Monday, June 12, 2017

SFZoo - Who's The Real Worst

Since I don't know what Zoo Management will come up with as a reason for denying my Membership, I gotta say a few things about my conduct at the Zoo and things that I've done to help the Animals.

When my Membership was revoked in 2011, it was purely based on Zoo Director Tanya Peterson trying to silence me. She didn't like me knowing anything that was going on there, and therefore being able to stand up for the Animals.  By taking away my membership and forcing me to pay each time I visited, her goal was to limit the amount of time I spent there, therefore limiting the amount of information I would gather. I didn't work there, so she couldn't fire me for being a Voice for the Animals, keeping me out was the only way.  

Someone told me they read Director Peterson's words after the Presidential Inauguration, welcoming President Trump and hoping he will take care of our wild things!  ... Is she kidding?  Did/does she support Trump?  How could anyone think that man and his murderous spawn would care about anything wild?  ... I relay this because I was outraged when I heard this.  I have never thought Director Peterson was someone who cared about the Zoo or the Animals.  She has proven that in many of her decisions in the near ten years she has been Director.  Now that we have lived through several months of this Presidential Administration, I see parallels in the was people are treated. She has run the Zoo as a Dictatorship.  Banning press.  Trying to silence those who speak up.  And firing those who don't play the game her way.

I feel like taking my membership is equal to firing me, because that's the only way she can control me.

So, let's list a few things I've done at the Zoo in the past nine.half  years.

I've shared my knowledge about the Animals with other Visitors, Volunteers and Staff.

I've made Enrichment Toys for the Big Cats and on occasion Bears, when Staff being paid to provide these items did not.  In fact two Bear Keepers called me a day before the Teddy Bear Festival and said no one made Enrichment Items for the event could we.  So after spending 25+ hrs each on Big Cat Toys for that week, both Lee and I made Bear Toys as well. For a Zoo sponsored event.

I've identified numerous Animal Health issues and report to Staff.  Including witnessing a Bear have a seizure, to which the Zoo allegedly tried to cover it up even to the Bear's primary Keeper.  ...One time I called in about an Animal bleeding, and after the Keeper came round, Director Peterson showed up in the area with a group of people, put both her hands on my arms and shook me, incoherently yelling, "He's going to bleed".  I felt assaulted.  I was later told by a Security Guard that she retold this story and said I ran up to her and grabbed her radio off her hip to call for help about the Animal. If that were true I would have had my membership taken away at that time, which was a year before in 2010.  She also told Staff I was Unstable and to keep me away from media at events.

I've identified numerous Animal Welfare issues and reported them to Staff.  Including people sitting over and standing on barriers, throwing objects at the Animals, feeding the Animals non-diet food, actually sitting on small Goats at the Farm (often while certain Staff have stood by and watched). This action could end those Dwarf Goats life.  ... If these were direct threats to Animal Safety, I of course asked the offender not to do whatever it was they were doing.  On several occasions within the last year I have been sworn at by Visitors, and when Security finally showed up, between them and Management, nothing was done.  Those offenders were allowed to stay. They were not asked if they had memberships to which could be in jeopardy.  One set of rules for me, another for everyone else.

I've posted many ideas via my blog, hoping the Zoo would use them, as they failed to think of things on their own many times. ... Many things were implemented, to name one, the Polar Bear expansion was an idea posted in my blog. They also fixed a dangerous build in the Snow Leopard training platform that I noticed. Whoever built that should have known better, as should the Animal Staff who put it there and use it.

I've documented via blog, many issue points that were not being attended to by Management.  

These are only things that I can think of off top of my head.  There have been countless things I've done and reported to help the Animals.  But to some, I'm the enemy.  And to Management, the Worst Member in History.  Unbelievable.  Yet, not really when we have a Management Team there that constantly makes decisions that are not in the best interest of the Animals, covers things up and gets rid of anyone who speaks up against the wrongs.  

In the past nine.half years there have been too many things that have been questionable, curious, concerning and just plain wrong at the Zoo.  All that come to mind have been Management decisions and these decision came down from protocol put forward by Director Peterson.  Director Peterson herself  has been in the News too many times regarding some bad press issues. 

One of the first things I will take issue with, goes hand in hand with an issue still happening uncountable times a day at the Zoo.  In 2009, two years after the Tiger event, a visitor made their way into the Grizzly Bear enclosure.  You can read the specifics online, but the issue points are such that this should never have happened.  Two things.  After the Tiger event, all Code Red Animal Exhibit Barriers should have been upgraded to prevent breaching by Human or Animal.  And my first question after hearing this, Why, is the Zoo open til 5p when the time changes?  I immediately sent an email to Director Peterson, saying the Hours need to be changed when it starts getting dark early and asked if she was waiting for another Tiger Tragedy?  She adopted it as her own and requested the Joint Zoo Panel agree to the change.  Second, the forever issue of Barrier Breaching.

After that it has been a long string of building new areas to entertain Humans, and bringing in new Animals, building them new enclosures, while Animals who have lived there for years live in outdated enclosures.  ... Many times her new and shiny toys, didn't even get the homes they were promised, as allegedly funding was never in place for it to begin with.  She just moved onto the next thing. Case and Point, the Komodo Dragon.  This poor Animal was promised a new enclosure within a year.half after arriving.  Three years later he was still living in the Terrarium he had outgrown. He developed spinal issues the Zoo alleges are genetic, but many think is because he has not had the room to properly grow. ... It is no secret to readers here what happened with the Chimps.  You can search my blog, as I was the one to feed this story to the media.  In short, allegedly Director Peterson didn't like the Chimps, and wanted to ship them out without attention, in favor of bringing in Orangutans.  Things have changed but WOW to have a Director who cares so little about the Well Being of Chimps who have lived near 50 years at the Zoo, is really disgusting.  

While on the subject of Apes, another tragedy that got media attention was the situation that led to the infant Gorilla Kabibe losing her life.  Many to blame in this, and of course Director Peterson allegedly in the mix.  ... Another Primate story, recently in the News, about the young Patas Monkey and his terminal illness which it was allegedly Director Peterson's word that prolonged his suffering.  This all happened during a time when the Zoo didn't even have a full-time Vet on Staff (for almost two months), because we have a Director who allegedly cares more about getting rid of people (both Vets) who disagree with her, than having Medical Staff for the Animals. 

There's been a long string of Animal deaths that have been questionable.  One that I think of every time I see the Black Swan at the Puente.  This poor Lady had a Sister.  They were moved all around the Zoo because no geographically suitable place could be found.  They landed at the Puente.  Why couldn't they just stay there?  Oh no can't have that.  They were moved to the part of the lake where the White Pelicans used to live.  Allegedly this was a place where bacteria in the water was known that could be harmful to them.  Well it was, and one died.  Now the lone Lady is back at the Puente.  

The Zoo is old.  Many of the buildings have lead paint.  There is a protocol for removing lead paint. Do we think the Zoo follows that? No!  Allegedly the paint sanded at the male Anteaters home was not properly handled and there were sanding chips all over the ground.  Note that this Animal was moved from Puente because he was eating the dirt.  So here he is now, possibly eating lead paint chips mixed into his ground covering.  I pray for him and to never find out he had lead poisoning. ... Paint has been chipping from the Chimp House for near twenty years.  You think they could paint it? Seal it?  Something?  Even the AZA did not cite them for this?!  I have seen the Chimps sticking their fingers in the chipped part and then putting it in their mouth.  

Let's go on barriers now.  First, the lack of signage about this is insane.  ... Will mention the Anteater since I just talked about him.  Even though this is not a Code Red Animal, no Animals home should be breachable to the point where someone could hang over, sit on, stand on or cross the barriers with ease.  I have written about so many of these offenses its ridiculous that nothing has changed there. Even a Docent I know wrote Director Peterson about people laying across this poor Animals barrier.  Only when the Zoo had their AZA Accreditation inspection was a barrier deterrent put up.   That said, nothing has been done to deter at the hot spots, Black Rhinos and Hippo.  Polar Bear was included in this but with the recent loss of Ulu, this is not an issue now.  The Black Rhino and Hippo have people constantly hanging over into their enclosure.  One slip and these Animals are shot dead.   No one cares.  I've talked about it for years.  

Visitors run wild through the Zoo and do all kinds of behaviors that disturb and harass the Animals and the Zoo lets them.  Breaching Barriers, yelling at the Animals, pounding their chests at the Apes, Howling at the Wolves, banging and kicking windows, throwing things at the Animals and into enclosures (several Animals have had to have surgery because of this), feeding them non-diet food (one Animal was recently really sick, even losing his sight and hearing because of this),  there have even been people assaulting Birds in the Aviary because no one cares to watch the free roaming Animals in there.  Its all happening at the Zoo and no one cares.  Management allows this.  They say they don't , but there is very little to caution not to, and when you report it, either no one comes or when they do they let people continue on their way.  Last year someone threw rocks at the Tiger to get it to move for them, and they were allowed to stay!  Outrageous!  That is a physical assault on an Animal and nothing.  Same thing when I reported people throwing stuff at a Flamingo while it sat on its nest, on its egg!  Offenses all over the place and that's okay there.  Going back to 2007, You know if the person who saw the Dhaliwal's tormenting the Lions before getting to the Tigers, had reported it and they had been ejected, Tatiana would still be alive.  Oh and I'll end this by noting that I'm sure if the Dhaliwals wanted to get a Membership , they could!

Is your head spinning yet?  Mine is and its dinner time.  This list could never be complete, but I think I've put forth enough to illustrate my point.

All these Animal issues, together with the long list of Director tyranny against Staff, and I'm branded the worst thing to happen to the Zoo?   The whole thing makes me sick.  We need a Zoo leader who has the Animals best interest in mind.  Can work together and respect Staff who have experience and care. For that matter, respect anyone who cares, because its those who care who are going to keep the Zoo thriving for the future.  

Sunday, June 11, 2017

Comment from Zoo Member Lee ... Is She Denied too?

I've had two Comments on the blog to my original post about the Membership issue.   I appreciate all the Comments and encourage anyone with one to add it.  Remember you can use the Anonymous option.  Thank you to all who take the time to Comment.

I am posting the comment by Andie aka Lee, one of my friends who I was sharing a Membership with.  I think its important for anyone involved to have their voice heard about this, because its wrong and shouldn't be happening to any of us.

Here is the other comment left, which sums up a bit of why things happen when dealing with Director Peterson.  Thank you to whoever this Anonymous poster is.


Membership Posts and Why It's Important

I apologize to those who read my blog to learn what is going on at the Zoo, for what will probably be more than a handful of posts on the subject of my membership issue.  This blog has the most traffic, so I must post about it here.  I guarantee it will not be pity me posts, but documenting the situation and putting forth information about Zoo Management that reflects the situation, so it will still be about the wrongs at the Zoo.

Every weekend I sit down to attempt past posts in progress, and except for a few entries, I haven't kept up on posting here about the things that just aren't right at the Zoo.  Its very weighing on me to think about these travesties, and energy zapping to organize thoughts to post about them.  Some are the same old topics, like the on going barrier safety issue, which is at the top of my list, as I see barrier breaching issues every visit and fear for the Animals lives.  Some of it new stuff that comes up unexpectedly, like the Patas Monkey tragedy, that I had to write about, there are other awful things that I just never get to, that don't get media attention.

Last weekend I started a post that I abandoned.  The post was meant to reiterate for those who don't know me and/or are new to this blog, a brief history.   I had run into someone I've known along time, someone who knows the Zoo, Management and Politics.  Someone who knows me and what the Zoo Animals mean to me.  The subject of the Zoo always comes up.  They ask and I always rattle off my frustrations and how behind I am with putting all my thoughts to paper here on my blog.   I was encouraged to get it all out.  I try every weekend, both to free it from my mind and most important, as a Voice for the Animals.  For me, it has always been about the Animals.

So much that isn't right goes on at the Zoo and I used to be able to write about everything, then it became overwhelming. Each time I don't put something out and document it here, I feel like I'm failing the Animals.  I am without a doubt, the only person outside the walls of the Zoo who pays attention to what goes on there, and is a Voice for the Animals.  I never used to identify with labels, but I am an Advocate for those precious Zoo Friends.   Inside the walls there few, as most Staff including Security who pays zero attention to what's going on, and those who do are reprimanded, and often fired.  Its a sad and frustrating situation for anyone who cares. 

I am a San Francisco Native, life-long Resident of the Richmond District.  I grew up going to the Zoo and have been a Member most of my adult life.  As a teenager, my Mother sent me and my friends to the Zoo in the 70s for Summer Volunteer Orientation.  Learning that we wouldn't immediately have hands on experience with the Animals, but instead cleaning, we opted to continue our goals of meeting teen idols instead.  I believe everything happens for a reason, but in hindsight I wonder if I had chosen the Zoo as a teen, would I be in Management by now and having a hand at making the Zoo the best place it can be.  Who knows, as there are some who have worked there and still do, who started as teens and made the Zoo their life career choice, because they care about the place and the Animals in their care.  Sadly things haven't been easy during this current reign for those who care.  

In 2008, I started to visit more often and learn more about the Animals, both from the Keepers and my own online research.  I wanted to share what I had learned.  I started my first blog to do that.  I was there on Christmas Day the year before and was heartbroken over the events that took the life of Tatiana (Tiger).  I was also bothered by the dark cloud it left over the Zoo, a place that was dear to me.  Part of sharing my knowledge was to hopefully endear people to the Zoo Animals and change peoples minds.  I wrote to the Director Tanya Peterson and put forth that goal.  I also included other suggestions, as being there so often, I could identify things that were in need.  One Keeper warned me that the Director didn't like suggestions/comments, and I'd have trouble.  As I became more involved emotionally to the Animals and privy to other things that went on, I felt there was so much the Zoo could do to be better.  I continued to share those ideas regardless of the warning.  Director Peterson always replied and thanked me for my suggestions.  I had also been lucky to have my idea to make Enrichment Toys for the Big Cats accepted by the Keeper and Vet Staff.  My friend Lee who was a Docent at the time, and I made toys for most of 2010.  In October politics played into it a few times and we finally opted out of continuing under the impossible guidelines the Zoo decided to put forth in order to squeeze us out of something we created.  By Feb 2011, Untruths were fabricated and Director Peterson revoked our Memberships.  Six years later,  its happening again.  

When this happened in 2011, my friend Lee was given a reason via email from Director Peterson. Untrue as it was, it was a reason.  That reason had nothing to do with me.  So, why did I have my Membership revoked?  Over eleven months, I contacted the Zoo, including Director Peterson and Zoological Board Chairman David Stanton, requesting a reason and was never given one.  After my second letter to Stanton, I received a condescending letter from him, noting that I had been given reason, and listing several untruths, all from the mouth of Director Peterson.  I responded that had I got a reason I would not be continually seeking one.  I let him know that he had no idea what goes on there, since he or anyone else on the Board ever goes there, only taking Director Peterson's word for everything.  I then asked him if he wanted to be the face of Director Peterson's words?  ... Our Memberships were reinstated within a week, complimentary. 

Now, again I have been given no reason other than, "past circumstances".  Since "past circumstances" were based on untruths, what exactly does that mean?   This came out of nowhere.  I had not been warned of any misconduct.  So,  I am waiting for the answer.  Tuesday June 6, 2017,  I sent an email to Steven Haines, VP Strategic Growth and Marketing.  I relayed that I had been advised not to speak to Management and requested my Membership Fees be mailed to me, along with a letter, detailing the reasons for denying my membership renewal.  I noted I had not received one the last time and I have been told it is their responsibility to provide me with that.   I said I would be expecting that by next week.  Once I receive that I will post it here.

Monday, June 5, 2017

My SFZoo Membership Revoked AGAIN!

So yea, once again I am, I guess, branded the Zoo's Worst Member.  If it wasn't so disturbing the ridiculousness of it might be comical.  And, once again I have been given no reason.

For those who don't know the story of the first time Director Tanya Peterson revoked my Membership,  you can read all the details here:
In short, Director Peterson sent my friend Lee, who had also been a Zoo Docent, an email accusing her of calling in a "false alarm" that resulted in a Code Red alert.  Further noting that her Membership was being revoked.  A couple weeks later, I found out my Membership was also revoked, but never received a reason.  This is in no way throwing Lee under the bus, but fact,  If I was to go off the reasoning given to Lee, since we were together at the time this "false alarm" was allegedly called in, then it had nothing to do with me.  I didn't make that call.  But, grouping us together was consistent with rumors that Peterson didn't like that we were that involved at the Zoo, that we had opinions, and suggestions, and frankly we were privvy to too much inside information.  I later found out that in addition to the "false alarm" untruths, Peterson had spread other untruths about me throughout Staff. Peterson's goal in revoking our Memberships, was to force us to pay per visit admission, financially limiting the amount of time we spent there.  It didn't.  ... I spent eleven months, writing letters to City Officials and the San Francisco Zoological Society Board Chairman.  Eventually we got our Memberships back and complimentary, which I read as an admission that the whole thing stunk.

In 2011, Lee and I had been the only people in the history of the Zoo to have their Memberships revoked.  Now, not sure if there's been anyone else, I doubt it, because there is a list of people who the Zoo watches, and one of them is a Member who continually feeds the Animals and goes into unauthorized areas.  She's been asked to leave a few times, and as far as I know, still is allowed to have a Membership.  So, this may make me the only person in the history to have theirs revoked twice.  

That brings us to today.  I share a Membership with Lee and another friend Michael.  Our Membership expired 3.31.17.  I renewed on my next visit, I think it was 4.4.17.   Our temporary cards were issued, expiring 5.31.17.  Today I went into the Membership office at the gate, as I had not received the hard copies yet.   The gal (I've seen her often but don't know her name),  said that there was a notation on the account that said, "deactivated, deceased".  I said what?  I was most upset by it saying "deceased", seriously?  I asked her if it said that under all our accounts and she said yes.  She pulled up each name and repeated it.  They called the Membership Dept and someone said they would be down.  Fuming at the "deceased"  notation, I asked this gal to print  it out because I wanted that documentation.  She went to ask someone and they said they can't do that.  They also couldn't take a photo of it, and when I tried to get her to repeat that's what it said on camera, she refused.  I made a pretty big issue of the "deceased" notation, which I frankly take as a threat of sorts.  That is no mistake, someone deliberately wrote that on each one of our accounts.  I'm sure the Zoo will deny this, but why would I make something like this up?  They have probably deleted in an effort to cover-up it was ever there. 

After waiting about fifteen minutes, I called the Zoo Main number and had them connect me with Membership.  The guy I spoke with Wes, said he would come down.  After several more calls and a total of forty minutes, Lamar and Nicole, Membership Manager, who I met for first time today, showed up.  Nicole introduces herself, shakes my hand (are you kidding me?), and then says, "The Zoo is "exercising their right to deny my Membership".  I asked why and she said all she knows is its based on "past circumstances".   I asked for more detailed reasoning, she said that's all she had.  So here once again is someone in a role of authority and they claim to know nothing.  She handed me a card to call a guy named Steven who is VP of Marketing and,... and he would then take it up with Tanya.  I asked if Tanya was there. No.  I asked for the Deputy Director Joe, not there.  I asked who the Manager on Duty is.  Nicole didn't know.  I asked Lamar, he said in his usual I don't know nothing response, I just deal with, ... naming his depts, like that's an excuse for not knowing who the Manager on Duty is.   So, once again as usual, no one has any answers, no one knows anything, its all smoke screens in that place.  ... I asked for my refund and told there was going to be some further delay, so I said I need to go, I'll be back tomorrow, have the check here. ... I called the Steven guy and left a message.  A couple hours later, I left another message that I would be there to pick-up my refund tomorrow and I would like a written detail of reasoning for them "denying' my Membership. We'll see if I get that reason, since I still never got one for the 2011 crime.

I seriously can not figure a reason that they can give that would be an honest one.  I have no idea what the issue point would be.  If I get a reasoning I will post it, and respond to it, because unlike Zoo Management, I have no problem with transparency. I can't imagine anything that would be justifiable to denying me Membership, but then so many unjustifiable things go on at the Zoo, and Director Peterson gets away it it all.  Why?  Because there are no checks and balances within the Zoo Management structure.  Director Peterson is both Director and President, creating a dictatorship.  As I understand it she is responsible to the San Francisco Zoological Society, who is responsible to the San Francisco Recreation and Park.  Not one person from the Zoological Society or Rec and Park, have any hands on dealing with Managing the Zoo, even though I think that's how its outlined in the Lease agreement.  All parties take Director Peterson's word on everything.  I don't know why, but nobody in either, really cares about the Zoo.  The way the Zoo works within the walls is, its either Director Peterson's way or you're out.  Director Peterson has wreaked havoc through Staff since she got there.  Forcing longtime Employees to quit or firing them, for a variety of reasons, mostly for having opinions that differ from hers, or speaking up when something isn't right.  Most recently, the Zoo went through a period of two months without any full-time Vet on Staff.  The two full-time Vets allegedly battled with Director Peterson in regard to Animal Care.  They have license and experience, she does not.  She allegedly fired one, and allegedly old the other to either retire or get fired.  Both left at the same time and the Zoo had no Vet on Staff.  There were outside Vets called in to fill the schedule, but days  there allegedly wasn't even a Vet on the grounds.  I haven't gotten to writing about this, but in my opinion, its really bad when you have over two hundred Animals and no full-time Vet on Staff.  Once the News Story about the sad Patas Monkey situation aired, the Vet who was fired was all of a sudden back.  Rumor has it, it was quick damage control on Director Peterson's part. 

Personally I think not having a Vet on staff at a Zoo is a bigger crime than anything I may have allegedly done.  Its curious the string of scandals over the past nine and a half years of Director Peterson's reign, and she is still there.  That's just one example of someone getting away with too much.   Over the past many years, I have been very vocal about the lack of Management and Security attention to the barrier breaching situation, as well as visitor misbehavior towards the Animals.  I call every time I see an issue.  If its a direct situation that could endanger an Animal, I often say something to the offenders (as well call), as Security never gets there in time, and frankly, an Animal can lose their life if someone falls into an enclosure.  I mention this because it amazes me how things are handled there, which directly relates to how I'm obviously still perceived as the "Zoo Enemy", when other members of the public constantly put the Animals in Danger and nothing happens.  Last year, Visitors threw rocks at one of the Tigers and weren't kicked out.  I was outraged, as was Security, but that was what was dictated by Management.  During Flamingo breeding season, I caught a drunk from the Zoo Oktoberfest Event, pick something up and throw it at a Flamingo Parent ON a nest!  I tried to stop them and they swore at me.  I called Security and reported the incident and that I was sworn at, and according to the rules posted, that is cause for ejection.  Afterward, I spoke with Bob Cooney who was Manager of the Day.  They were not ejected and he cited it as a "judgement call".  I was outraged.  A few months later, someone had their kid hanging over a barrier waving a stick at the Animals.  I told them they aren't supposed to be on the barriers.  The Mother told me to "Fuck off".  I called Security.  No one showed up.  As I was leaving I saw this Mother again and also Staffer Walker and reported the incident as well being told to "Fuck off".   I watched as Walker spoke to the Mother.  He was friendly and laughing.  You would think they were having a casual happy conversation.  No indication this was a serious incident and swearing at me was a violation of Zoo rules.  Afterward, when I saw the Mother not get ejected, I talked to Walker and he said, "It was a judgement call".  Are you kidding me?  I note these things, because, here I sit, I guess Public Enemy Number One for some reason, yet these people who put the Animals lives in danger and swear at other guests, get away with it.  They don't even get asked if they have Memberships (that could be revoked, or at the very least notated as a warning).  I guarantee you, there are different rules for different people.  If I had sworn at these people, I'd have been ejected and my membership revoked on the spot.  I will further note that Walker also told me that people get three warnings.  I have also heard this in relation to Membership revoking.  In 2011, neither Lee nor I got any warnings.  You can't really get warnings on untruths, but you know what I mean.   This time, no warnings either.  No one has said anything to me about anything.  

The other outrageous thing about this, evidently my Membership was "deactivated" on 3.3.17. There must have been an oversight that allowed me to renew on 4.4.17, but regardless, Director Peterson knew about this on 3.3.17, three months ago and at no point was any reason sent to me in writing.  As well, its been two months, since I renewed and at no point were my membership fees refunded.   The whole thing is outrageous.  Furthermore, where does that leave Lee and Michael?  They don't even come to the Zoo but maybe a couple times a year.  Are they "deactivated and deceased" in the eyes of Director Peterson as well?

Some people would say, why does this matter so much?  It matters because I'm tired of Director Peterson bullying everyone.  And whatever her reasoning is going to be about this, I will bet its going to boil down to an untruth, based on my opinions about something.  I can have whatever opinions I want.  I can be vocal about them.  That is not reason for denying Membership.   If it was anything more than being vocal, then why wasn't something said to me?  If it was anything more, I would be banned, but yet I'm allowed to buy a day admission.   I'm tired of being targeted when all I do is go there and care about the Animals and their Welfare.

I'll post an update when I have one.