Would you like to read more?Register for free to finish this article.Sign up now for the following benefits:Four FREE articles of your choice per monthBreaking news, comment and analysis from industry experts as it happensChoose from our portfolio of email newsletters To access this article REGISTER NOWWould you like print copies, app and digital replica access too? SUBSCRIBE for as little as £5 per week.
MELBOURNE, Australia —Tiger Woods described the United States’ comeback as “amazing” after the defending champion mounted a historic rally to retain the Presidents Cup.The USA became the first team to win the Presidents Cup after trailing the Internationals heading into the final day thanks to a stunning fightback on Sunday. “There are a lot of young, young players, a lot of players that the world has never seen or heard, but you will see them a lot in the future. I have admiration for my guys and the caddies and the wives, it’s been fantastic.”Els added: “You’re going to make me cry now. I just love these guys. We’ve spent all week together and all year together with all the meetings we’ve had, and them buying into all the stuff that I came up with, and they were 100 percent in, and I was 100 percent with them. It was a collective effort of just great people, the wives, the caddies, PGA Tour staff, everybody worked together on this one.”We didn’t get the result we wanted, but we got 10 points in four sections of team play, and that means the team building was a success.” PRESIDENTS CUP: The U.S. comeback, as it happenedLed by Woods, the USA clinched eight points in the singles for a 16-14 triumph and an eighth consecutive success, after having been down 10-8 by the close of play on Saturday.Playing captain Woods — who broke the record for most Presidents Cup wins with 27, surpassing Phil Mickelson — said: “We did it together. We came here as a team. My teammates and my boys all played well. “The captains did an amazing job of just being there for every little detail. I couldn’t have done it without all their help and all my boys. They did it.”When @TigerWoods knew… pic.twitter.com/ck6Z1xJ502— PGA TOUR (@PGATOUR) December 15, 2019″It’s been one of the more amazing challenges, but you know, Stricks [Steve Stricker] and Coups [Fred Couples] and Zach [Johnson], they were amazing,” 15-time major champion Woods added.”All the guys, they believed in one another. We relied on one another as a team and we did it together.”Woods sat out Saturday’s four-ball and foursomes but returned to lead off for the USA on Sunday, setting the tone with a comprehensive 3 and 2 victory against Abraham Ancer.”I trust all my 11 guys. I trust them implicitly; I told them from the very get-go. They went out there and got the points we needed. We fought,” Woods continued.”Even the points we lost, we were making them earn every one of them, and this Cup wasn’t going to be given to us. We had to go earn it, and we did.”It was a case of so close, but yet so far for Ernie Els’ International team, which was dreaming of a first Presidents Cup success since 1998.The Internationals stormed out of the blocks with a 4-1 lead after the opening day and maintained that advantage until the USA flipped the script on its head Sunday.Captain Els, whose team included a number of debutants, was emotional afterward.A career moment in front of his home crowd. @CamSmithGolf shows all the emotions as he closes out his singles match @PresidentsCup. pic.twitter.com/G3XueQ1BWv— PGA TOUR (@PGATOUR) December 15, 2019″I can only give them my love,” Els said. “They tried so hard. They played so hard for each other and the team, and to buy into something new like I tried, I really have to take my hat off to every one of them. read more
Ladies British Open Amateur Championship 9 – 10 September 1 January – 17 June 30 June – 1 July 19 Dec 2016 Ladies’ Golf Union and The R&A complete their merger The 146th Open – Final Qualifying 20 – 23 July Championship Vagliano Trophy and Junior Vagliano Trophy Pyle & Kenfig 31 July The Amateur Championship The Senior Open Championship The merger of the Ladies’ Golf Union (LGU) and The R&A has been finalised and will come into effect from 1 January 2017. The R&A will assume responsibility for staging the LGU’s championships and international matches next year, offering leading women professionals and elite amateur golfers the opportunity to play in a world class series of events. The Ricoh Women’s British Open will continue to be managed by IMG in 2017 under the existing agreement with the LGU. England Golf has welcomed the merger. Chairman Graham Yates commented: “This is excellent news for golf and particularly for raising the profile of women’s golf.” Chief Executive Nick Pink added: “This merger means we can look forward to a new focus on women’s golf and to welcoming many more women and girls into the sport and into our clubs.” The heads of agreement between the two organisations was signed in June leading to the integration of the LGU’s business operations and its members of staff into The R&A group of companies. An agreed governance structure has also been implemented to give LGU Board members representation on relevant R&A Committees. Trish Wilson, Chair of the LGU, said, “The completion of the merger is a progressive and important step for the development of women’s golf. “Bringing the two organisations together creates a platform that will allow us to develop our aspirations for women’s golf on a global stage and encourage more girls and women to play golf and become members of clubs. “The success of the Ricoh Women’s British Open and the Curtis Cup demonstrates the growing strength of women’s golf in both the professional and amateur game and we look forward to building on this with The R&A.” Martin Slumbers, Chief Executive of The R&A, said, “The integration of the two organisations puts us in a better, stronger position to realise our collective vision for growing the game of golf around the world. “Our combined resources and staff expertise will help us to achieve our shared aims for the development of golf, including increasing girls’ and women’s participation and encouraging more families to enjoy golf as a recreational activity. “Both organisations have an excellent track record of successfully staging prestigious championships and international matches and we are looking forward to a great season of events next year.” For more information visit www.RandA.org The 146th Open – Regional Qualifying 15 – 19 August 26 June Senior Ladies British Open Amateur Championship 27 – 30 July 3 – 6 August Date 4 July Royal Birkdale The 146th Open Various The Jacques Leglise Trophy Ricoh Women’s British Open – Pre Qualifying Ricoh Women’s British Open – Final Qualifying St Annes Old Links Hankley Common North Berwick 17 July 15 – 20 August Los Angeles Country Club Enville Royal Porthcawl 19 – 21 September The Nairn and Nairn Dunbar Various Royal St George’s and Prince’s The Boys Amateur Championship Senior Home Internationals Ballybunion (Old Course) Various The Seniors Amateur Championship Sunningdale (Old Course) Venue Kingsbarns Links Girls British Open Amateur Championship Little Aston Ladies British Open Amateur Stroke Play Championship Newport Various 9 – 11 August Ricoh Women’s British Open 1 – 2 September Royal Belfast 13 – 17 June Circolo Golf Bogogno, Italy The Boys Home Internationals The Walker Cup 8 – 10 August Ladies and Girls Home International Matches 6 – 8 September 9 – 11 August 19 – 24 June Coronation Foursomes 3 – 5 October read more
Facebook0Tweet0Pin0Submitted by Thurston EDCScaleUp, a comprehensive small business growth training program offered through the EDC Center for Business & Innovation, begins September 13. Designed for business owners, the training recognizes that they have little time to focus on growth. They need powerful tips, tools and insights that build capacity rather than add to their workload.ScaleUp includes in-person classroom training, peer engagement, and optional no-cost one-on-one advising to help business owners plan and achieve their goals. This program is designed for businesses in any industry that have been in operation at least one year. ScaleUp training is FREE for businesses within the city limits of Olympia and Lacey thanks to generous funding from those cities.Business owners who have participated in ScaleUp Training Series have seen transformational impact on their businesses. Some of their comments about the experience include:“Every business owner should take this class!”“This class was exceptional. You won’t regret it!”“ScaleUp has helped build my confidence to strive for more in my business.”“I learned how to organize my business and got a better understanding of the numbers necessary to succeed.”ScaleUp includes three, 4 session courses: Business TuneUp, Build Your Market, and Financial Mastery. While designed for businesses to take in succession, each class can be taken as a stand-alone.The Center for Business & Innovation has offered ScaleUp since 2016. Universally, past participants have found the program well-worth their investment of time, and for those who weren’t eligible for outside funding, their investment of money.The ScaleUp Series begins on September 13 with the Business TuneUp course.Dates: 4 Thursdays, Sept 13 – Oct 4Class Times: 8:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.Location: Center for Business & Innovation, 4220 6th Ave. SE, Lacey WA 98503Cost: FREE for Lacey and Olympia based businesses. Otherwise, $395 for Business TuneUp.Registration: Visit www.scaleupthurston.org to registerThe 2018 ScaleUp Training Series is supported by TwinStar Credit Union.For more information on ScaleUp please visit www.scaleupthurston.org or contact us at 360-464-6060. read more
Samantha Barnwell from Oceanport, center, participates in the First-Year Overnight Orientation Program at Monmouth University, West Long Branch. The two-day program brings first-year students to campus in July. Students do various team-building activities, have an individual advising appointment with a first-year adviser, learn about campus resources and begin exploring the differences between high school and college through student-created skits and a mock class experience with a full-time faculty member.
It was a very strong contingent of runners from the Kootenay Zone, paced by LVR’s Shawn DeGroot, at the recent B.C. High School Cross Country Championships in Victoria.The contingent excelled with DeGroot leading the way with a 24th place finish. Staff and management at Mallard’s Source For Sports would like to salute the runners and coaches with Team of the Week honours. The running contingent includes, Kieran Simpspon (Prince Charles, Creston), Hunter Stanway (J.V. Humphries, Kaslo), Lukas Smith (JVH), Young Jin yu (L.V. Rogers), Luca Sattler (LVR), Oliver Hale (LVR), Shawn DeGroot (LVR), Steven Hernandez (Mount Sentinel), LVR and Salmo coach Jon Francis and Mount Sentinel coach Sacha Kalabis. Front, Neil Jacobsen (Prince Charles), Eli Bukowski (JVH), Tyler Exner (LVR), Roberto Miranda (Mt. Sentinel), Nico Bolter (LVR) and Jackson Hawton (Prince Charles). Missing, Ellie Hewat (JVH), Kiraya Spencer (LVR), Darya Huser (Salmo), Danica Long (LVR) and Kia Weir (Mt. Sentinel). read more
Was there ever a song and dance as fantastical as W. Ford Doolittle’s ITSNTS proposal?Yesterday, we took a look at the critique of evolutionary natural selection (ENS) in PNAS by W. Ford Doolittle and Andrew Inkpen. These two Darwinians are well versed in the controversies over ENS, having watched numerous versions parade by over the decades: kin selection, group selection, niche construction, inclusive fitness, neutral evolution, stabilizing selection, holobiosis, and more. They’ve listened to arguments over the meanings of fitness, adaptation, and selection. They’ve pondered the controversy over “units of selection” – the entities on which selection acts. They know evolution in and out, from its vision of proteins to its grand scenarios about the biosphere. And they’ve seen critics ask if natural selection is a law of nature at all, or just a restatement of happenstance or a priori reasoning. They can’t leave the situation in a mess like this. The Darwin show must go on!And so they make a proposal: “ITSNTS thinking” about evolution (we’ll define that shortly). They know that Darwin Party elder Richard Lewontin laid down the rules for understanding natural selection. “Standard ENS” (evolutionary natural selection) must meet three requirements:(i) There is variation in morphological, physiological, and behavioral traits among members of a species (the principle of variation). (ii) The variation is in part heritable, so that individuals resemble their relations more than they resemble unrelated individuals and, in particular, offspring resemble their parents (the principle of heredity). (iii) Different variants leave different numbers of offspring either in immediate or remote generations (the principle of differential fitness).Lewontin believed these conditions are necessary and sufficient for ENS, even though they also fit the Stuff Happens Law. Lewontin, by defining fitness in terms of survival, also fell into the tautology trap by equating fitness to reproduction (see “Fitness for Dummies,” 19 June 2014). Lewontin’s version also fails to account for the origin of novel structures, such as wings and eyes.Godfrey-Smith further restricted natural selection by warning, “there must be some parent–offspring similarity, and the clarity of a ‘parent-offspring’ relation of the relevant kind is inversely related to the number of parents—if there are too many parents there are no parents at all.” Any “selection” that occurs, in his view, must involve clear parent-offspring relations. But in his view of natural selection, he too failed to explain the origin of complex novelties. He reduces natural selection to little more than change: “Evolution by natural selection is change in a population owing to variation, heredity and differential reproductive success.” This makes extinction of the whole population a legitimate effect of natural selection as much as major leaps upward in complexity. That’s not quite what Darwin had in mind.Doolittle’s “ITSNTS Thinking” ProposalWith that background, are you ready for Doolittle and Inkpen’s proposal to save natural selection? Can they unite the warring factions? Can they harmonize the simple cases with the complex cases? Can they re-“Darwinize” the mechanism that made Darwin famous? Here it comes: “Processes and patterns of interaction as units of selection: An introduction to ITSNTS thinking.” What is ITSNTS? Here comes:ITSNTS = “It’s the Song, Not the Singer”This had better be a good show. Let’s try to understand it before we applaud or boo. Doolittle envisions a persistent process rather than a persistent population of individuals. The process (the song) goes on, whether or not the individuals carrying the tune (the singers) change. “If there’s a song, there are singers.” Conversely, when we see individual organisms or groups following familiar patterns of behavior, we can see themes persisting through time behind their activities. “If there are singers, there’s a song.” How on earth did Doolittle come up with this genius idea? How is it not circular?Well, it all started when critics of standard ENS found exceptions to it, like stable populations of symbiotic populations (e.g., gut biota), and processes that increase the fitness of the group at the expense of the individual (such as in the “evolution of altruism” or in social insect communities, where individuals incapable of reproduction do all the work). And then, there were some mystics trying to apply natural selection to the whole biosphere, invoking visions of the goddess Gaia. Knowing the controversies such cases generated between the mystics, the group-selectionists and the diehard neo-Darwinians, Doolittle looked for common ground. Let’s give Doolittle and Inkpen space to describe the peace treaty:It is for the same reason problematic to speak of adaptation of multiparental communities formed by recruitment or re-production. Sober and Wilson recommend what they call “William’s Principle”—that “adaptation at a level requires that there was selection at that level”—noting that “[t]he fact that a trait now benefits groups does not entail that it evolved because it was beneficial to groups.” Indeed, it is not clear that any property can be considered “beneficial” to impermanent and nonreproducing communities. These might come to show traits of interest to or valued by us as researchers or citizens, such as functional stability, or resilience, or “eubiosis” (in the case of the “holobiont” that is us and our gut microbiomes), these being the indirect byproducts of “lower-level” processes. But without some form of differential reproduction or differential and continuous physical persistence, these traits cannot be considered adaptations for communities if anything resembling Lewontin’s recipe is to be applied.ITSNTS theory seeks to rationalize (or “Darwinize”) such indirect “beneficial” outcomes, casting these not as adaptations for the individuals or collectives that implement a process, but for the process itself. Indeed, it was initially motivated by the now frequent claim that microbial community activities (“functions”) are more stable or ecologically resilient than are the taxonomic compositions of the assemblages carrying them out, a phenomenon demanding evolutionary explanation.OK, we’ve listened to their song and dance. Before cheerily humming the tune, we’d better look at the lyrics. In this view, individuals don’t matter, nor do species. They’re just singers who come and go. The song’s the thing, not the things singing the song. This view might be called, ‘Survival of the Process.’ What happened to Godfrey-Smith’s warning about “too many parents”? Where did reproduction go? It went to a hyphenated word: “re-production.” The singers re-produce the song, without a requirement of sex or genes, and the song goes on.To see how ITSNTS Thinking turns into a mystical idea, look at one example they take very seriously: the nitrogen cycle. Here is a “process” that benefits numerous communities of organisms. It is “stable” in the sense that even if populations come and go, individuals would surely “re-create” the nitrogen cycle, because it benefits them all. (We might say that the nitrogen ‘song’ keeps everyone humming the tune as individuals come and go in the evolutionary theater.) The beneficial process recruits individuals as needed to carry out their sub-function, and the process persists. In ITSNTS thinking, “the continuity of process ‘resides in the recursive representation of immortal pattern by ephemeral avatars (collectively implementing taxa)’” as D. Haig had suggested in 2014. Here’s how Doolittle applies ITSNTS to the evolution of the nitrogen cycle:No individual of any species involved in that cycle performs its role self-sacrificially. Each has coevolved with other participants serving as its environment, or against a background of the products of these other participants. No alleles have been fixed just because they promote continuance of the nitrogen cycle as a cycle, for all that alleles that have been fixed may do that: the time scales are too long and there are “too many parents.” Thus, a completed nitrogen cycle … is only a “fortuitous benefit” of the coevolution of separate species, not an adaptation of some interspecies aggregate. Such properties might be seen as beneficial for life in the very long run, but have never been adaptations as traditionally defined by a history of differential reproduction within populations. Standard notions of ENS by differential reproduction, and associated concepts of adaptation of things, cannot apply.Nevertheless, because each step of the nitrogen cycle in isolation can benefit a taxon that implements it, energetically or in the provision of metabolites, and because the cycle has long been in operation, many taxa (sometimes from all three domains and forming ecological “guilds”) have evolved that can and now do, collectively, perform it (Fig. 1).So far, no comments have appeared about this proposal. If Doolittle and Inkpen hope that controversy will subside, most likely they have poured gasoline on the fire. Hard-line neo-Darwinists will scream that they have mystified natural selection. Richard Dawkins will complain that they have replaced selfish genes with selfish processes. And many may wonder about the origin of the processes, and how new beneficial processes could arise. To paraphrase DeVries, ITSNTS can explain the survival of the process, but not the arrival of the process.Dr Bergman’s book explains the rise of eugenics from Britain to America to Nazi GermanyBefore anyone is tempted to drink Doolittle’s Kool-Aid, we want to point out that it has fatal flaws. If he can “Darwinize” the nitrogen cycle, and in the process eliminate traditional meanings of fitness, inheritance and reproduction, then natural selection has become disconnected from reality. It’s some mystical process out there that wants to “survive” by using real “things” as its pawns. Did you catch the phrase “immortal pattern by ephemeral avatars”? Sounds like Baal worship. We might note with a snicker, too, that ITSNTS tries to look sweet and nice compared to “red in tooth and claw” – which means all those genocidal wars that Jerry Bergman documents in his book The Darwin Effect were for naught. In fact, if Doolittle is right, the perpetrators of those horrors were fighting against evolution! They failed to worship this Gaia-like providential deity that tries to keep the sweet song going. I hope you Darwinists are paying attention to what’s happening to your theory before the Kool-Aid sets in.Needless to say, ITSNTS fails just as completely as all the other versions of natural selection at accounting for the origin of irreducibly complex systems. But perhaps the worst fatality in “ITSNTS Thinking” is that it accounts for too much. If all units of selection must be considered – genes, cells, organisms, species, and communities – singers in the grand old song, then why not add planets, solar systems, galaxies, and universes while they’re at it? And don’t forget the multiverse, too!The most valuable service Doolittle and Inkpen have provided in this paper is not just the laughter at watching drunk old men singing “How dry I am” on stage. No, the biggest take-away from this paper is that natural selection remains a vacuous, ill-defined, vague, controversial, meaningless, illogical, mystical restatement of the Stuff Happens Law. Thank you, Dr. Doolittle. You have done much to advance our cause, “Time to Ditch Natural Selection” (3 October 2015).Bethell interviews Richard Lewontin and others who admit failings in natural selection theory.Christians, creationists, ID advocates, please condemn this house of cards before it collapses. Evolutionists, run from it, too, so you won’t be caught in its downfall. Do something worthwhile with your science, like biomimetics. And historians, get out your keyboards. Natural selection will soon be known as the Worst Theory in the History of Science.(Visited 649 times, 1 visits today)FacebookTwitterPinterestSave分享0 read more
Share Facebook Twitter Google + LinkedIn Pinterest There have been pockets of lower than expected corn yields around the state where the full force of 2017’s broad challenges came to fruition, but corn has generally been a pleasant surprise for many farms, said Peter Thomison, Ohio State University Extension corn specialist.“Planting progress curves showed planting at about the five-year average this spring. If you just looked at that it would suggest there were not problems as far as the planting, but the National Agricultural Statistics Service doesn’t factor in replanting,” Thomison said. “Some counties had 20% or more of the corn replanted. Seed company reps said that this was the most replanting they had experienced on record in some areas. In northwest Ohio there were people I heard from that replanted three times with corn. When I hear a report about issues like this from more than two or three people, I suspect it is the tip of the iceberg and there is much more of that going on.”The extreme variability (even in fairly uniform fields) led to variable environments for a number of yield limiting factors.“This year we saw a little bit of everything out there. We had some soil compaction that causes things like corkscrew seedlings in the spring. I am always interested in abnormal ear formations and there were many of those out there this year. Some of those have direct yield losses and others can be in fields that still generate good yields. We had ear rot and sprouting ear problems scattered across the state as well. It was a smorgasbord of trouble shooting issues exhibiting themselves this year,” Thomison said. “We were worried about some bad situations at harvest where we had ponding and too much water early in the season. There was poor emergence, uneven emergence, slow plant development — I took a lot of pictures of fields with pockets of plants falling behind the rest of the field this year. Once the canopy closed the fields looked great but when you walked out there you’d find these pockets. There were de-nitrification issues and disease issues affecting the crops as well. There was also some direct stand loss. We even had some losses from green snap around July 20. We had a little bit of everything out there this year.”Ultimately, though, the situation set up corn for a good growing season in many cases, but not for soybeans. The plentiful rainfall for most of the state through much of July, followed by a cooler, drier August and dry early September, favored early planted (and replanted corn) but hurt soybean yield potential.“There were localized situations where corn yields were hurt, but yields were generally higher than expected. I think the quality of the drainage in these fields was an important factor this year. People were concerned about nitrogen loss and yet some of the fields have turned out extraordinarily well. I have heard there are areas in the state where yields are in the 150s and 160s, but I haven’t heard as much about those as the corn yields that have been higher than expected,” Thomison said. “The corn and soybeans responded differently to the rainfall and temperatures this summer. We had some really cool weather in August and September and those temperatures benefitted the corn crop because it was starting to experience moisture stress and the cooler weather mitigated the impact. Soybeans didn’t respond the same way. There were also reports of southern rust and people were wondering about fungicide applications in corn and the cool dry weather came along and slowed the development of southern rust so that may have helped reduce potential yield loss from that and other diseases. The cool temperatures during grain fill and after the crop was pollinated helped the corn perform better. Early on, we were concerned about corn with shallow roots. The cool temperatures helped us later in the season. I think it helped more in corn than soybeans.”Especially for all of the replanted crops, the delayed frost was a huge factor this fall.“We got a killing frost well after the normal frost date, two to three weeks later in some areas,” Thomison said. “We even had late planted corn that was much drier than would have been expected after the warm fall weather we had.”In what has been (and continues to be) a long 2017 for many farmers in Ohio, challenging weather conditions take on increased importance as opportunities for a timely harvest are quickly evaporating for a dry, soggy, dry, soggy season.“Right now the main concern is that the 2017 harvest is not finished yet,” Thomison said on Nov. 9. “We still have three locations of the Performance Trials that need to be harvested. We are worried about how long this corn will stay out there with these repeated rainfall events. We have fields with lodging in them. There are growers out there where these windstorms really flattened some of the fields. You can see big differences in some of these hybrids in terms of the standability as the harvest continues. If we had a dry stretch of about a week we could see a lot of corn coming off, but if we keep getting these sporadic rains harvest could take awhile. If you have corn sitting in moisture or the ears are in contact with the ground it will be slower and take awhile. The final chapter has not yet been written for 2017.” read more
In a set back to farmers in Gujarat, the High Court has rejected their petitions challenging the land acquisition process for the ambitious Ahmedabad Mumbai bullet train project on grounds of “inadequate” compensation.In their petitions, farmers had challenged the Gujarat government’s notification for the acquisition of their land, contending that the State had no power to acquire land for a multi-State project like that of the bullet train.‘Higher compensation’The High Court, however, has said the aggrieved farmers can approach the government to seek higher compensation for their lands.The Bench upheld the validity of the Land Acquisition Act, amended by the Gujarat government in 2016 and subsequently approved by the President.The High Court Bench of Justice Anant Dave and Justice Biren Vaishnav declined to entertain the petitions challenging the land acquisition for Ahmedabad-Mumbai bullet train project, a 508 km-long project being undertaken by National High Speed Rail Corporation Limited.The Division Bench verdict now clears a major hurdle in the way of the ambitious project that is being implemented with funding from Japan.Upholding the validity of the Gujarat amendment in 2016 to the Centre’s land acquisition law, the Division Bench noted that though the project is a multi-State, the Centre had approved executive powers to Gujarat to acquire land for it.Retrospective effectThe court has observed that the President has given assent to this delegation of power, with retrospective effect, to Gujarat, hence it enjoys legal validity for undertaking the land acquisition process.The court, however, noted that initially the State had no power, but after the President’s assent, this was authorised.The court was also of the opinion that the provision of not conducting social impact assessment under the amended Act does not fall into the category of “excessive delegation”, as contended by the agitating farmers in their petitions.The court justified the State’s move to skip mandatory provisions of conducting Social Impact Assessment (SIA).The court said that the SIA process carried out under the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) guidelines was appropriate and satisfactory.More than 5,000 of the total 6,900 farmers affected by the project had registered objections to the land acquisition process initiated by the State authorities.Challenging verdictAccording to sources, farmers are likely to approach the apex court challenging the Gujarat HC’s verdict.In 2018, five farmers from Surat district moved the court against Gujarat’s land acquisition notification. In their petitions, they claimed that the Centre has the power to issue the notification, and the State government does not have the power to acquire land, for the multi-State railway project.Though these five petitioners withdrew their petition, more than 100 farmers from the south and central districts of Gujarat moved the High Court, challenging the amendments made by Gujarat in the Central land acquisition law.Nearly a 1,000 farmers, while the hearing was ongoing, had filed a one-page affidavit registering their objection on the land acquisition process and demanded the nature of compensation should be aligned with the Centre’s land acquisition law, which incorporates socio-economic impact of the project on the people affected by it.Current valueThe farmers also insisted that compensation should be based on the current market value of the land.The Railways, however, claimed that the State government has power to acquire land, as the President’s assent had already delegated these powers to it.The bullet train corridor will have 12 stations across its 508-km stretch between Ahmedabad and Mumbai. read more