Available at the Warming Hut at Crissy Field and on Amazon here
Tuesday, December 29, 2009
Monday, December 28, 2009
Dog friendly ski trails in Tahoe
Ski with your dog at TahoeXC
dog-friendly skiing
Ski-daddle In Tahoe City
www.tahoexc.org
530-583-5475
Your happy, leash-free dog can trot along beside you on five miles of beautifully groomed dog-friendly trails here. (Leashes are required only at the trailhead and parking lot.) The ski lodge is just as welcoming as the trails. Inside the cozy lounge you’ll find plenty of dog biscuits, as well as hot chocolate and cookies for people.
dog-friendly skiing
Ski-daddle In Tahoe City
www.tahoexc.org
530-583-5475
Your happy, leash-free dog can trot along beside you on five miles of beautifully groomed dog-friendly trails here. (Leashes are required only at the trailhead and parking lot.) The ski lodge is just as welcoming as the trails. Inside the cozy lounge you’ll find plenty of dog biscuits, as well as hot chocolate and cookies for people.
Friday, December 25, 2009
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Thursday, December 17, 2009
Wednesday, December 16, 2009
The Best Walking Partner: Man vs. Dog
http://well.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/12/14/the-best-walking-partner-man-vs-dog/
Is it better to walk a human or to walk a dog?
New research from the University of Missouri has found that people who walk dogs are more consistent about regular exercise and show more improvement in fitness than people who walk with a human companion. In a 12-week study of 54 older adults at an assisted living home, 35 people were assigned to a walking program for five days a week, while the remaining 19 served as a control group. Among the walkers, 23 selected a friend or spouse to serve as a regular walking partner along a trail laid out near the home. Another 12 participants took a bus daily to a local animal shelter where they were assigned a dog to walk.
To the surprise of the researchers, the dog walkers showed a big improvement in fitness, while the human walkers began making excuses to skip the workout. Walking speed among the dog walkers increased by 28 percent, compared with just a 4 percent increase among the human walkers.
“What happened was nothing short of remarkable,” said Rebecca A. Johnson, a nursing professor and director of the Research Center for Human Animal Interaction at the University of Missouri’s College of Veterinary Medicine. “The improvement in walking speed means their confidence in their walking ability had increased and their balance had increased. To have a 28 percent improvement in walking speed is mind boggling.”
Ms. Johnson said that because some people are afraid of dogs, the participants were given the choice of walking with a human or a dog as the companion. Ms. Johnson said the dog walkers were far more consistent in sticking with the program than those who were walking with humans.
“In the human walking group, they were regularly discouraging each other from walking,” she said. “Missouri is a hot state. We would hear them saying: ‘It’s hot today. I don’t want to walk, do you?’ ”
The response from participants in the dog-walking group — and their dog companions — was very different.
“When the people came to the animal shelter, they bounced off the bus and said, ‘Where’s my dog?”’ Ms. Johnson said. “And the dogs never gave any discouragement from walking.”
Ms. Johnson said she suspects differences will show up in other areas, like depression and anxiety, although that data are still under review and the final study has not yet been published.
But there were also other subtle indicators of improvement among the dog-walking group. Many people in the dog-walking group stopped using canes and walkers. “They would say, ‘Now I’m physically fit enough to take my dog for a walk,”’ Ms. Johnson said.
Is it better to walk a human or to walk a dog?
New research from the University of Missouri has found that people who walk dogs are more consistent about regular exercise and show more improvement in fitness than people who walk with a human companion. In a 12-week study of 54 older adults at an assisted living home, 35 people were assigned to a walking program for five days a week, while the remaining 19 served as a control group. Among the walkers, 23 selected a friend or spouse to serve as a regular walking partner along a trail laid out near the home. Another 12 participants took a bus daily to a local animal shelter where they were assigned a dog to walk.
To the surprise of the researchers, the dog walkers showed a big improvement in fitness, while the human walkers began making excuses to skip the workout. Walking speed among the dog walkers increased by 28 percent, compared with just a 4 percent increase among the human walkers.
“What happened was nothing short of remarkable,” said Rebecca A. Johnson, a nursing professor and director of the Research Center for Human Animal Interaction at the University of Missouri’s College of Veterinary Medicine. “The improvement in walking speed means their confidence in their walking ability had increased and their balance had increased. To have a 28 percent improvement in walking speed is mind boggling.”
Ms. Johnson said that because some people are afraid of dogs, the participants were given the choice of walking with a human or a dog as the companion. Ms. Johnson said the dog walkers were far more consistent in sticking with the program than those who were walking with humans.
“In the human walking group, they were regularly discouraging each other from walking,” she said. “Missouri is a hot state. We would hear them saying: ‘It’s hot today. I don’t want to walk, do you?’ ”
The response from participants in the dog-walking group — and their dog companions — was very different.
“When the people came to the animal shelter, they bounced off the bus and said, ‘Where’s my dog?”’ Ms. Johnson said. “And the dogs never gave any discouragement from walking.”
Ms. Johnson said she suspects differences will show up in other areas, like depression and anxiety, although that data are still under review and the final study has not yet been published.
But there were also other subtle indicators of improvement among the dog-walking group. Many people in the dog-walking group stopped using canes and walkers. “They would say, ‘Now I’m physically fit enough to take my dog for a walk,”’ Ms. Johnson said.
Thursday, December 10, 2009
Sunday, December 6, 2009
Wolf recovery at crossroads in Southwest
Wolf recovery at crossroads in Southwest
Ranchers say reintroduction program has put many out of business
The Associated Press
updated 2:52 p.m. PT, Sun., Dec . 6, 2009
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - A decade has passed since the U.S. government began returning endangered Mexican wolves to their historic range in the Southwest. It hasn't worked out — for the wolves, for ranchers, for conservationists or for federal biologists.
And that has resulted in frustration and resentment by many involved in the reintroduction program centered along the Arizona-New Mexico border, a landscape of sprawling pine and spruce forests, cold-water lakes and clear streams.
"I believe in being a good steward of the land and preserving it for generations to come, but this is ridiculous," said Ed Wehrheim, who heads the county commission in Catron County, in the heart of wolf country. "I've had ranchers' wives come to me just bawling because everything they and their parents have worked for is going down the drain."
Four ranches have gone out of business since the wolf reintroduction began and another four are expected to do the same before next summer, Wehrheim said.
The region has been hit by drought and cattle prices aren't what they used to be, but Wehrheim said pressure from environmentalists and hundreds of livestock kills by Mexican gray wolves over the past decade have only made things worse.
Environmentalists argue that grazing practices are part of the problem and the wolf reintroduction program has failed because of mismanagement by the federal government.
In the middle stands Bud Fazio, coordinator of the Mexican gray wolf reintroduction program.
The program is at a crossroads and Fazio said he hopes to bring everyone back to the table to find a way to move forward, quell concerns of critical environmentalists and gain the confidence of wary ranchers.
"One thing about wolves is they bring out extreme emotions and feelings and attitudes, so it is an extra challenge," he said. "There is some middle ground. There is some balance, but my sense is that so far we haven't found that in the Southwest and we need to."
Future of program in debated
A subspecies of the gray wolf, the Mexican wolf was exterminated in the wild by the 1930s. The government began reintroducing wolves in 1998 along the Arizona-New Mexico line, in a territory of more than 4 million acres interspersed with forests, private land and towns.
There are about 50 wolves in the wild in Arizona and New Mexico, but that's half of what biologists had hoped to have by now.
Federal, state and other officials involved in wolf recovery are scheduled to meet next week in Albuquerque for the first of many "frank discussions" about the future of the program, Fazio said.
Part of the reason for the talks is a recent settlement with environmentalists that called for an end to a three-strikes rule that allowed wildlife managers to trap or shoot wolves that had killed at least three head of livestock within a year.
The settlement also made clear that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has control over the program, rather than a committee formed in 2003 to bring other agencies into the recovery effort.
The original rule that established the reintroduction program still allows managers to remove problem wolves, but Fazio said officials will now consider many factors — such as the wolf's genetic value to the program and its reproductive success — before making decisions on keeping an animal in the wild.
"Everything remains on the table in terms of an option for managing wolves and that does include removal of live animals or lethal removal," Fazio said. "What is different is that a whole suite of things, broader than before, will be taken into account."
Preying on cattle
Wehrheim and the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association maintain the settlement changes nothing because the wolf program had already started to leave wolves with more than three strikes in the wild. They pointed to the Middle Fork pack, which was blamed for 10 livestock kills in two months.
The pack includes four pups and two adults, both of which are missing their front left paws.
Federal biologists say the pack is now hunting elk and relying less on strategically placed food caches.
Ranchers say that leaving the maimed wolves in the wild encourages them to go after easy prey such as calves.
"It's a problem of the program, not a problem of the wolf," Catron County Manager Bill Aymar said.
The Center for Biological Diversity also has been critical of the program, but the group believes the wolves should be left in the wild and critical habitat declared for the species to recover.
Surviving on the landscape
Wehrheim told New Mexico legislators in Santa Fe this week that ranchers in southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona can't afford to live with the wolves if the program remains unchanged and the federal government's plan for compensating livestock losses goes unfunded.
"It's very, very serious for Catron County and all of the wolf recovery area," he said. "We don't see any ranching existing with the wolf. We don't see any hunting existing with the wolf. We're talking tens of millions of dollars of loss."
He gave the example of a third-generation ranch that harvested about 200 calves annually before going out of business earlier this year. The operation was capable of bringing in more than $1 million in tax and other revenues to the county.
Tod Stevenson, director of the New Mexico Game and Fish Department, testified that his agency and the state want to make sure Catron County and its ranchers can continue to survive on the landscape.
"That's the best way that we can continue to manage wildlife, is to have them as partners out there on the ground," he said. "It's critical that we come up with a balance to achieve that."
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34303223/from/RSS/
Ranchers say reintroduction program has put many out of business
The Associated Press
updated 2:52 p.m. PT, Sun., Dec . 6, 2009
ALBUQUERQUE, N.M. - A decade has passed since the U.S. government began returning endangered Mexican wolves to their historic range in the Southwest. It hasn't worked out — for the wolves, for ranchers, for conservationists or for federal biologists.
And that has resulted in frustration and resentment by many involved in the reintroduction program centered along the Arizona-New Mexico border, a landscape of sprawling pine and spruce forests, cold-water lakes and clear streams.
"I believe in being a good steward of the land and preserving it for generations to come, but this is ridiculous," said Ed Wehrheim, who heads the county commission in Catron County, in the heart of wolf country. "I've had ranchers' wives come to me just bawling because everything they and their parents have worked for is going down the drain."
Four ranches have gone out of business since the wolf reintroduction began and another four are expected to do the same before next summer, Wehrheim said.
The region has been hit by drought and cattle prices aren't what they used to be, but Wehrheim said pressure from environmentalists and hundreds of livestock kills by Mexican gray wolves over the past decade have only made things worse.
Environmentalists argue that grazing practices are part of the problem and the wolf reintroduction program has failed because of mismanagement by the federal government.
In the middle stands Bud Fazio, coordinator of the Mexican gray wolf reintroduction program.
The program is at a crossroads and Fazio said he hopes to bring everyone back to the table to find a way to move forward, quell concerns of critical environmentalists and gain the confidence of wary ranchers.
"One thing about wolves is they bring out extreme emotions and feelings and attitudes, so it is an extra challenge," he said. "There is some middle ground. There is some balance, but my sense is that so far we haven't found that in the Southwest and we need to."
Future of program in debated
A subspecies of the gray wolf, the Mexican wolf was exterminated in the wild by the 1930s. The government began reintroducing wolves in 1998 along the Arizona-New Mexico line, in a territory of more than 4 million acres interspersed with forests, private land and towns.
There are about 50 wolves in the wild in Arizona and New Mexico, but that's half of what biologists had hoped to have by now.
Federal, state and other officials involved in wolf recovery are scheduled to meet next week in Albuquerque for the first of many "frank discussions" about the future of the program, Fazio said.
Part of the reason for the talks is a recent settlement with environmentalists that called for an end to a three-strikes rule that allowed wildlife managers to trap or shoot wolves that had killed at least three head of livestock within a year.
The settlement also made clear that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has control over the program, rather than a committee formed in 2003 to bring other agencies into the recovery effort.
The original rule that established the reintroduction program still allows managers to remove problem wolves, but Fazio said officials will now consider many factors — such as the wolf's genetic value to the program and its reproductive success — before making decisions on keeping an animal in the wild.
"Everything remains on the table in terms of an option for managing wolves and that does include removal of live animals or lethal removal," Fazio said. "What is different is that a whole suite of things, broader than before, will be taken into account."
Preying on cattle
Wehrheim and the New Mexico Cattle Growers' Association maintain the settlement changes nothing because the wolf program had already started to leave wolves with more than three strikes in the wild. They pointed to the Middle Fork pack, which was blamed for 10 livestock kills in two months.
The pack includes four pups and two adults, both of which are missing their front left paws.
Federal biologists say the pack is now hunting elk and relying less on strategically placed food caches.
Ranchers say that leaving the maimed wolves in the wild encourages them to go after easy prey such as calves.
"It's a problem of the program, not a problem of the wolf," Catron County Manager Bill Aymar said.
The Center for Biological Diversity also has been critical of the program, but the group believes the wolves should be left in the wild and critical habitat declared for the species to recover.
Surviving on the landscape
Wehrheim told New Mexico legislators in Santa Fe this week that ranchers in southwestern New Mexico and southeastern Arizona can't afford to live with the wolves if the program remains unchanged and the federal government's plan for compensating livestock losses goes unfunded.
"It's very, very serious for Catron County and all of the wolf recovery area," he said. "We don't see any ranching existing with the wolf. We don't see any hunting existing with the wolf. We're talking tens of millions of dollars of loss."
He gave the example of a third-generation ranch that harvested about 200 calves annually before going out of business earlier this year. The operation was capable of bringing in more than $1 million in tax and other revenues to the county.
Tod Stevenson, director of the New Mexico Game and Fish Department, testified that his agency and the state want to make sure Catron County and its ranchers can continue to survive on the landscape.
"That's the best way that we can continue to manage wildlife, is to have them as partners out there on the ground," he said. "It's critical that we come up with a balance to achieve that."
Copyright 2009 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34303223/from/RSS/
Saturday, December 5, 2009
Animals That Help People With Depression
Animals may be used in animal-assisted therapy (AAT), as Emotional Support Animals (ESA) or as Psychiatric Service Animals (PSA) to therapeutically intervene, provide companionship and reduce suffering of people with a variety of psychological and medical disorders. They help the depressed by offering opportunities for exercise (which improves feelings of well-being), social contact, companionship, communication and emotional intimacy.
Dogs and Cats
Dogs and cats are among the most popular pets used to help individuals with depression. They have been known to elevate mood by providing people with close companionship. Psychiatric Service Dogs (PSD) are specially trained to perform tasks that help people with major depression. They are distinguished from Emotional Support Dogs who are not trained for disorder-specific work. For example, a PSD can be trained to respond to an attempted suicide in his depressed owner by pushing a button on a special phone that notifies 911.
Farm Animals
In an issue of Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, Bente Berge and colleagues describe their findings from a study in which individuals with depression and other psychological disorders worked with farm animals, including sheep, horses, dairy cows and cattle, poultry, rabbits and pigs as part of a psychological treatment regimen. At follow-up studies, self-efficacy was significantly higher, particularly among those with affective disorders like depression. Coping was also greatly improved among those with the highest rises in self-efficacy.
Equine Assisted Therapy (EAP), using horses, may also be effective for those who are depressed. In the 2007 issue of Society and Animals, Bradley T. Klontz and his colleagues reported on a treatment study involving equine-assisted experiential therapy. At the conclusion of the study, participants reported reduced psychological distress and enhanced well being. Improvements were stable at a six-month follow-up.
Birds
There are anecdotal reports of individuals reporting benefits from owning parrots and other pet birds. In 1997, a study published in Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals revealed that elderly men who were exposed to an aviary at the Veterans Administration Medical Center showed a reduction in depression. It is thought that birds may offer an opportunity for communication and social contact that lifts mood.
Dolphins
Dophin Assisted Therapy (DAT) is one of the most extensively researched areas of AAT and is commonly used among special-needs children. In 2005, researchers Christian Antonioli and Michael A. Reveley published findings from their research in the British Medical Journal reporting that mild and moderately depressed individuals showed improvement after swimming with dolphins for two weeks.
Small Animals, Fish and Reptiles
Guinea pigs, rabbits, ferrets, fish and even reptiles may help lower blood pressure, reduce stress and improve self-efficacy. More research is needed to determine the way in which these animals can assist depressed persons.
Original article can be found here.
Dogs and Cats
Dogs and cats are among the most popular pets used to help individuals with depression. They have been known to elevate mood by providing people with close companionship. Psychiatric Service Dogs (PSD) are specially trained to perform tasks that help people with major depression. They are distinguished from Emotional Support Dogs who are not trained for disorder-specific work. For example, a PSD can be trained to respond to an attempted suicide in his depressed owner by pushing a button on a special phone that notifies 911.
Farm Animals
In an issue of Clinical Practice and Epidemiology in Mental Health, Bente Berge and colleagues describe their findings from a study in which individuals with depression and other psychological disorders worked with farm animals, including sheep, horses, dairy cows and cattle, poultry, rabbits and pigs as part of a psychological treatment regimen. At follow-up studies, self-efficacy was significantly higher, particularly among those with affective disorders like depression. Coping was also greatly improved among those with the highest rises in self-efficacy.
Equine Assisted Therapy (EAP), using horses, may also be effective for those who are depressed. In the 2007 issue of Society and Animals, Bradley T. Klontz and his colleagues reported on a treatment study involving equine-assisted experiential therapy. At the conclusion of the study, participants reported reduced psychological distress and enhanced well being. Improvements were stable at a six-month follow-up.
Birds
There are anecdotal reports of individuals reporting benefits from owning parrots and other pet birds. In 1997, a study published in Anthrozoos: A Multidisciplinary Journal of The Interactions of People & Animals revealed that elderly men who were exposed to an aviary at the Veterans Administration Medical Center showed a reduction in depression. It is thought that birds may offer an opportunity for communication and social contact that lifts mood.
Dolphins
Dophin Assisted Therapy (DAT) is one of the most extensively researched areas of AAT and is commonly used among special-needs children. In 2005, researchers Christian Antonioli and Michael A. Reveley published findings from their research in the British Medical Journal reporting that mild and moderately depressed individuals showed improvement after swimming with dolphins for two weeks.
Small Animals, Fish and Reptiles
Guinea pigs, rabbits, ferrets, fish and even reptiles may help lower blood pressure, reduce stress and improve self-efficacy. More research is needed to determine the way in which these animals can assist depressed persons.
Original article can be found here.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
iPhone app lists dog-friendly businesses
iPhone app lists dog-friendly businesses
Meredith May, Chronicle Staff Writer
In Justin O'Neill's perfect world, no one would ever have to tie his dog to a parking meter to run errands.
Images
Justin O'Neill of San Francisco, who created Fido Factor,...Lisa Francis says hello to Stella at a dog-friendly bar i... View Larger Images
Not only does he say it's dangerous - criminals like to take dogs with identification tags and then pose as Good Samaritans to collect rewards - but it also stresses the animals, making them more prone to aggression and anxiety problems.
His solution? A new iPhone app.
The former technology media consultant created Fido Factor, a free application that locates the nearest dog-friendly stores, restaurants, cafes, parks and hotels.
"I noticed there was this major disconnect between businesses and dog owners," said O'Neill, 28, who likes to run errands with his 6-year-old Irish Terrier, Kole.
"Many welcome dogs but have no medium to convey that message, and dog owners have no way to find out," he said.
To create the database, O'Neill spent three months walking all over San Francisco with Kole, asking business owners whether canines could cross the threshold.
He found some surprising welcomes - dogs are allowed in some Wells Fargo banks, the Crate & Barrel store in the Castro district, select coin laundries and many restaurants and bars with outdoor patios.
Some of what he found was common local knowledge, but when he collected it, and noted whether the places had dog bowls, treats or resident dogs, he had created a type of dog Yelp.
In Wiki-style, users who find additional locales can post them to Fido Factor, as well as write reviews of any of the 1,200 Bay Area businesses already listed.
Fido Factor accepts reviews from anywhere in the country. New York, Portland and Boston were the first to show up beyond San Francisco in the database, followed by Nevada and North Carolina.
Nearly 5,000 people have downloaded Fido Factor since it was released last July.
"There isn't really one online resource where dog owners review all types of establishments, so you're at the mercy of word-of-mouth, but this is real time info," said Tina Ahn, director of development for the San Francisco SPCA.
Ahn recently arranged a business dinner at Water Bar in the Ferry Building after using Fido Factor, so she wouldn't have to leave her puppy at home in a crate.
O'Neill is in talks with the SPCA to turn Fido Factor into a source of micro-philanthropy for the shelter. After Fido Factor's first year developing a user base, he plans to add advertising to generate revenue, freeing him up to donate $1 to the SPCA each time a user adds a new location and 50 cents per new review.
Nicole Macias of San Francisco has reviewed at least 70 establishments for Fido Factor.
"My dog goes with me everywhere, she's a regular Muni rider, and I want to be able to find places when I'm already out, and not have to worry," she said.
Shop owner Michael Williams doesn't allow drinks or large backpacks in Medium Rare Music on Market Street, but dogs can come in.
"So many people in the neighborhood have pets," he said. "It would be just silly to not let them in."
E-mail Meredith May at mmay@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page E - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Meredith May, Chronicle Staff Writer
In Justin O'Neill's perfect world, no one would ever have to tie his dog to a parking meter to run errands.
Images
Justin O'Neill of San Francisco, who created Fido Factor,...Lisa Francis says hello to Stella at a dog-friendly bar i... View Larger Images
Not only does he say it's dangerous - criminals like to take dogs with identification tags and then pose as Good Samaritans to collect rewards - but it also stresses the animals, making them more prone to aggression and anxiety problems.
His solution? A new iPhone app.
The former technology media consultant created Fido Factor, a free application that locates the nearest dog-friendly stores, restaurants, cafes, parks and hotels.
"I noticed there was this major disconnect between businesses and dog owners," said O'Neill, 28, who likes to run errands with his 6-year-old Irish Terrier, Kole.
"Many welcome dogs but have no medium to convey that message, and dog owners have no way to find out," he said.
To create the database, O'Neill spent three months walking all over San Francisco with Kole, asking business owners whether canines could cross the threshold.
He found some surprising welcomes - dogs are allowed in some Wells Fargo banks, the Crate & Barrel store in the Castro district, select coin laundries and many restaurants and bars with outdoor patios.
Some of what he found was common local knowledge, but when he collected it, and noted whether the places had dog bowls, treats or resident dogs, he had created a type of dog Yelp.
In Wiki-style, users who find additional locales can post them to Fido Factor, as well as write reviews of any of the 1,200 Bay Area businesses already listed.
Fido Factor accepts reviews from anywhere in the country. New York, Portland and Boston were the first to show up beyond San Francisco in the database, followed by Nevada and North Carolina.
Nearly 5,000 people have downloaded Fido Factor since it was released last July.
"There isn't really one online resource where dog owners review all types of establishments, so you're at the mercy of word-of-mouth, but this is real time info," said Tina Ahn, director of development for the San Francisco SPCA.
Ahn recently arranged a business dinner at Water Bar in the Ferry Building after using Fido Factor, so she wouldn't have to leave her puppy at home in a crate.
O'Neill is in talks with the SPCA to turn Fido Factor into a source of micro-philanthropy for the shelter. After Fido Factor's first year developing a user base, he plans to add advertising to generate revenue, freeing him up to donate $1 to the SPCA each time a user adds a new location and 50 cents per new review.
Nicole Macias of San Francisco has reviewed at least 70 establishments for Fido Factor.
"My dog goes with me everywhere, she's a regular Muni rider, and I want to be able to find places when I'm already out, and not have to worry," she said.
Shop owner Michael Williams doesn't allow drinks or large backpacks in Medium Rare Music on Market Street, but dogs can come in.
"So many people in the neighborhood have pets," he said. "It would be just silly to not let them in."
E-mail Meredith May at mmay@sfchronicle.com.
This article appeared on page E - 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
