsoftware.com

www.galvnews.com By Scott E. Williams The Daily News Published March 13, 2003

GALVESTON — Every year, the Beach Patrol welcomes a new class of lifeguard hopefuls with differing degrees of swimming experience. This year, one of the rookie class members has a little more than the typical first-year lifesaver. “We met one morning when I was teaching a course in Venezuela,” said Peter Davis, Beach Patrol assistant director. “I had been swimming, and he was willing to swim with me, so I thought, ‘Great, I finally have someone to work out with who can keep up with me.’ About a third of the way through, I realized what I was up against. He really put me through some pain.” Gerardo Vera started swimming when he was 4 years old in his native Venezuela in the 1950s. At six, he went to his first swim meet, and about a decade after that first meet, he was training to represent his country in the 1972 Olympics. “My coach, Gregorio Tavio, asked me if I wanted to try for the Olympics, and I said, ‘Sure,’” said Vera, 48. “He told me, ‘When I say eat, you eat. When I say sleep, you sleep. When I say run, you run.’” Vera said he was used to training hard, year round. “Swimming has no season,” he said. “You have championships in March, so you have to keep in competitive shape through the December break.” Vera said he changed everything about his life to revolve around his training. “I changed schools to be two blocks from the pool. I moved in with my sister because it was closer,” he said. He swam against U.S. champion Mark Spitz, who ended up winning five gold medals to go with the two he had won in 1968. Vera finished 11th in the 200-meter race, 13th in the 400 meters and 17th in the 1,500 meters. His finishes in the shortest two races made him the highest-finishing swimmer from any Latin country, including Italy and Spain. A bout with hepatitis B kept Vera from competing in the 1976 Olympics, and by the end of the year, he had decided to attend the Universidad Central de Venezuela to study veterinarian medicine. He put swimming aside and pursued that field while working as a teacher and technical service director throughout the Western Hemisphere until he was sent to perform technical support in his homeland. There, political unrest caused his office to close, and he decided to make a change. A few weeks ago, he ran into Davis, who was teaching a course in CPR and water rescue to lifeguards in the area. Vera asked about becoming a lifeguard. “We’re lucky because, in Venezuela right now, it’s tough to get work, so it worked out for us to get someone of his caliber,” Davis said. Vera said he felt like the lucky one, and hoped to catch on as a full-time lifeguard. “I feel great,” he said. “The rest of the kids here, they’re really educated swimmers. I’m really impressed with the high level of recognition and responsibility here. When I’m out with the other starting lifeguards, they’re all so much younger, it feels like I’m swimming with Luis. He’s my oldest son. “I’m really happy to be here. It makes me feel younger.”

www.kmsb.com 03/10/2003 By SUSAN GAIDOS / Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News

Some call it sweet, a few develop a thirst for it. Virtually everybody has plotted ways to get it.

Now scientists, too, are seeking revenge. Digging through anthropological and archaeological data on tribal warfare, researchers are analyzing the role that payback plays in human relations.

"Revenge is a peculiar topic," says Pennsylvania State University anthropologist Stephen Beckerman. "Everyone knows what it is, or thinks he does. Though there's a vast literature in theology and pop psychology urging us to eschew revenge and love our enemies, serious scholarly literature on revenge is remarkably thin."

Research so far suggests that when it comes to revenge, human intelligence "gone mad," perhaps, can spur people to do stupid things. And even when reason intervenes, human nature may urge you to strike back. Researchers say reciprocity, the give-and-take interchange that prompts you to return a favor, may also provoke you to repay a blow.

Revenge is not, of course, unique to humans. Animals share a universal impulse to strike back when injured. Studies show that a number of creatures – blue-footed boobies, elephant seals and side-striped jackals to name a few – routinely retaliate by attacking in kind. Evolutionarily speaking, revenge served up in this tit-for-tat fashion may serve an adaptive role by deterring future attacks.

Humans often carry revenge to lethal extremes, killing enemies for past actions and fueling feuds that can last generations. Yet given a warrior's dismal chances of surviving ongoing wars, the long-term benefits of revenge aren't so obvious.

So to better understand the interplay among revenge, retaliation and human motives, scientists are analyzing oral and written records on past tribal wars in New Guinea and Ecuador. Those studies may help explain how humans view conflict and may identify circumstances under which people are more likely to return violence for violence, anthropologists said in Denver last month at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.

Lawrence Keeley, an anthropologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago who has studied warfare in modern and prehistoric societies, says tribal warriors, unlike their contemporary counterparts, attack their enemies for personal, rather than political or economic, reasons. Without governments to press them into service, these warriors go to war because they want to, not because they have to.

"Revenge and retaliation are a component of warfare everywhere and at all times," Dr. Keeley says, noting that revenge is motivated by injury whereas retaliation is returning injury for injury.

Studies of tribes in eastern Ecuador show that warriors may seek revenge for a variety of grievances or goals: A death, an illness, a streak of bad luck, even a desire for mates or glory can spark an attack.

But the No. 1 motive for coalitional violence is vengeance for a previous killing, says James Boster, an anthropologist at the University of Connecticut who has extensively studied Ecuador's Waorani tribes.

"The problem with retaliatory violence is that once started down the path of an attack and counterattack, the same furious dynamic that might have protected against the initial assault perpetuates the violence," Dr. Boster says.

Though the threat of retaliatory violence may deter an initial assault, once a fight breaks out it can lock antagonists into an endless cycle of violence, he explains.

Dr. Keeley agrees, noting that in the short term, retaliation can bring peace, albeit an uncomfortable one. Facing down opponents sends a clear signal of strength and sometimes forestalls further aggression.

But over the long haul, societies that seek revenge and retaliate most fiercely are also the most war-torn, he says.

Reciprocity role

Striking back may just be part of human nature, he says, noting that reciprocity, an inclination to return like for like, plays a role in all types of human interactions. Returning a favor, acknowledging a smile, reciprocity is a relational glue that helps build successful connections among families, friends and business associates.

"Reciprocity expresses a deep feature of human decision-making in action, and we can see it across human affairs everywhere," Dr. Keeley says.

Reciprocity also plays out in warfare, he says, operating under the guise of retaliation: an eye for an eye, a life for a life.

This type of exchange may account for the instinct to strike back when attacked, but it falls short of explaining why humans fail to put the brakes on lethal confrontation in the first place.

Paul Roscoe, an anthropologist at the University of Maine who has studied warfare in tribal societies of New Guinea, argues that human intelligence may be a conspirator, enabling man to play out his outrage. The same part of the brain that separates man from beast can be used to plan and organize attacks, he says.

Animals, lacking this "higher" intelligence, are too smart to carry revenge to such extremes.

Most animals are hard-wired to respond in kind to escalating aggressions, Dr. Roscoe notes, but they break off the confrontation – by withdrawing or submitting – when outmatched. Two male red deer, for example, will first roar at each other, and then walk back and forth to size each other up. Even if they lock horns and fight, the match is generally not lethal.

"The problem, in looking for a Darwinian theory of revenge, is to explain why humans, unlike most other species, don't stop short of lethality in their conflicts," Dr. Roscoe says.

"In the perfect case, a single retaliatory homicide would pay the blood debt and end the matter. At most, one or two reciprocal homicides would suffice for both sides to get the message and either cease hostilities or for one side to withdraw."

Anthropological data from New Guinea show, however, that revenge and retaliation are seldom this efficient. A fracas that results in a single death can set into motion a seemingly endless cycle of attacks and counterattacks. Because warring parties often disagree on what constitutes a balance of killings, feuds may endure for years or generations once started.

In describing their motives for killing, the tribal members expressed a desire to "even the score." One tribe, for example, said, "The clan has been weakened, thus the clan of the murderer must be weakened, too." Another said it would fight until the number of the dead ones was fairly even, to "keep the enemy balanced in terms of manpower."

Fear factor

New Guinea warriors also killed out of fear for their own well-being. Believing failure to vindicate a homicide would bring sickness and death to its members, the Iatmul tribe would promptly avenge a killing.

Similarly, the Melpa were quick to take vengeance, believing that the spirit of a murdered man would "pester his own clan until he was avenged."

Dr. Roscoe concludes that blood revenge is probably not a useful evolutionary adaptation. It frequently fuels more killing rather than deterring it, he says.

He argues that war is a "byproduct of human intelligence," an outgrowth of man's highly developed neocortex. The neocortex, a region of the brain known for intellectual thought and creativity, enables humans to develop tools, communicate through language and plan and carry out group action for war.

"Humans developed the ability to model actions before they happen. This means we can plan collective violence. It explains why we have warfare," Dr. Roscoe says. Research on chimps confirms that once you can gang up and launch a surprise attack on outnumbered victims, killing becomes a dramatically more attractive option.

Neocortical prowess also allows humans to dehumanize their enemies and manipulate their emotional states, says Dr. Roscoe. Warriors, for example, can whip themselves into an angered frenzy by recalling slain kin and engaging in repetitive, war-mongering chants.

But if tribal warriors sometimes use their intelligence to incite war, evidence shows they also use it in ways to forestall aggression and set limits on reciprocal violence.

Dr. Beckerman, of Penn State, notes that tribes in many places develop elaborate rules outlining who, where, when and how revenge may be carried out. Kin, for example, are forbidden to retaliate against each other.

"The general rule is that you are prohibited from taking blood revenge on those who would be obliged to avenge you, if you were killed," Dr. Beckerman says.

Groups with ongoing relations – such as different clans within the same tribe or different villages within the same precinct – often share ideas on what kind of injury calls for blood revenge, who should carry it out and who the acceptable target of revenge ought to be, he says.

And reciprocity, the same relational rationalization used to return violence for violence, is sometimes used to build truces and contain unbridled violence. Food, labor, wives and other goods are often traded among members of tribes or between groups in attempts to keep losses and gains in balance or to bring an end to bloodshed.

"A life for a life, an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth was not, for the tribal people who codified this rule, a recipe for unbridled violence, but rather an attempt to contain it," Dr. Beckerman says.

Scientists note that these are not the only factors that play into war. Brian Ferguson, an anthropology professor at Rutgers University in Newark, N.J., who has studied the Yanomami Indians of Venezuela and Brazil, notes that revenge as a concept differs from one society to another, and no one revenge model fits all.

Ultimately, such studies may provide insights on warfare among larger societies and states, Dr. Roscoe says. "Personally, I think we have an awful lot to learn from areas like New Guinea, because we're not looking back in the past, but we're looking at ourselves in the present, stripped of our thermonuclear weapons."

Susan Gaidos is a free-lance writer in Maine.

www.newswire.ca

MONTREAL, Feb. 27 /CNW Telbec/ - The L'OREAL-UNESCO program FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE today honored twenty women scientists from all corners of the globe.

The Awards, presented by the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of L'OREAL, Lindsay Owen-Jones, and Director-General of UNESCO, Koichiro Matsuura, recognized five Laureates working in the field of Material Sciences in addition to fifteen Fellows in the Life Sciences at a ceremony held at UNESCO's Paris Headquarters. This year's Awards bring to 71 the number of women, from 45 countries, who have been honored by the program.

The L'OREAL-UNESCO FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE program aims to improve the position of women in science by recognizing outstanding women researchers who have contributed to scientific progress (L'OREAL-UNESCO Awards of $100,000 each), and young women scientists engaged in exemplary and promising projects (UNESCO-L'OREAL Fellowships of $20,000 each).

The L'OREAL-UNESCO Award distinguishes five remarkable women researchers representing the five continents: Africa, Asia-Pacific, Europe, Latin America and North America. Often, these women's exceptional careers have opened up new and revolutionary ways of improving conditions of life and well being.

Professor Pierre-Gilles de Gennes, Nobel Prize in Physics 1991, presided over an international jury of ten eminent scientists. ("see list of 2003 Award Laureates below"). Speaking at the ceremony, Mr. Lindsay Owen-Jones said: "The discoveries that you make push forward the boundaries of science. You are emblems who are a great source of hope; attracting new young women to your fields of research and inspiring a great calling that ensures the future of science." Koichiro Matsuura added: "You are the role models for today's young girls, opening a door to freedom and adventure that has been forbidden them for too long. In today's knowledge societies, women must contribute to scientific research, and mark it with their vision of the world and its development." The expansion of the Awards to include the discipline of the Material Sciences, coupled with a significant increase in their monetary value, demonstrates the commitment of the Award partners to ensure that the L'OREAL- UNESCO FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE program finds its place alongside the world's leading international awards programs.

The UNESCO-L'OREAL Fellowships encourage young women scientists to pursue their research projects in the laboratory of their choice. This year, fifteen women from five regions were rewarded. By fostering young researchers and their hopes, the FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE program works to reinforce the vocation of women in scientific disciplines. Since the creation of the Fellowships in 2000, the program has distinguished a total of 45 young scientists. ("see list of 2003 Fellows below")

LOCAL INITIATIVES The annual international Award ceremony is the highlight of an increasingly full program of local initiatives being organized worldwide; including in Austria, Belgium, Canada, China, Finland, Germany, Italy, Republic of Korea, Poland, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Thailand, Turkey and the United Kingdom. These initiatives ensure that women in science benefit even further from the partnership forged between L'OREAL and UNESCO.

In Canada a national program called "Mentorship for Science" is being developed jointly between L'Oréal Canada, the Canadian Commission for UNESCO and Actua, a non-profit organization dedicated to increasing the scientific and technical literacy of young Canadians. This mentorship program, which is set to be launched later this spring, will partner leading women scientists, such as the FOR WOMEN IN SCIENCE laureates, with young Canadian girls in order to stimulate and encourage these young girls to pursue careers in science.

Note to Editors:

• Life Sciences and Material Sciences both contribute to the scientific success of L'OREAL. In twelve research centers in France, Asia and America, more than 2,700 scientists are responsible for the registration of hundreds of patents annually. 55% of these scientists are women - a percentage unmatched elsewhere in the industry.

• L'OREAL is the world's number one cosmetics company, present in 140 countries. For more details, visit www.loreal.com - UNESCO is an intergovernmental organisation. It currently has 188 Member States. The main objective of UNESCO is to contribute to peace and security in the world by promoting collaboration among nations through education, science, culture and communication.

THE 2003 AWARD LAUREATES

Karimat EL-SAYED (Egypt), Professor of Solid State Physics, Ain Shams University, Cairo, has specialized in the detection of impurities in materials relevant to industrial metallurgy and semi-conducting materials.

Fang-Hua LI (China), Professor, Institute of Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, is a specialist of electron microscopy. Her work has pushed back the limits of observation of crystalline structures through the elimination of interference.

Ayse ERZAN (Turkey), Professor of Physics, Istanbul Technical University, has used the concepts of fractal geometry to study the collective phenomena of percolation, in which the interactions of simple constituents translate to behavior at large scale or over long periods.

Mariana WEISSMANN (Argentina), Senior Researcher, Argentine National Research Council, Buenos Aires, has helped to move our understanding of quantum solids from a qualitative view to quantitative predictions. She has also been a pioneer in the use of computers to study the properties of solids.

Johanna M. H. LEVELT SENGERS (USA), Scientist Emeritus, National Institute of Standards and Technology, Gaithersburg, Maryland, has contributed to a better definition of water and steam properties for scientific applications. Her work has aided industry in its search for cleaner and safer ways to dispose of hazardous and toxic waste.

THE 2003 FELLOWS

Africa Côte d'Ivoire: Ahou Edwige SIRANSY - Physiology Nigeria: Sodangi Abdulkarim LUKA GESINDE - Parasitology South Africa: Karin JACOBS - Mycology

Arab States Palestinian Authority: Mary George KAILEH - Molecular Biology Syria: Darie ALIKAJ -Virology Tunisia: Samia REJIBA - Molecular Biology

Asia-Pacific Australia: Devi STUART-FOX - Ecology/Evolutionary Biology Iran: Shiva SEYED FOROOTAN - Molecular Biology ("The third Asia-Pacific Fellowship Recipient will be announced in the coming weeks.")

Europe/North America Israel: Victoria YAVELSKY - Molecular Biology/Immunology Romania: Adriana JALBA - Plant Biology Turkey: Ahu ALTINKUT UNCUOGLU - Molecular Biology

Latin America/Caribbean Argentina: Maria Gabriela PALOMO - Marine Ecology Peru: Dionicia GAMBOA VILELA - Molecular Biology Venezuela: Rocio DIAZ-BENJUMEA BENAVIDES - Parasitology/ Biology

-30-

For further information: Teresa Menna, Corporate Communications, L'Oréal Canada, (514) 287-4613, tmenna@ca.loreal.com; www.forwomeninscience.com

L'OREAL CANADA INC., UNESCO has 3 releases in this database.