The MA DFW stocked a total of 124 broodstock Atlantic salmon into Berkshire waters during the week of December 10 – 14.  They were stocked into Goose Pond, Stockbridge Bowl, Onota Lake, Windsor Pond and Laurel Lake.  They were in the 5 to 12 lb range.

When he comes to town, it is always a good thing.   Even his title evokes optimism – Director of the MA Division of Ecological Restoration (DER).  He is Tim Purinton and he is usually checking out a new candidate for restoration, or calling a public meeting to officially announce the completion of a wonderful project and to thank those responsible for getting it done.   On Friday, December 14, he showed up at the Cheshire Town Hall to do the latter.

The project referred to was the removal of the 10 foot reservoir dam on Thunder Brook in Cheshire which had once been the town’s primary drinking source. The water behind the dam had become increasingly shallow because of siltation and the reservoir was no longer being used.  Maintenance of the dilapidated 80 year old dam was becoming a financial burden and liability threat to the town.   Another part of the project was the replacing of a failing downstream culvert with a new larger, open-bottom span.    Because of this project, there is 2.5 miles of reconnected stream which flows into Kitchen Brook and then into the South Branch of the Hoosic River.  The wild native Eastern Brook Trout are able to frolic and to traverse up and downstream in the crystal clear water to do their fall migration and spawning.

Purinton’s statement, “We’re with the state and we want to help”, drew chuckles from the audience, but he finished his sentence saying, “but it only works if the local effort is there.”  And the effort was certainly there from the Town of Cheshire and its DPW, Hoosuck Chapter of Trout Unlimited (TU), the Hoosic River Watershed Association (HooRWA), Massachusetts College of Liberal Arts, MA Division of Fish & Game (DFG), DER, local staff of the MA Division of Fisheries and Wildlife (DFW), Massachusetts Environmental Trust (MET) the Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership and the US Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS). 

“It’s been a busy year for the state in terms of dam removals”, said Purinton.  “Thunder Brook marks the ninth project this year, and another 30 are in the works.  An additional 3,000 dams exist within the state, with less than 10 percent of them useful and most are ecologically harmful”.   Massachusetts ranks third nationally in how quickly these dams are being removed.

The project cost $245,000.  Some $137,000 of it was spent on engineering, permitting and oversight which were entirely covered by grant funding: ($10,000 from TU, $50,000 from MET, $60,000 from USFWS, and funds from other organizations such as Converta Energies).  Some $150,000 of the implementation cost was provided by town in-kind services and grant funds.

 Martha Naley, Chief, Branch of Habitat Restoration USFWS said the removing of old decrepit dams and reconstructing  poorly constructed culverts is good for the environment and economy and makes hunting and fishing better.  It also reduces flood damages.  She named DER Priority Projects Coordinator Nick Wildman and Tim Purinton “super heroes” in the project.

 State Senator Ben Downing said, “We are always excited to play a part and our role is to ensure that we budget funds to help protect and preserve such streams for future generations.  We look forward to many future projects”.  State Representative Gailanne Cariddi said that she is working with Judy Grinnell of the Hoosic River Revival as well as HooRWA and is looking forward to working with them on other projects.

 This was an important project for the town of Cheshire,” Cheshire Selectwoman Carol Francesconi said. “I want to thank the partners — you were the best.”

“In addition to the environmental benefits, ecological restoration projects like this also provide jobs and have a 75 percent return on investment” said MA Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Rick Sullivan in a press release.  “This is another great partnership involving multiple agencies and private conservation organizations that enhances one of Berkshire County’s freshwater gems and benefits the many fish and wildlife species that inhabit Thunder Brook and the Hoosic River watershed,” (DFG) Commissioner Mary Griffin also by press release. 

After describing the characteristics of the 70 mile Hoosic River and this important tributary, Steve McMahon, HooRWA Executive Director summed up his comments by saying; “Projects like the Thunder Brook dam removal and culvert replacement continue to be vital.  Our river doesn’t remain clean without our local legislator and state senator’s continued commitment to preserving the environment.  Fish habitat doesn’t improve without the dedication of trained staff and local specialists from DFG, DFW, DER, MA College of Liberal Arts and our own Monitoring Coordinator Kelly Nolan.” 

“These projects don’t happen without the Town of Cheshire Selectboard and Highway Department saying that we can complete this dam removal in our town.  Cooperation and partnerships like this is what it takes to get the job done and HooRWA is involved in similar projects throughout the watershed.  Thunder Brook seems like a small project compared to the Briggsville Dam removal in Clarksburg a short time ago but it is vital to the health and vitality of this special watershed.”  

Afterwards the group went with Nick Wildman to witness the new culvert replacement on Thunder Brook and later walked upstream to where the dam had been removed.   It is a pretty spot with a clear riffled brook flowing through there now.   “It’s not only great for the ecology of the stream, but we’ve taken on a great infrastructure project that would have needed to be done anyway,” Wildman said. *****

According to the preliminary findings of the 2011 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, participation in wildlife-associated recreation increased in 28 states since 2006.  These figures are based upon surveys and not actual license sales.

Overall, this survey found that over 90 million Americans, 38% of the population 16 years of age and older participated in wildlife-related recreation in 2011, an increase of 2.6 million participants from the previous survey in 2006.  Participation in recreational fishing increased by 11% and hunting was up 9%. This increase reverses a trend over previous surveys showing a 10% decline in hunting participation between 1996 and 2006.

Of the 28 States with increases in the number of wildlife-related recreation participants from 2006 to 2011, the largest percentage increases were seen in Alaska (47%) and Louisiana (40%). South Dakota had the highest proportion of state residents who hunted (21%).  Alaska had the highest proportion of state residents who fished (40%) and Vermont had the highest proportion of state residents who wildlife watched (53%).

Nation-wide over 37 million people spent time fishing and/or hunting and nearly 72 million people engaged in wildlife‑watching activities such as closely observing, photographing, and/or feeding wildlife.

14% of the national population 16 years and older fished in 2011, while 6% of them hunted.    Of the 11% increase in anglers, the biggest increase was by Great Lakes anglers, a 17% increase in participation. The increases for saltwater and non-Great Lakes freshwater angling participation were 15% and 8%, respectively.

Big game like elk, deer and wild turkey attracted 11.6 million hunters, an 8% increase; small game including squirrels, rabbits, quails, and pheasants attracted over 4.5 million, a 6% decrease; migratory birds, such as geese, ducks and doves, attracted 2.6 million hunters a 13% increase and other animals such as coyotes, groundhogs and raccoons attracted 2.2 million hunters a 92% increase.

Nationwide, nearly all people who watched wildlife did so around the home.  For the 69 million around-the-home participants, feeding wildlife was the most popular activity (74%).   Over 45 million people observed wildlife and 25 million photographed wildlife around their home.  Over 12 million visited parks or natural areas to view wildlife and over 13 million maintained plantings or natural areas for the benefit of wildlife within a mile of their home.

The above are preliminary figures and the final and state reports will be made available in the near future.   

So, what about Massachusetts?    I question the accuracy of surveys and went directly to actual number of licenses issued, which should be more accurate.  They were provided by MassWildlife and are based upon fiscal year (F/Y) results rather than calendar year results listed in the survey.  The combined hunting, fishing and sporting licenses issued in F/Y 2011 were 210,390 vs. 211,741 in 2006, a 1,351 decrease.      Hunting licenses dropped from 24,480 in 2006 to 23,386 in 2011, a 1,094 loss.  Sporting licenses increased from 43,144 in 2006 to 44,775 in 2011, a gain of 1,631.  When combining the sporting and hunting licenses figures, they total 68,161 in 2011 vs 67,624 in 2006 or a 537 increase in hunters.  (I am counting all sporting license holders as hunters for why else would they pay the extra cost of the license when they could spend less monies just getting a fishing license). Fishing license sales dropped from 187,261 in 2006 to 187,004 in 2011 or a loss of 257.  

I accepted the survey preliminary figures for wildlife watching which indicated that Massachusetts wildlife watchers declined from 1,726,000 in 2006 to 1,530,000 in 2011.

What surprised me the most was the increased numbers of hunters nationally and in Massachusetts.   I certainly don’t see any increase here in the Berkshires.  Some, including myself, considered them a dying breed, but now I am not so sure. *****

Bobcats are in the news lately thanks in part to the excellent Berkshire Eagle article written on November 27 by John Sakata (Bobcats in the backyard).  It featured great pictures of some cats which were taken by Raymond Jacoub.  Big cat stories always grab our attention.  Let me relate an old one.

It was 65 years ago (December 7, 1945) that the North Adams Transcript broke the following story about two local hunters who were reportedly chased by an animal thought to be a panther.  Charles Hunt and Ruth Godfrey, both of Henderson Road, Williamstown, went hunting about 6 am in order to be in the woods for the opening hour of hunting.  According to the article, while making their way through thick underbrush, and going slowly, they heard a crackling noise off to one side.  Taking a position underneath a large pine tree they stood quietly awaiting developments.  The crackling noise continued but seemed each time to come from a different location causing the hunters to come to the conclusion that they were being circled by some animal.  The deep shadows in the forest did not permit them to make out any form, but the circling noise persisted. 

Suddenly there was a blood curdling screech, which Miss Godfrey described as “making your hair stand on end and as if some woman was being horribly murdered”.  This convinced the couple that the encircling animal was a member of the cat family.  Again the blood curdling cry resounded through the woods, but this time much closer.  At this time Miss Godfrey decided it was time to leave and she started on a run for the clearing behind her home about one-half mile away, calling to her companion to follow, which he did. 

She said that she did not want to meet up with any animal that could utter such cries when she was armed with only a 410 shotgun and her fellow hunter with a 12 gauge, also when the visibility was so poor.  After reaching home, they waited for full daylight when they re-entered the forest.  There they found that the animal had followed them into the clearing.  Tracks of the animal were as large as a man’s fist and it took 15 foot leaps.  Following its traill, they learned that in running, the animal’s tail trailed in the snow.  

After studying various animal books, the conclusion was reached that it must have been a panther, because of the trail signs.  Miss Godfrey’s brother, James Godfrey, hunting further back in the woods that day, came across further traces of the animal where it had stalked deer. 

On December 19, 1945, the Transcript reported that Charles Hunt shot the animal about 9 pm the evening before.  He had trailed it from the chicken coop of his residence to the Godfrey wagon shed where a bobcat had been cornered by a dog.  The bobcat weighed 31 lbs. The newspaper caption read, “Williamstown Panther is now dead bobcat”. 

Nevertheless, on Saturday evening, January 26, 1946, from 8:00-8:15 pm, the couple appeared on the Sportsman’s Column of the Air, a radio show aired by WBRK in Pittsfield, where they discussed their hair-raising experience.   They were interview by Attorney Frank Albright of Great Barrington, Jim Hurley, Outdoor Writer for the New York Daily Mirror, and participant of the weekly radio show Hunting & Fishing Club of the Air, and George Wiles of the Williamstown Fish & Game Protective Association.  The radio show took place in the crowded auditorium of WBRK, which had a seating capacity of about 300.  A number of interesting gifts were presented to them including a two-day all expense paid trip to the National Sportsman’s Show in New York City, new Trail Blazer Wrist Compasses by the Illinois Merchandise Finance Company of Pittsfield, and other items of outdoor equipment donated by local dealers.  Miss Godfrey was presented a corsage.  Hurley appeared in person to present the certificate for the trip to the New York Sportsman’s Show. 

The couple admitted that the panther experience brought them to the realization that they were in love.   Following an announcement of the couple’s upcoming marriage over the air by Mr. Wiles, they were photographed by New York, Boston, Springfield and Pittsfield papers.  The Berkshire Evening Eagle featured a front page picture of the couple in its January 29, 1946 edition, with the caption “Panther Romance Pays Off”.  The Transcript’s caption was, “Williamstown Panther appears employee of Cupid”. 

Regardless, Wiles still felt that the animal they encountered was a panther.  He claimed to have seen one after the bobcat had been killed in the same vicinity, and there were similar subsequent reports by others.  Nothing like a good “ big cat” story, eh?   They live forever. 

Many thanks go to Lew Brown of Pittsfield for bringing this story to our attention.  Lew’s father was Richard (Dick) Brown who was the Northern Berkshire Reporter for the Springfield Republican in those days.  He received his information from George Wiles. 

(Incidentally, the WBRK sportsman’s radio program was aired weekly and sponsored by KFC CERO-MEATO, nationally known dog food, and was conducted by Roland Mitchell.)

*****

The local hunting community is still abuzz with the news of a big 24 point buck being taken on opening day of shotgun deer hunting season by Craig Luscier of Dalton.   He bagged it here in the Berkshires.

 Luscier knew that there was a large buck where he was hunting for he had seen it on his trail camera several times.  “I knew he was very large”, said Luscier, “but I didn’t realize how many points it had.  The entire rack could not be seen in any of the pictures because it was too big to fit.” 

Late Monday afternoon, he was hunting in an undisclosed area with a primitive (muzzleloader) shotgun when he saw a 5 point buck.  He passed it up knowing full well that the large one was around there somewhere.  Sure enough, shortly afterwards, Luscier spotted him about 45 yards off.  He placed the scope on him and fired.  The smoke from the gun blocked his vision for a while and he didn’t know if he hit it, but he didn’t hear the buck run off.  When the smoke cleared, he saw it lying on the ground.  He nervously but quickly reloaded his gun for another shot in case it got up and tried to run off.  He didn’t need that second shot.

 The first call he made was to his lady friend Terri Barrett and then to his friend Doug Smith, both of Dalton, requesting a camera and help in dragging the deer out of the woods.  Both showed up on the scene shortly thereafter.   There were several broken off tines on that rack, so he must have been the dominant buck and had been busy fending off the smaller bucks while they were trying to steal his female friends. 

 Sorry, I can’t give a more specific location as to where he shot the deer.  If he told me, he would have to kill me (just kidding).  There most certainly are other deer running around that area with his genes and concerns exist that if the word got out, people from all over would come and shoot them all.

 The stars certainly lined up for Craig that day.  His son Forrest just started hunting and was supposed to hunt with him but he couldn’t make it.  If he had gone, Craig would have encouraged him to take the 5 pointer for his first deer.  That of course would have scared the big buck out of the area.  Another interesting point is that this was the first deer that Craig ever shot at with a gun.  He is normally a bow hunter and has taken several deer that way in the past.

 He checked the deer in at Smitty’s Sporting Goods Shop in Dalton Tuesday evening.  The stars lined up for me, too.  I just happen to be in the same building getting my deer processed by meat cutter Bob Dougherty when Craig brought his in.  Traffic literally stopped on Rte 9 when motorists saw it being carried in.  Over a dozen men, women and children congregated at the shop to see the deer which was lying in an ice fishing sled on the shop floor.

We all watched part-owner Doug Smith count the antler points.  They totaled 24 and there were 3 or 4 other large tines which had been broken off but could not be counted.  That deer must have had at least 27 points at one time.  There were several other points which were a hair too small to qualify.    The deer weighed 197 lbs dressed, the neck measured 29 inches and the beam width measured 27 inches.  Based upon the antlers, nearly everyone believed that they were looking at the new state record for a non-typical deer shot with a muzzleloader.   The deer could not be immediately aged because Craig wants to preserve the head for mounting. 

Craig will take the deer to New England Taxidermy in CT to be mounted.  After 6 months or so, after the antlers have properly dried, it will be officially scored by a Boone & Crockett scorer.   Don’t be surprised if it is a new state record.

Being in that sport shop that evening with people standing around the deer looking and taking pictures of it brought back memories of days long gone when these shops were the hub of activity for the sportsmen; where hunters congratulated one another on their successes and commiserated with them on their missed opportunities.    It was a setting fit for a Rockwell painting – the only thing missing was a pot belly stove.  Surely, it was a night that none of us will ever forget, and it is doubtful that we will ever see or touch a deer like that again in our lifetimes.

Have you always wanted to take up fly fishing but were afraid of being ridiculed during your learning process?  Are you afraid of hooking the fly into your ear, eyes or other parts of your body?  All beginning flyfishers experience that, but most get over it and go on to become fairly proficient fly fishers and enjoy a most rewarding lifetime of flyfishing.

 Many of us learned from a fly caster who said, “Here, watch what I do and you do the same”.   He stuck around for a while to give some pointers and then we were on our own.  If we really wanted to learn this sport, we stuck with it, practiced a lot and eventually got the hang of it.  We learned how to cast the fly not knowing what forces come into play.  Somehow, the fly, which weighs virtually nothing, is cast out 20-30 feet.   Its magic!

 But, if you are one of those persons who doesn’t believe in magic and must understand how things work, there is a book entitled A Treatise, the Art of Casting a Fly.   Written by former Great Barrington resident Paul Argentini, it gets into the forces that propel the fly line and attached fly.  Argentini meticulously walks the reader through the various steps of fly casting.  I mean he really gets into the mechanics of the cast right down to the kinetic energy that travels down the fly line which in turn loads the rod on the back cast (rod dynamics which create potential energy) and then more kinetic energy which propels the line and the fly.  There are 10 short chapters which dwell solely on the principals of casting.  I truly believe that if the advice which is given in this book is followed, the reader will learn how to fly cast or become a better fly caster.

There are other chapters on fishing equipment, entomology and leaders, tippets and knots.  I should caution the reader that there is one section dealing with the tapering of leaders which I take exception with, that being the “X” strength factor of the leaders.  The higher the “X” number, the thinner and weaker the leader.   (A 3X leader is stronger than a 7X).   It is incorrectly stated in the book.

What really drew my attention to this book were the hand-drawn color renditions of the fish and the actual and artificial flies throughout the book.  Paul’s wife Vera Argentini is an artist and she did an excellent job creating these renditions.  The book cover alone just beckons you to pick it up.  You just don’t see hand drawings like this in fishing books anymore.  It reminds one of the illustrations in the old fishing books, back in the days before modern photography.

The 76 page soft-cover book, which is published by Sunbury Press, Inc (www.sunburypress.com), sells for $24.95.  It would make a nice addition to your fishing library, but I think it belongs on your living room coffee table.  I’m sure the pages will quickly become rabbit-eared from use, just like mine.

Well, here we go again; tomorrow is another opening day of deer season.  Today will be spent looking for all the paraphernalia which will be needed for tomorrow’s hunt……drag rope, knife, florescent red clothes, slugs, flashlight, compass, hand warmers, thermos,  and, oh yes,  the gun.    A trip to the supermarket may be necessary to buy fresh sandwich bread and lunch meat.    If there is still some Thanksgiving turkey left over, that works too.   

We’ll go to bed early tonight in order to get a good night sleep, but it won’t happen.  Because of the anticipation of the hunt, there will be the usual trouble getting to sleep.   Sometime in the middle of the night we will get up and look for something that we forgot to get ready, such as the hunting license which is still in the pheasant hunting vest, or perhaps the location of the key to the gun lock.

While trying to fall asleep, we will recall some of our past hunts.  We may recall missing a nice deer because of buck fever, or the jammed shotguns, getting lost in the fog, long deer drags, drenching rains and fogged up gun scopes, the penalty that we paid for not sighting in our guns in advance, sliding off a mountain road.   We will remember deer hunters that we shared the sport with over the years who have since passed beyond the ridge.  Oh yes, we will remember some of the deer that we shot, especially the big ones.

The alarm will go off around 4:00 AM and while still half asleep, we will get up, stumble around the house and wake everyone up.   Our bird/rabbit hunting dogs will look at us in disbelief as we go out the door without them. (illegal to hunt deer with dogs).

Hooray!  Opening day has finally arrived.  Good luck to all.  May we all have a safe and enjoyable deer hunting season.  *****

Incidentally, to help you have that safe hunting season, you might want to click onto the MassWildlife web page, then click onto the hunting information page, then scroll down to the paragraph entitled Effectiveness of Blaze Orange.  Click onto the underlined words “the right amount and kind of blaze orange”.   It is a 5-minute safety video which provides tips about how wearing the right amount and kind of blaze orange can keep you safe in the field.  It is useful for any outdoor user who is in the woods during hunting season.  Viewers may be surprised to see what a difference it makes.  Personally, I dress from head to foot in the stuff during deer hunting season, just to be on the safe side.  *****

The Hoosic River Revival (HRR), a community-based, non-profit, private organization composed of area residents, believes the time has come to make the Hoosic River in North Adams an asset.  The goal of the HRR is to make the river suitable for fishing, boating and swimming, to have it bordered by biking and walking trails running through parklands, and for it to be a place where people come for business and socializing.   In keeping with that goal, it has been working with consultants, city planners and river restoration engineers to prepare an Options Assessment.   Recently completed, this Assessment provides many ideas for enhancing the 2 1/2 miles of the Hoosic River, and the downtown area immediately adjacent to the river.

In the 1950’s, the Army Corps of Engineers built flood control chutes which funnel the North and South Branches through downtown North Adams and they merge at the west end of Massachusetts Museum of Contemporary Art.  According to HRR, these chutes have done their job; the River is no longer a danger during heavy rains or spring runoff.  And, due to tighter environmental regulations from the Federal Government, the River presents no health threat to the City’s residents.  Unfortunately, the chutes have both tamed it and prevented the public from seeing, using, and appreciating it.

Due to the channelization, Mass. DEP has assessed the entire 2.4 miles of the flood control chutes as “non-support” with respect to aquatic life use.   Water is significantly warmer in the flood control chutes due to dramatically reduced water depth, poor aeration and little overhead cover.  These conditions are inhospitable to fish, while the smooth surface prohibits plant and macro-invertebrate growth necessary for any functioning aquatic habitat.

This impact is particularly unfortunate in the upper Hoosic River, which is one of the few cold-water rivers in Massachusetts containing populations of native brook trout and naturally reproducing brown trout. A healthy population of trout is not only an ecological benefit, but also an economic advantage, attracting anglers to a region heavily dependent on tourism.  The flood control chutes severely limit this habitat.

With structural maintenance of the 60 year-old Hoosic flood control project a future concern, North Adams should consider creative ways to include a more accessible river in its new image.  According to the Berkshire County Regional Planning Commission,   “During the time of industrial growth residents abused the river.  Now they ignore it.  Yet the river is far cleaner and more attractive than it used to be. While considering ways for tourism to take up the slack of lost industrial jobs, Northern Berkshire could benefit from attending to this exciting and potentially useful resource.”

“The flood chutes are ugly. But it could be different,” says Judith Grinnell, leader of the HRR.  Residents of North Adams have a choice in how they want to engineer the River in order to guard against flooding while at the same time restoring its recreational and ecological value.  Adams has already initiated a habitat restoration project aimed at enhancing trout habitat in the channelized section of the river running through downtown Adams. 

Flood control projects are increasingly incorporating natural designs that promote aquatic habitat and public access.  Some projects are so successful in replicating a natural channel that they are virtually indistinguishable from unengineered rivers.  While intense development of the banks of the Hoosic River makes a completely natural, de-channelized river a near impossibility, there is great potential for improving habitat, promoting recreation, and increasing public access and enjoyment of the river. 

A new method of increasing public access and enjoyment of urban rivers consists of designing “playscape” paddle runs, where the flow is concentrated and whitewater conditions are created with the placement of small (2-3 ft.) grade drops for paddlers.   This design may be an attractive possibility for the constrained sections of the River in North Adams and, if properly designed, it may improve fish habitat at the same time as attracting paddlers and tourists.

Another relatively quick and inexpensive option of habitat improvement should be considered

for the areas of the flood control project consisting of rip-rap levees.  Currently, operations and maintenance protocols defined by the Army Corps of Engineers require North Adams and Adams to mow the sides and tops of the levees and remove vegetation growing in the rip-rap in order to maintain the stability of these structures.  Because of that, the river flowing through these sections of the flood control projects is even less shaded than the areas where it flows through the concrete channels.

While the lack of vegetation detracts from the aesthetics of a “natural” stream, the increased exposure to sunlight causes an increased and greater variability of stream temperature, which adversely impacts trout.  HRR believes the possibility of planting vegetation that will not interfere with the structural integrity of the levee structures should be investigated.

The HRR is working in partnership with the Hoosic River Watershed Association.  Grinnell pointed out that HooRWA is concerned with the entire three-state, 70-mile Hoosic River while the HRR is concentrating on the city’s sections of the river.  A planned bike path linking North Adams to Williamstown probably will run near the river for much of its way is another tie into this revitalizing venture.

“It won’t be easy”, says Grinnell.  “There are difficulties in altering the flood chutes, and expenses.  But the concept is in line with changes in state and federal policies that are looking to make rivers more wildlife and people friendly by removing dams, restoring banks and encouraging more natural answers to controlling the waters.”  HRR wants to share the Options Assessment information (a short powerpoint and Q & A presentation) with local organizations. Contact Judy Grinnell at (413)212-2996 or via email at HoosicRiverRevival@gmail.com