Here’s something I’ve only been able to say for a couple of days — I am a Washingtonian. It’s still hasn’t truly sunk in yet, but the major components, myself included, arrived in Washington, D.C., intact. Being here really makes me want to revisit movies and shows set in D.C. — “House of Cards,” “Olympus Has Fallen” and “National Treasure” come to mind. My sincerest thanks to all who helped launch me on this new adventure, especially my parents, Wayne and Sandie Gerstner and my sister Whitney. Thank you so much, for everything.

While not set in D.C., I did make time to see “The Man from U.N.C.L.E.” this weekend and I’m rather glad that I did. Henry Cavill (Superman from “Man of Steel” ) and Armie Hammer (the Winklevoss twins from “The Social Network”) star as American and Russian spies, respectively, who must cooperate to stave off a world-ending plot.

From a production design and directorial standpoint, the film oozes style. Cavill and Hammer are well-suited to their roles as an espionage odd couple. Occasionally a joke or dramatic bit doesn’t stick the landing but the stumbles are slight and the acrobatics are fun to watch.

The meat of the story is pretty standard fair and somewhat poorly executed. Nevertheless, Cavill and Hammer, and stylish director Guy Ritchie, easily make up for the deficiency in plot. Films that are more style than substance, which “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.” definitely is, are often captivating in small doses, but become less enjoyable as the novelty wears off.

Luckily for “U.N.C.L.E.,” my desire to see more odd couple adventures and misadventures of Cavill and Hammer never abated. In fact, I would happily welcome another “U.N.C.L.E.” film. All said, witty, charming fun can be had with “The Man From U.N.C.L.E.”

5 of 6 stars

Students returning to fall semester classes are facing sticker-shock in college bookstores. Textbooks that formerly ran $40-to-$80 a few years ago are now costing $200 and $300 each.

As a result, students’ textbook-buying behavior is changing. According to a survey of students by the National Association of College Stores and reported in a recent Chronicle of Higher Education, more college students are viewing textbooks as recommended rather than required and “…students are  waiting to see how much the material is used before they buy them.” Meanwhile, professors “…almost never see the course materials as optional.”  More and more, “…students are waiting to see how much the material is used before they buy them,” according to the survey manager.

The survey found that student spending on class materials dropped from $638 in the 2013-14 academic year to $563 for the 2014-15 year. In addition to students waiting to see if the materials will actually be used in class, part of this drop was a shift to cheaper textbook rental.

And about 11 percent of students now have some courses that use new “integrated learning systems”
where the text, videos, quizzes and homework are delivered online.  Publishers have realized that at big research universities that only value research, many instructors of large classes are glad to turn over these teaching duties to a publisher’s online system, essentially turning the lecture course into a pre-packaged online operation that is impersonal and standardized.

The production cost for a paper textbook is actually very low—most $200 textbooks could be profitably sold to students for $40 if it were not for the electronic ancillaries and support services that publishers feel they must provide to compete—extra bells-and-whistles that most students do not use.

Meanwhile, surveys of college students reveal that students continue to overwhelmingly prefer paper text over e-Texts for a variety of reasons that are supported by research on deep reading, reading speed, comprehension and skimming.

Some professors are sensitive to their students’ dilemma and recognize the legalized extortion involved. They are encouraging colleagues: “Don’t require a textbook if you don’t use it!” Some make textbook adoption decisions based on the best-book-at-the-cheapest-price and only adopt a text after it has been on-the-market a semester so there are used books available.

One solution that is not working is the use of “open source” online materials. Depending upon the discipline, there can be serious concerns with quality. Copyright-free material is often out-of-date.

Good publishers subject texts to careful peer review that is often missing in open source materials that are cobbled together from questionable sources. And online open source materials continue to have the drawbacks of e-texts and other electronic media.

Royalties to authors of bonafide textbooks are rarely a factor in the high costs of textbooks. When a quality book is adopted by many universities, the royalties the author receives are in the range of a few coins. Copyright is not the problem driving up textbook costs.

But thanks to the internet and predatory publishers, there are now offers to professors to send in their class notes. These can then be “published” online and required by that single instructor. The publisher will split the exorbitant price with the author-professor. Nowhere the quality to be adopted by any other instructor, this “text” can bring in more income to the instructor than their salary, especially if they are a poorly-paid part time adjunct.

Honest professors, departmental chairs and higher administrators can and should bring such practices to a stop. But so far, the runaway costs of textbooks due to some inconsiderate professors, some  disgraceful publishers, and some technology crazies—continues.

This week I was again reminded of the problems that sometimes arise as humans and wildlife attempt to share this same planet.

As proven by the slow but constant increase in their dead carcasses along our south central Kansas roads, more Armadillos are moving into our part of the state all the time.

Last week, I got a call from a friend who lives in the community surrounding the Highlands Golf Course northwest of Hutchinson. Something was riddling her lawn at night by digging small holes all over it and she was told it was probably an armadillo.

Now armadillos are quaint little creatures that usually cause no trouble. They are especially fond of grubs and worms and are second only to badgers in their digging ability, and the sand hills area around the golf course makes for easy digging; not a good combination especially in this part of the world where pristine lawns rank right up there with good fried chicken.

They can hear or smell the grubs under the surface of the soil and waste no time digging them up for a tasty midnight snack. When I was a kid there was a Japanese beetle infestation in our part of Ohio and skunks, who also relish grubs, were ruining golf course greens at night by digging out Japanese beetle grubs from beneath the soil. Both situations had the same outcomes. All involved were glad to get rid of the grubs for sure, but not for the price of their lawn and golf course greens being ruined. The armadillo and skunks were both just doin’ what God created them to do.

Beavers are another good example of this predicament. Beavers are engineers and dam builders deluxe, and their dams create many nice ponds when creeks and streams are dammed-up.

In mountain settings or in pastures or other locations where these resulting ponds are not a problem for anyone, the beavers can live their life without interruption. After all, these ponds become watering holes for wildlife (and in some situations even livestock I suppose,) they become marvelous trout and fish ponds and they make magnificent duck and goose habitat.

The problems arise when creeks, streams and rivers in farm country are dammed-up and flood crop land, and most farmers can’t or won’t put up with that. Beavers also tend to cut down the best trees available. When I was first learning to trap beavers here in Kansas, I came upon a spot along wolf creek just outside our little town where so many nice trees had been felled it looked as though someone was preparing to build a log home there.

If a strain of beavers could be bred to cut only brush and unwanted intrusive timber along creeks, I could probably make my fortune by leasing out flocks of them to local farmers! Once again, beavers get themselves into hot water by doin’ what God created them to do.
There are other examples of this same dilemma; deer/vehicle collisions in the fall because of deer following their God-infused desire to multiply, coyotes taking down a calf or a lamb because they were created to be a predator, etc.

You all know that my wife and I are trappers and hunters, and heartily advocate the harvest of wildlife to control their numbers and the removal of problem wildlife when necessary, so I’m not even hinting at giving wildlife free-rein of our countryside because they simply follow their instincts. It just helps me see things differently when I consider that all wildlife are just doin’ what God created them to do.

Continue to Explore Kansas Outdoors.

Steve Gilliland, Inman, can be contacted by email at [email protected].