tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post3268883739223408647..comments2024-03-19T20:31:23.141-05:00Comments on The Chuck Cowdery Blog: Fun With Fungus, Maybe Not.Chuck Cowderyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-2502736017248834672013-09-10T17:01:21.898-05:002013-09-10T17:01:21.898-05:00I have to say that this isn't true... "ti...I have to say that this isn't true... "time-consuming and expensive procedure to have your house cleaned every year or two, just to keep it looking decent."<br /><br />We safely and inexpensively clean away the fungus easily.<br />https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dua3f2tjZg<br />http://www.firstchoicepowerwashing.com<br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02422918741525164735noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-90961731500086588232012-09-14T19:57:49.220-05:002012-09-14T19:57:49.220-05:00I don't think you're lying. You believe so...I don't think you're lying. You believe something that isn't true. That's a mistake, not a lie.Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-60891143415623004552012-09-14T15:03:04.071-05:002012-09-14T15:03:04.071-05:00Your statement that: "no one was aware of th...Your statement that: "no one was aware of this problem when our houses were built or bought," is false, basically says I am lying. At least acknowledge what you say. And to say "I do believe this issue is being over-hyped and exaggerated" is condescending and dismissive. I said the fungus was only recently "identified" and the off-site problems realized. We will see how the courts decide on this.Michael Millsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-71793638466606318722012-09-14T11:53:06.291-05:002012-09-14T11:53:06.291-05:00I don't recall calling anyone a liar, but I do...I don't recall calling anyone a liar, but I do believe this issue is being over-hyped and exaggerated. There's nothing new here. Nothing was 'just recently discovered.'Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-50002221499150279962012-09-14T07:32:57.270-05:002012-09-14T07:32:57.270-05:00I wasn't trying to be uncivil, but when you ca...I wasn't trying to be uncivil, but when you call people liars that is uncivil also. If you had to deal with this mess, you would be frustrated too. And I don't really know what you mean by "fed a line", but I consider that as dismissive. I did not say the fungus was unknown, only that it has only recently been identified and associated with the problems off distillery properties. I had seen the same problems on state vehicles where I worked as far back as the eighties, but no one knew what it was or what caused it. As you are probably aware, one distiller in Louisville has recently been cited for their emissions. Just because a source of pollution has only been recently identified doesn't let the polluter off the hook. That has been decided in courts over and over. Michael Millsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-8879437563689765562012-09-13T21:51:59.149-05:002012-09-13T21:51:59.149-05:00Please keep this civil, Michael. Disagree without ...Please keep this civil, Michael. Disagree without being disagreeable. Consider the possibility that you've been fed a line. I've personally been aware of the fungus now known (apparently) as Baudoninia since about 1991, I've seen it at every distillery in the United States. It has been identified and associated with spirits aging for about 140 years. It's nothing new. So you're definitely wrong about that. Whether or not it's a nuisance that rises to the level of a harm is probably for a court to decide. I hope you have a satisfactory outcome.Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-51475666465061324642012-09-13T14:20:24.016-05:002012-09-13T14:20:24.016-05:00Wrong again Chuck. Most of the houses, including ...Wrong again Chuck. Most of the houses, including ours, were built here were before the identification of Baudoinia. In addition, even though the distillery is less than 1/2 mile away, it is not visible from here. At that time, no one was aware that a potential problem existed or what a nuisance it would be. You are obviously out of your depth on this issue, and need to do your research before posting. "Shoot first, and take aim later" is the latest catchphrase for your methodology, I believe.Michael Millsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-62421860355357465602012-09-11T10:09:19.521-05:002012-09-11T10:09:19.521-05:00While I appreciate the perspective, the statement ...While I appreciate the perspective, the statement that "no one was aware of this problem when our houses were built or bought," is false. Just because <i>you</i> don't know about something doesn't make it universally unknown.Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-84017949884126131532012-09-11T09:15:59.942-05:002012-09-11T09:15:59.942-05:00Chuck, If you are so damn smart come down here to ...Chuck, If you are so damn smart come down here to Kentucky and put your "elbow grease" into cleaning up this mess. It is a time-consuming and expensive procedure to have your house cleaned every year or two, just to keep it looking decent. To compare it to mildew in a shower is ridiculous. That is like comparing a termite infestation to a fly in the house.<br />The fungus has decreased property values considerably, if you can sell them at all.<br />And to say that the distilleries were thee first is also a ridiculous argument. No one was aware of this problem when our houses were built or bought. Many industries have been sued or fined for pollution problems long after they occurred. I have been involved in some myself, as a state regulator.<br />Preventing pollution or harm to neighbors is, or should be, part of doing business in a free society.Michael Millsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-30802268238428786202012-09-05T22:19:05.494-05:002012-09-05T22:19:05.494-05:00I'd also be willing to bet that none of the ho...I'd also be willing to bet that none of the homeowners involved purchased those properties prior to the erection of the distillery itself. It's kind of like buying a house next to a farm and then complaining about the smell..sam knoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-84968261179601089212012-09-03T14:10:01.148-05:002012-09-03T14:10:01.148-05:00Pretty argument, Dave, but misdirected. Have you e...Pretty argument, Dave, but misdirected. Have you ever been around this stuff? I have, and there's nothing to it. It's harmless. Some might even welcome it as a symbol of local prosperity. Of course, you don't make a friend of me by accusing me of dishonesty right out of the box either, Dave.Chuck Cowderyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12191121480961526039noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-840930092789285091.post-86508533348472256332012-09-03T07:11:06.835-05:002012-09-03T07:11:06.835-05:00Rather than complaining about litigiousness, or th...Rather than complaining about litigiousness, or the New York Times, why not do an honest piece about corporate responsibility, or lack thereof which is the real issue at hand. I haven't read anything that disputes the impact of whisk(e)y production on the growth of the Baudoinia fungus. So there seems to be broad agreement that the spread of the fungus is a mess that is created by the distilling industry. Why them shouldn't the burden of mitigating this impact be borne by the industry that profits from its creation? Honest allocation of the real cost of industrial impacts on society should the cornerstone of a free market society. This can be done one of several ways, through government regulation, through the courts, or through a industry pro-actively taking responsibility for their impacts and voluntarily bearing the costs of their mitigation. If the bourbon industry doesn't want to be sued or regulated then why can't they take responsibility for the mess the fungus makes in the surrounding community and either clean it up, or make restitution to those that do? If this requires the cost of a bottle of bourbon to increase then so be it. Why should an industry keep all the revenues and expect the rest of society to bear the costs of cleaning up the mess they create? Most businesses make the calculation that turning a blind eye to problems they create and lawyering up to fight any challenge is the most profitable business strategy. If they worked pro-actively with the community to recognize and resolve problems they would find the courts extremely hostile to these kinds of litigations, but I'm not holding my breath.Davenoreply@blogger.com