+menu-


  • Category Archives Ecology (DOE) Sucks
  • The Importance of Federal Water Control?

    Contact: Rosemarie Calabro Tully
    rct@energy.senate.gov
    (202) 224-7556

    Dear Rosemarie,

    I just called your office, left a message and now as instructed, I am emailing you.

    Re: Senator Cantwell Releases a Bold Vision for Water in the 21st Century

    THE IMPORTANCE OF FEDERAL WATER CONTROL

    Congress is one  way  Executive Order  is another a presidential memorandum to institutionalize the National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP)

    —————————————————————-

    Feb 5, 2013 WA STATE HAD THINGS UNDER CONTROL.

    6 (3) The provisions of this chapter apply only to waters of the
    7 Yakima river basin.

    It appears that the WA State Legislators can change WA State DOE Water Rules with a House Bill 1414 ?

    Behind My Back | Water Rules Not Etched In Stone

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/02/05/water-rules-not-etched-in-stone/

    Feb 5, 2013 – ARE WA STATE WATER RULES ETCHED IN STONE? PERHAPS NOT… 6 BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF … WASHINGTON:
    7 Sec. 1. RCW 90.38.005 and 1989 c 429 s 1 are each amended to read
    8 as follows:
    9 (1) The legislature finds that:

    It appears that the WA State Legislators can change WA State DOE Water Rules with a House Bill 1414 ?
    36 to satisfy both existing rights, and other presently unmet as well as
    37 future needs of the basin;

    6 (3) The provisions of this chapter apply only to waters of the
    7 Yakima river basin.

    What do we need in Clallam County to change the Dungeness Water Rule?
    Elected officials that represent us, Van De Wege, Senator Hargrove and Tharinger, to do their job and propose legislation
    36 to satisfy both existing rights, and other presently unmet as well as
    37 future needs of the basin;

    What do they need in Skagit County to change the Skagit River Water Rule?
    Elected officials that represent them, do their job and propose legislation
    36 to satisfy both existing rights, and other presently unmet as well as
    37 future needs of the basin;

    Feb 5, 2013 WA STATE HAD THINGS UNDER CONTROL.

    GOD FORBID THAT THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ALLOW ANYTHING BE UNDER STATE CONTROL

    ————————————————————————

    WOW in 2015? Last year, Sen. Cantwell introduced the Yakima Basin bill

    THE IMPORTANCE OF FEDERAL WATER CONTROL

    Senator Cantwell Releases a Bold Vision for Water in the 21st Century

    DOUBLE WOW 2016, Sen. Cantwell said. “The Yakima water bill is a national model for watershed management. The federal government has a responsibility to act now to support these efforts.”

    —————————————————————————————

    Indeed, step by step, one way or another, from WOTUS to Wetland Delineation, to Cantwell.

    First the Feds TAKE all of our water using WOTUS

    WOTUS “Water Runs Down Hill”

    Posted on September 4, 2015 8:52 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    WOTUS Water Runs Down Hill
    So, the LAW OF GRAVITY becomes the EPA WOTUS WATER LAW OF THE LAND?

    ———————————
    I DON’T NEED AN APPLE TO FALL ON MY HEAD TO UNDERSTAND THE GRAVITY OF WATERS OF THE UNITED STATES (WOTUS)

    Last year the administration wrote new definitions that would have subjected all waters (running down hill) within 4,000 feet of a navigable water to EPA review and control.

    Behind My Back | Congress Must Act on Water Issues

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/12/04/congressmustact-on-water-issues/

    Dec 4, 2015 – Congress Must Act on Water Issues May 24, 2014 It takes an act of the U.S. … www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/01/high–dry-and-destitute/.

    ——————————————————————————-

    WA State Reform on Wetland Delineation?

    Posted on February 11, 2016 11:29 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    Re: WA State Legislative reform ideas for SMPs and wetlands delineation update?

    Wetland delineation is also an element of a “jurisdictional determination. ... A WETLAND IS A WOTUS “water of the United States” and thus regulated under the federal Clean …

    Wetland delineation establishes the existence (location) and physical limits (size) of a wetland for the purposes of federal, state, and local regulations.

    Wetland delineation is also an element of a “jurisdictional determination.” This process identifies which water bodies within a project’s boundaries meet the definition of “waters of the United States.” For more information on this, see the Corps’ of Engineers (Corps) Regulatory Guidance Letter 08-02, Jurisdictional Determinations.

    —————————————————————————————

    SO WHAT’S OLD?

    Behind My Back | “Ecology Sucks”

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/04/15/ecologysucks/

    Apr 15, 2013 – Ecology Sucks” And, the rest of the story. The local news papers did report that I said it. WHAT THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS DID NOT REPORT …

    Behind My Back | High, Dry and Destitute

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/01/highdry-and-destitute/

    Feb 1, 2015 – High, Dry and Destitute WA State citizens, private property owners and … category and have previously been posted on “behindmyback.org”.

    AND WHAT’S OLD?

    FEB 5, 2013, It appears that the WA State Legislators can change WA State DOE Water Rules with a House Bill 1414 ?

    behindmyback.org/2013/02/05/ The provisions of this chapter apply only to waters of the 7 Yakima river basin.

    ————————————————————————–

    MARCH 25, 2016  SO WHAT’S REALLY NEW?

    BY HOOK OR BY CROOK, ONE WAY OR ANOTHER

    TOTAL FEDERAL CONTROL OF ALL WATER

    Senator Cantwell Releases a Bold Vision for Water in the 21st Century

    New white paper outlines a national policy framework for drought and water security

    Congress is one  way  Executive Order  is another a presidential memorandum to institutionalize the National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP),

    National Drought Resilience Partnership – US Drought Portal

    www.drought.gov/drought/content/ndrp

    National Drought Resilience Partnership Fact Sheet: Learn more about the NDRP, the importance of drought preparedness, and THE IMPORTANCE OF FEDERAL and …

    ————————————————————————-

    Senator Cantwell Releases a Bold Vision for Water in the 21st Century

    New white paper outlines a national policy framework for drought and water security

    Read Sen. Cantwell’s white paper here.

    Washington, DC – Today, on World Water Day, Ranking Member of the Energy and Natural Resources Committee U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) released a white paper to advance the development of a 21st century national framework for addressing drought and water security in the United States.  
    body{font-family: Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:9pt;background-color:

    An unprecedented drought last year and 15 years of drought across the American West have demonstrated the need to rethink U.S. water management in the 21st century. Since 1980, droughts have cost the United States more than $200 billion. The drought last year caused widespread and serious impacts for communities, agriculture, industry and the environment. As drought is predicted to continue in the coming years and as communities throughout the United States face significant water-security challenges, it is a crucial time to evaluate and develop new strategies at the national level.  

    Sen. Cantwell’s paper lays out a national framework to address water challenges through the modernization of federal programs to support and finance sustainable, watershed-scale solutions; advance science and technology; and promote partnerships with communities. The purpose of the paper is to foster a public dialogue and to develop a comprehensive policy agenda to address national drought and water security needs, as called for by states, tribes, local governments, utilities, agricultural producers and conservation groups.

    Modernizing federal programs is critical to supporting a more water-secure future,” Sen. Cantwell said. “The Yakima water bill is a national model for watershed management. The federal government has a responsibility to act now to support these efforts.”

    The framework document reflects lessons learned from Washington’s Yakima River Basin, where an extraordinary collaboration has led to a watershed planning effort that has become a national model. Last year, Sen. Cantwell introduced the Yakima Basin bill (S. 1694) to authorize federal participation in this effort, which will help usher in a new era in water management. The bill will help to restore ecosystems and endangered species, conserve water and provide water security for families, fish and farmers for years to come. Last month, Deputy Secretary of the Department of the Interior Michael Connor called the Yakima process a model not only for working through water challenges, but any natural resource management challenge.

    The white paper released today builds on that approach and outlines five policy principles as a national framework for drought and water security:

    1. Supporting collaborative watershed-scale solutions that are locally-driven. Governance solutions should support and incentivize collaborative, locally driven, watershed solutions by modernizing, coordinating, and streamlining federal programs to make them more effective.

    2. Financing solutions through partnerships and streamlined federal funding. Innovative water financing solutions should utilize an integrated watershed funding approach that streamlines federal funding and increases opportunities for public-private partnerships.

    3. Using and advancing the best science, technology and tools. Science and technology solutions should focus on accelerating innovation and the advancement of tipping points in science, technology and tools to transform water management.

    4. Advancing sustainable water supply solutions for people and the environment. Water supply solutions should take an integrated, portfolio approach that balances the needs of both people and the environment, including: (1) increased use of water markets, efficiency, conservation, recycling, reuse and desalination; (2) improvements in existing infrastructure, operations and low-impact infrastructure (such as aquifer storage and recovery); and (3) nature-based solutions and restoration of ecosystems and fisheries.

    5. Partnering with Tribal Nations, Arctic and Island Communities. The federal government should partner with and support Tribal Nations, Arctic and Island communities as they face unique challenges in responding to and addressing long-term water security needs.

    Addressing long-term drought is also a priority for the Obama administration. Ahead of today’s White House Water Summit, the administration released a presidential memorandum to institutionalize the National Drought Resilience Partnership (NDRP), which seeks to reduce the vulnerability of communities to the impacts of drought.

    Download Sen. Cantwell’s white paper on drought here.
    Read the presidential memorandum on long-term drought resilience here.

    ###

    Permalink: http://www.energy.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/2016/3/senator-cantwell-releases-a-bold-vision-for-water-in-the-21st-century

    How does drought response relate to climate preparedness?

    • The President’s Climate Action Plan: In June 2013, President Obama released his Climate Action Plan to cut the carbon pollution that causes climate change and affects public health, including increased risk of drought wildfires.
    • Executive Order – Preparing the United States for the Impacts of Climate Change: On November 1, 2013, President Obama established a Task Force on Climate Preparedness and Resilience to advise the Administration on how the Federal Government can respond to the needs of communities nationwide that are dealing with the impacts of climate change, including drought and wildfires.
    • Fact Sheet: Executive Order on Climate Preparedness
    • National Drought Forum Report: In December 2012, Federal agencies and states held the  ational Drought Forum (NDF) to focus on improving government coordination to support the planning and preparedness needed for enhancing resilience to ongoing or reoccurring drought. The NDRP is one important outcome of this forum and continues the Obama Administration’s commitment to helping communities get the drought assistance they need.
    • Federal Actions to Assist the Drought Emergency: A list of recent Federal actions, programs, and funding opportunities to support communities currently facing drought and to prepare for future drought events
    • Drought Recovery Matrix (download): An “at a glance” overview of federal resources, programs, funding, and authorities available to policy experts, federal and state agencies, and other impacted sectors to navigate the numerous programs and opportunities available to assist in building greater drought resilience (Last Updated in 2012).

     


  • Calif. Farmers High Dry and Destitute

    Calif. Farmers HIGH, DRY AND DESTITUTE

    Obama admin allocates water for endangered fish, leaves …

    m.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/feb/24/obam
    The Washington Times

    Logo: The Washington Times · Home · NewsObama admin allocates water for endangered fish, leaves California farmers high and dry … Wednesday, February 24, 2016 … some farmers are looking at another year of a zero federal water … “We’ve got to not only take a look at providing project [water] yield, we’ve also got …

    Washington State citizens, private property owners and farmers, in Skagit and Clallam County have been left HIGH, DRY AND DESTITUTE by WA State DOE WATER RULES.

    SO WHAT’S NEW? ENDANGERED FISH BEFORE FARMERS, FOOD AND THE ECONOMY.

    YEP… AGAIN AND STILL, FLUSHING TRILLIONS OF GALLONS PEOPLE WATER DOWN THE ENDANGERED SPECIES TOILET.

    ——————————————————-

    New post on Pie N Politics

    Feds allocate water for endangered fish, leave Calif. farmers high and dry
    by Liz Bowen
    By Valerie Richardson – The Washington Times
    Wednesday, February 24, 2016
    Despite wetter-than-average weather in California, some farmers are looking at another year of a zero federal water allocation even as the billions of gallons of water continue to be dumped into the ocean in order to save a three-inch fish.
    The worst part for many lawmakers at Wednesday’s House subcommittee hearing is that the Delta smelt remains as vulnerable as ever after the loss of 1.4 trillion gallons of water since 2008 under the federal Endangered Species Act.

    ———————————————————–

    PLEASE CLICK ON  AND LISTEN TO THE

    subcommittee hearing

    ———————————————————-

    High, Dry and Destitute

    Posted on by Pearl Rains Hewett

    Fish Before People Regardless of Cost

    Fish Before People Regardless of Cost

    The court held that the protection of EVERY ENDANGERED SPECIES is the highest priority of the federal government, REGARDLESS OF THE COST.

    California’s worst drought in 1200 years in pictures – BBC.com

    FARMERS BEFORE FISH?

    Pacific Legal Foundation, CHALLENGED, sought Supreme Court review, but the High Court denied, it set up reconsideration of the Supreme Court’s  ruling…..

    the court held that the protection of every endangered species is the highest priority of the federal government, regardless of the cost. The result has been a heavy-handed, top-down bureaucracy that frustrates human interests and species conservation.

    Status: On July 23, 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied rehearing before the entire court, leaving an adverse ruling from March in place. PLF attorneys filed a petition for certiorari on September 30, 2014. The petition was denied on January 12, 2015.

    ——————————————————————————————————————–Pacific Legal Foundation, a bit of unedited text..

    Stewart & Jasper Orchards v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
    Issue: Representing several California farmers, PLF attorneys are challenging the biological opinion (BiOp) by federal agencies used to restrict water deliveries from the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta in order to protect the Delta smelt, a small fish listed under the Endangered Species Act. In 2012, PLF previously sought Supreme Court review of the case on a Commerce Clause challenge because smelt are in intrastate species, but the High Court denied cert. With a recent adverse ruling at the Ninth Circuit on the biological opinion, it sets up reconsideration of the Supreme Court’s TVA v. Hill decision, relied on by the Ninth Circuit to uphold the smelt BiOp. In TVA v. Hill, the court held that the protection of every endangered species is the highest priority of the federal government, regardless of the cost. The result has been a heavy-handed, top-down bureaucracy that frustrates human interests and species conservation.

    Status: On July 23, 2014, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals denied rehearing before the entire court, leaving an adverse ruling from March in place. PLF attorneys filed a petition for certiorari on September 30, 2014.

    The petition was denied on January 12, 2015.

    ————————————————————————————————————-

    Complex and contradictory laws, and court decisions, and regulations have made it nearly impossible for water to flow and our communities to grow

    Indeed, a  growing number of communities across the West have become impacted by severe drought conditions,

    Washington State Declares Drought Emergency

    www.huffingtonpost.com/…/washingtondrought-e
    The Huffington Post

    May 15, 2015 – Drought isn’t just a California problem, folks. Washington Gov. Jay Inslee declared a statewide drought emergency on Friday

    ————————————————————————————————–

    How complex is this?

    The court held that the protection of EVERY ENDANGERED SPECIES is the highest priority of the federal government, REGARDLESS OF THE COST.

    ———————————————————————————————————

     As House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy explained, “California is enduring its worst drought in 1,200 years, and a growing number of communities across the West have become impacted by severe drought conditions.”

    This week, the House will consider a bill to address water policies in California and the West:

    What happened to this?

    Western Water and American Food Security Act (HR 2898)

    Pie N Politics In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
    Liz Bowen | February 29, 2016 at 6:42 pm | Categories: CA. Congressman Tom McClintock, Endangered Species Act, Federal gov & land grabs, Politicians & agencies, Water, Resources & Quality | URL: http://wp.me/p13fnu-6xm
    Comment See all comments

    ——————————————————-

    Dec 4, 2015

    Behind My Back | Congress Must Act on Water Issues

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/12/04/congressmust-act-on-water-issues/

    Dec 4, 2015Congress Must Act on Water Issues May 24, 2014 It takes an act of the U.S. … www.behindmyback.org/2015/02/01/high–dry-and-destitute/.

    Comment


  • I Saw Something and I Said Something

    I SAW SOMETHING on Jan 26, 2011 and I have been  SAYING SOMETHING EVER SINCE.

    8-10 American Citizens that were afraid of of what their government was going to do to them with the Clallam County Shoreline Management Act (SMP) update.

    I thought SOMEBODY should do something about that. Then I thought, I AM SOMEBODY  and I am going to do SOMETHING ABOUT THAT.

    Jan 27, 2011 I called and I SAID SOMETHING to the reps  answering the phone at the listed Olympia WA phone numbers, I left messages of concern for my 3 WA State elected representatives. Hargrove, D-Hoquiam and Representatives Tharinger (D-Dungeness) and Van De Wege (D-Sequim)

    Feb 27, 2016, I am still waiting for a written response.

    At the next Clallam County Commissioners meeting, I SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THAT

    “When American citizens are afraid of what their government is going to do to them, that is unacceptable to me.”

    (the public gallery applauded and the PDN published)

    Related image

    After the meeting, I had a few words with Clallam County Commissioner Mike Chapman about the SMP UPDATE.

    With his back to me, as he walked away Mike said “If you don’t like the way things are going, go down stairs and sign up for the SMP Citizens Advisory Committee.

    I like things to happen, and if they don’t happen I like to make them happen.

    I did sign up, as an unpaid volunteer, I was appointed by Elected DCD (Department of Community Development) director Sheila Roark-Miller

    And, as they say  “That’s when the war began”

    I sat for about two years, on the  SMP UPDATE CITIZENS COMMITTEE?  as one of five or six private property owners committed to protecting shoreline private property rights against the WA State Dept Of Ecology (DOE) 

    I made over 160 documented public comments on the Clallam County SMP website, to protect shoreline private property rights.

    Where There’s a Will There’s a Way

    ——————————————————————-

    SOMEBODY ELSE,  A COMMUNICATIONS EXPERT, SAW SOMETHING AND SAID SOMETHING

    He said, what you are doing is investigative reporting.

    YOU NEED A WEBSITE.

    Jan 29, 2013,  My Grandson, Tristin,  set up my website behindmyback.org

    My website, behindmyback.org, is dedicated to investigating, researching, documenting, updating and disseminating critical information to ..

    Behind My Back | Pearl Rains Hewett

    www.behindmyback.org/author/admin/

    Author Archives: Pearl Rains Hewett. Website: http://www.behindmyback.org; registered: 2013-01-29 22:20:57.

    He asked me, what do you want for an image or picture?

    The personal viewing of  Abraham Lincolns statue at night in WA D.C. left a permanent image  imprinted in my mind.

    He asked me, what do you want for a message?

    The words Abraham Lincoln spoke on November 19, 1863. in the Gettysburg address….

    That government of the people, by the people, for the people, shall not perish from the earth.

    And,  Abraham Lincoln said  “The world will little note, nor long remember what we say here”

    However, many American citizens do remember, and I made a note of it.

    He asked me, people will want to know something about you, why are you doing this?

    Well, what could I say? Actually it was pretty easy, you know, like the midnight ride of Paul Revere April 18, 1775 warning “One if by Land Two if By Sea”….

    Pearl Revere running through cyberspace with red flag warnings..“One if by Land Two if By Sea”….

    Feb 1, 2013  three days later, I posted this on my website.

    Behind My Back | My code name “Pearl Revere”

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/02/01/my-code-name-pearlrevere/

    Feb 1, 2013My code name is “Pearl Revere” This blog is all about US, “We the People”. I had hoped that setting up a blog would give “We the people” a …

    My Grandson set up my website

    There is no doubt that it is around the family and the home that all the greatest virtues, the most dominating virtues of human society, are created, strengthened and maintained, Winston Churchill.

    I am a concerned, American citizen and Grand Mother, I have ten (10) Grand Children and eight (8) Great Grand Children.

    I am concerned with the future of all American Grand Children, yours mine and ours, that will be living in the United States Of America, WITH THE $20 TRILLION DOLLAR PERPETUAL DEBT OF THE DEAD, after we are gone.

    —————————————————————————————-

    Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.

    This truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it, ignorance may deride it, malice may distort it, but there it is.

    ———————————————————

    POLITICALLY CORRECT… for Winston Churchill to say this?

    If you have an important point to make, don’t try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time. (I love Winston Churchill’s attitude)

    —————————————————–

    POLITICALLY INCORRECT… for Pearl Rains Hewett to say this?

    Behind My Back | “Ecology Sucks”

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/04/15/ecologysucks/

    Apr 15, 2013 – Ecology Sucks” And, the rest of the story. The local news papers did report that I said it. WHAT THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS DID NOT REPORT …

    Never give in, never give in, never, never, never, never give in…..

    Behind My Back | Tenacity And Bother?

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/09/21/1217/

    Sep 21, 2013 – WHY DO I BOTHER? Bottom line BECAUSE I AM AN AMERICAN CITIZEN and I have a right to freedom of SPEECH MY TENACITY and …

    ————————————————————————

    The first posting on my website was Jan 30, 2013

    Behind My Back | For the Protection of Whose Life?

    www.behindmyback.org/…/for-the-protection-of-wildlife-and-the-restrictio…

    Jan 30, 2013FOR THE PROTECTION OF WILDLIFE AND RESTRICTION OF PUBLIC USE To protect the EPA Clean water Act, DOE shorelines of Statewide …

    —————————————-
    Over three years later.. #675
    The last posting on my website Feb 24, 2016

    Where There’s a Will there’s a Way.

    Where There’s a Won’t They Don’t

    In a reelection campaign speech, our Clallam County Commissioner Mike Chapman  said “If we don’t want you to do it, we will make it as difficult as possible”

    Related image

    Go figure… With this attitude against what our local citizens want, Mike Chapman was reelected.

    ———————————————————————-

    YEP… It’s the same guy.

    The same elected commissioner that turned his representative back to me, and said, if you don’t like the way things are going.

    He ignored me and he offended me…

    And, as they say  “That’s when the war began”

    I like things to happen, and if they don’t happen I like to make them happen.

    THIS IS MY 676 COMMENT ON behindmyback.org

    Whether you like my ongoing war with the government, or hate it,

    from Jan 26, 2011 to Feb 27, 2016 its still going on.

    And….. It’s all Clallam County Commissioner Mike Chapman fault..

    ————————————————

    Clallam County Commissioner Mike Chapman  pushed my “START BUTTON”

    Ever concerned American Citizen has a “START BUTTON” Please visit my website behindmyback.org to get STARTED…

    ——————————————————————————————

    POLITICALLY CORRECT… for Winston Churchill to say this?

    If you have an important point to make, don’t try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time. (I love Winston Churchill’s attitude)

    ———————————————————

    PDN What’s Wrong With These Pictures?

    Feb 18, 2016 What’s Wrong With These PDN  Pictures?

    Peninsula News — Wednesday, February 17, 2016

    ————————————————————–

    1 / 2
    Next Photo

    ———————————————————

    What’s wrong with this picture?

    Olympic National Park mea culpa: ‘Inholder’ blocked from …

    www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/…/30628999…
    Peninsula Daily News

    Jun 28, 2011Olympic National Park mea culpa: ‘Inholder’ blocked from family property. Previous Photo. Next Photo …. From the PDN: See more special …

    Image result for PEARL RAINS HEWETT
    Image result for PEARL RAINS HEWETT
    Image result for PEARL RAINS HEWETT
    Image result for PEARL RAINS HEWETT
    Image result for PEARL RAINS HEWETT

    ^ WA State Gov.Inslee is not accountable to anyone for anything…

    —————————————————-

    The bottom line

    A picture is worth a thousand words

    If you have an important point to make, don’t try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time. (I love Winston Churchill’s attitude)

    ———————————————————————–

    This is a snippet from a previous post.. I just can’t resist using this…

    POLITICALLY INCORRECT… for Gramma to say this?

    Of course, Women may also be effected and effective with the “mama bear” phenomenon.  A biological bit of “I am woman watch me roar.” Call it the “Mama Bear N Politics”

    I insist on using HUMOR and I love  this description.

    I may seem quiet and reserved, but if you mess with my children, I will break out a level of crazy that will make your nightmares seem like a happy place.

    Hmmm… I have three children, ten grandchildren and eight great grandchildren and the government is messing with their future.

    If I live long enough… my war to protect “OUR” Grand children’s future may last as long as the  war in the middle east..


  • Clallam County SMP Update

    Clallam County SMP Update

    CLALLAM COUNTY VESTED CITIZENS  HAVE A  VOICE

    A GOOD READ 624 SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

    MARCH 30, 2015 SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS INCLUDE, CLALLAM COUNTY AFFECTED VESTED SHORELINE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS, INVESTMENT PROPERTY OWNERS, LOCAL BUSINESS,  THE TIMBER INDUSTRY,

    IN PART, OTHERS HAVE THEIR VOICE TOO, PAID  GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES  NGO OUT OF TOWNERS, FEDERAL, STATE, AND COUNTY  AND THE TRIBES.

    2015 Comments

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    031815 – PHewett

    031815 – KSpees

    2015 Comments

    031515 – KSpees

    031515 – PHewett

    031415 – KSpees

    031315 – KSpees

    030115 – PHewett

    030115 – PHewett

    030115 – PHewett

    022815 – PHewett

    SMP Comments under review by the Planning Commission:

    2015 Comments

    022715 – ForksCity

    022715 – BrandtPtOwners

    022715 – HSmyth

    022715 – SierraClub

    022715 – CGeer

    022715 – LPhelps

    022715 – RFletcher

    022715 – KNorman

    022715 – SBruch

    022715 – RBloomer

    022715 – RBloomer

    022715 – DStahler

    022715 – MDoherty

    022715 – SBogg

    022715 – RKnapp – JKT

    022715 – BLynette

    022715 – BLynette

    022715 – RPhreaner

    022615 – JLarson

    022515 – SierraClub

    022515 – TEngel

    022515 – AMatthay

    022515 – LPhelps

    022515 – KSpees

    022415 – DeptOfInterior

    022415 – TSimpson

    022415 – TFreeman

    022415 – BLake

    022415 – JCress

    022415 – Taylors

    022415 – EGreenleaf

    022315 – GBergner

    022015 – BBrown

    022015 – GBrown

    022015 – TRief

    022015 – RAmaral

    022015 – WCook

    022015 – DKalinski

    022015 – DFrascati

    022015 – JHelpenstell

    022015 – JFletcher

    022015 – CTilden

    022615 – PABA

    022015 – GJensen

    022015 – SWikstrom

    022315 – SBonner

    022215 – JElleot

    022115 – TSage

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    021915 – DWahlgren

    2015 Comments

    021915 – NKoseff

    021915 – KDuff

    021915 – BVreeland

    021915 – CStrickland

    021915 – EStrickland

    021915 – GSmith

    021915 – DOE

    021915 – SGilleland

    021915 – LBowen

    021915 – HMeier

    021915 -DChong

    021915 – SAnderson

    021915 – OEC

    021915 – RHuntman

    021915 – BLynette

    021915 – CWeller

    021815 – WFlint

    021815 – SNoblin

    021815 – LNoblin

    021815 – PHewett

    021815 – KAhlburg

    021815 – EBowen

    021815 – PFreeborn

    021815 – TTaylor

    021815 – KGraves

    0218105 – GCase

    021815 – KCristion

    021815- SReed

    021815 – SLaBelle

    021815 – MGonzalez

    021815 – JAdams

    021815 – SKokrda

    021815 – KFarrell

    0211815 – MMazzie

    021815 -HKaufman

    021815 – MCrimm

    021815 – CCarlson

    021815 – SFarrall

    021815 – JWinders

    021815 – TErsland

    021815 – FWilhelm

    021815 – SPriest

    021815 – RHolbrook

    021815 – LLaw

    021815 – LHendrickson

    021815 – JMaddux

    021815 – DHagen

    021815 – MHinsdale

    021815- DWatson

    021815 – DWarriner

    021815 – DRigselie

    021815 – JBaymore

    2015 Comments

    021815 – Plauché & Carr LLP

    021815 – PHewitt

    021815 – JCollier

    021815 – JCollier

    021815 – CMiklos

    021815 – PMilliren

    021815 – RPhreaner

    021815 – BBurke

    021815 – GCrow

    021815 – CJohnson – NOTC

    021815 – CParsons – State Parks

    021815 – JMarx

    021715 – JDavidson

    021715 – RAmaral

    021715 – CGuske

    021715 – TTrohimovich – Futurewise

    021815 – DSchanfald

    021715 – Port of PA

    021715 – PMillren

    021715 – EWilladsen

    021615 – EChadd-OCA

    021315 – SLange

    021315 – CKalina

    021215 – RCrittenden

    021115 – RKaplan

    021115 – SScott

    021115 – PHewett

    020915 – RMantooth

    020615 – PRedmond

    020615 – CVonBorstel

    020515 – DHoldren

    020515 – JMichel

    020215 -DHoldren

    020515 – DHoldren

    020415 – SCahill

    020215 – CEvanoff

    013115 – MBlack

    013015 – SHall

    013015 – BConnely

    012715 – BGrad

    012715 – DGladstone

    012715 – BBoekelheide

    012715 – KWiersema

    012015 – JBettcher

    011615 – PHewitt

    011615 – ACook

    011415 – PLavelle

    011215 – PHewitt

    010915 – PHewitt

    010915 – RKnapp

    010715 – WSC

    2014 SMP Comments under review by the Planning Commission:

    2014 Comments

    122914 – MQuinn

    121614 – OCA

    111814 – PHewett

    111814 – PHewett

    111714 – PHewett

    091514 – PHewett

    081814 – PHewett

    SMP Comments on earlier drafts of the plan can found here

    ———————————————————————–

    SMP Legal Action Continues

    SMP Update fight moves forward – Great Pen Voice Letter by Gene Farr
    To: Karl Spees <76ccap@gmail.com>

    Gene Farr lives in Jefferson County.

    It is the same imposed govt taking without due process we are having in Clallam County. It will be the same in Grays Harbor County and over the whole state.

    I read the letter in the Peninsula Daily News. It was a little hard to follow.  This version is very clear and easy to follow.

    Is it the editing of the local paper or me?

    Karl Spees – Concerned American

    Thx Gene excellent letter.

    $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

    Hope you all saw a slightly modified version this in the PDN today.  They added in Hood Canal Sand & Gravel as one of the litigants and changed the title to Shoreline program:

     

    SMP Legal Action Continues

     

    The PDN reported last week that the State Growth Management Hearing Board rejected appeals by the Olympic Stewardship Foundation, the local chapter of Citizen Alliance for Property Rights and others. These legal actions had been launched when Jefferson County adopted and the State Dept of Ecology approved a highly flawed and onerous update to the County’s Shoreline Master Program.

    You read that right. A county can’t adopt its own regulations to suit its local conditions. It must do what the State Department of Ecology wants in order to get the required approval.  Is that Constitutional?

    These legal appeals noted numerous constitutional, legal and procedural issues. The total was over 200 items, yet this Board of political appointees chose to not validate even one issue.  Now the legal action will move on to a real court of law.

    This SMP Update devalues shoreline property by making it less desirable.  It is now harder to develop, improve, repair or replace damaged shoreline property.  With the lower total value of county property as a tax base, the county then must increase property tax rates on all property to raise the same amount of funds.  This affects all property owners.

    CAPR and OSF are working on behalf of all property owners.  OSF is a local organization that believes “The best stewards of the land are the people who live on the land and care for their homes and property.”  We all should support these organizations.

    Gene Farr

     


  • AG Request on Instream Flow

    NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINION  (complete text below)

     QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a LOCAL PLANNING UNIT VOTES TO RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS TO AN EXISTING INSTREAM FLOW RULE? 

    Obligate,  by definition, bind or compel (someone), especially legally or morally.

    The full text of is below, RCW 98.82.080 INSTREAM FLOW COMPONENT –  RULES- REPORT

    —————————————————————————————————

    SECTION V – ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES  THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD

    snippet 3.The Attorneys General of Washington State is elected by popular vote. As the chief attorney for the state, the Attorneys General advises the Governor and state agencies on legal matters, but operates independently of the Governor. Local County and City prosecutors operate independently of the Attorney General’s office.

    ——————————————————————————-

    This is my comment

    It’s not complicated, it’s just another WA State legal conundrum on ECOLOGY’S WATER RULES

    And, it appears to me, that the Attorney General is on a fishing expedition so he can advise the Governor and state agencies on legal matters (like lawsuits)

    ———————————————————————————————–

     THE WORDING IN RCW 90.82.080 IS CONFUSING.

     (it only address’s the “SHALL NOT BE” modified)

    THE QUESTION FROM THE ATTORNEY GENERAL  IS  ON “SHALL  BE” obligated, to be MODIFIED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.

    THE INSTREAMFLOW, ON THE SKAGIT and DUNGENESS RIVERS, HAS ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED BY RULE.

     IS THE  The AG’s question POINTLESS? …  UNTIL WHEN? SOME  LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT by a recorded unanimous vote “REQUEST” the department TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS, the minimum instream flows

    Then legal question then  becomes,

    Does the DOE have the legal authority UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY, to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT, TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS?

    IF THE  DOE is “NOT” legally AUTHORIZED,UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY,  to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT.

    Then, yes, under the terms and conditions of RCW 90.82.080 DOE  should be obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

     And, the DOE is obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

      ——————————————————————————————-

      ” IF” the members of LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES REQUEST THE PLANNING UNIT to modify instream flows and unanimous approval of the decision to modify such flow IS  ACHIEVED, THEN THE INSTREAM FLOWS SHALL BE MODIFIED UNDER THIS SECTION;

    THE is DOE obligate to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

     ———————————————————————-

    The legal question is still,

    Does the DOE have the legal authority UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY, to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT, TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS?

     IF THE  DOE is “NOT” legally AUTHORIZED UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY,  to “DENY THE REQUEST” of THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT.

     Then, yes, under the terms and conditions of RCW 90.82.080 DOE  should be obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

     And, the DOE is obligated to conduct rulemaking to address the vote.

    ——————————————————————————————-

     IF THE  DOE is “NOT” legally AUTHORIZED  to “DENY THE REQUEST” ?

     WHO IS LEGALLY AUTHORIZED AND BOUND  UNDER THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD GOVERNMENT-TO-GOVERNMENT POLICY,  TO DENY THE TRIBAL REQUEST?

    Washington State/Tribal Government-to-Government Implementation Guidelines

    SECTION V – ROLES & RESPONSIBILITIES,  snippet

    2. State Agency Directors: THE CENTENNIAL ACCORD calls for each state agency to develop a plan to implement the government-to-government policy. “Each agency will establish a documented plan of accountability and may establish more detailed implementation procedures in subsequent agreements between tribes and the particular agency.” Some agency directors report directly to the Governor’s office, while some report to an appointed board or commission.

    3. Attorneys General Office: The Attorneys General of Washington State is elected by popular vote. As the chief attorney for the state, the Attorneys General advises the Governor and state agencies on legal matters, but operates independently of the Governor. Local County and City prosecutors operate independently of the Attorney General’s office.

     ———————————————————————————————-

    complete text of


     NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINION

    QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a LOCAL PLANNING UNIT VOTES TO RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS TO AN EXISTING INSTREAM FLOW RULE? 


                                       WASHINGTON ATTORNEY GENERAL

    The Washington Attorney General issues formal published opinions in response to requests by the heads of state agencies, state legislators, and county prosecuting attorneys.  When it appears that individuals outside the Attorney General’s Office have information or expertise that will assist in the preparation of a particular opinion, a summary of that opinion request will be published in the state register.  If you are interested in commenting on this opinion request, you should notify the Attorney General’s Office of your interest by March 11, 2015.  This is not the due date by which comments must be received.  However, if you do not notify the Attorney General’s Office of your interest in commenting on this opinion request by this date, the opinion may be issued before your comments have been received.  You may notify the Attorney General’s Office of your intention to comment by e-mail to jeff.even@atg.wa.gov or by writing to the Office of the Attorney General, Solicitor General Division, Attention Jeff Even, Deputy Solicitor General, PO Box 40100, Olympia, Washington 98504-0100.  When you notify the office of your intention to comment, you may be provided with a copy of the opinion request in which you are interested, information about the Attorney General’s Opinion process, information on how to submit your comments, and a due date by which your comments must be received to ensure that they are fully considered.

    The Attorney General’s Office seeks public input on the following opinion request(s):

                                                      Opinion Docket No. 15-02-03-Ericksen 

    Request by Doug Ericksen, Senator, District 42

    QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a local planning unit votes to recommend amendments to an existing instream flow rule? 

    ——————————————————————————————————-

    COMPLETE TEXT OF RCW 98.82.080

    INSTREAM FLOW COMPONENT –  RULES- REPORT

    (1)(a) If the initiating governments choose, by majority vote, to include an instream flow component, it shall be accomplished in the following manner:

    THE HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY RULE

    (i) If minimum instream flows HAVE ALREADY BEEN ADOPTED BY RULE for a stream within the management area,

    “UNLESS” the members of the LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES ON THE PLANNING UNIT by a recorded unanimous vote REQUEST the department TO MODIFY THOSE FLOWS, the minimum instream flows

    SHALL NOT BE MODIFIED UNDER THIS CHAPTER.

    ” IF” the members of LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND TRIBES REQUEST THE PLANNING UNIT to modify instream flows

    and unanimous approval of the decision to modify such flow IS NOT ACHIEVED, THEN THE INSTREAM FLOWS

    SHALL NOT BE MODIFIED UNDER THIS SECTION;

    —————————————————————————–

    THIS SECTION OF RCW 90.82.080 DOES NOT APPLY TO THE  NOTICE OF REQUEST FOR ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OPINION

    QUESTION(S):

    Does RCW 90.82.080 obligate the Department of Ecology to undertake rulemaking to amend an instream flow rule if a LOCAL PLANNING UNIT VOTES TO RECOMMEND AMENDMENTS TO AN EXISTING INSTREAM FLOW RULE? 

    (But it is VERY interesting read)

    THE HAVE NOT BEEN ADOPTED BY minimum streamflows RULE

    (ii) If minimum streamflows HAVE NOT been adopted by rule for a stream within the management area, setting the minimum instream flows

    SHALL BE A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT BETWEEN THE DEPARTMENT AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING UNIT.

    The department must attempt to achieve consensus and approval among the members of the planning unit regarding the minimum flows to be adopted by the department.

    APPROVAL IS ACHIEVED IF ALL GOVERNMENT MEMBERS AND TRIBES THAT HAVE BEEN INVITED AND ACCEPTED on the planning unit present for a recorded vote UNANIMOUSLY VOTE TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED MINIMUM INSTREAM FLOWS,

    AND

     ALL NONGOVERNMENTAL MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING UNIT PRESENT FOR THE RECORDED VOTE, “BY A MAJORITY”, VOTE TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED MINIMUM INSTREAM FLOWS.

    (b) The department shall undertake rule making to adopt flows under (a) of this subsection. The department MAY adopt the rules either by the regular rules adoption process provided in chapter 34.05 RCW, the expedited rules adoption process as set forth in RCW 34.05.353,

    OR THROUGH A RULES ADOPTION PROCESS THAT USES PUBLIC HEARINGS AND NOTICE PROVIDED BY THE COUNTY LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY TO THE GREATEST EXTENT POSSIBLE.

     Such rules do not constitute significant legislative rules as defined in RCW 34.05.328,

    and do not require the preparation of small business economic impact statements.

    (c) If approval is not achieved within four years of the date the planning unit first receives funds from the department for conducting watershed assessments under RCW 90.82.040,

    the department may promptly initiate rule making under chapter 34.05 RCW to establish flows for those streams and shall have two additional years to establish the instream flows for those streams for which approval is not achieved.

    (2)(a) Notwithstanding RCW 90.03.345, minimum instream flows set under this section for rivers or streams that do not have existing minimum instream flow levels set by rule of the department shall have a priority date of two years after funding is first received from the department under RCW 90.82.040, unless determined otherwise by a unanimous vote of the members of the planning unit but in no instance may it be later than the effective date of the rule adopting such flow.

    (b) Any increase to an existing minimum instream flow set by rule of the department shall have a priority date of two years after funding is first received for planning in the WRIA or multi-WRIA area from the department under RCW 90.82.040 and the priority date of the portion of the minimum instream flow previously established by rule shall retain its priority date as established under RCW 90.03.345.

    (c) Any existing minimum instream flow set by rule of the department that is reduced shall retain its original date of priority as established by RCW 90.03.345 for the revised amount of the minimum instream flow level.

    (3) Before setting minimum instream flows under this section, the department shall engage in government-to-government consultation with affected tribes in the management area regarding the setting of such flows.

    (4) Nothing in this chapter either: (a) Affects the department’s authority to establish flow requirements or other conditions under RCW 90.48.260 or the federal clean water act (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1251 et seq.) for the licensing or relicensing of a hydroelectric power project under the federal power act (16 U.S.C. Sec. 791 et seq.); or (b) affects or impairs existing instream flow requirements and other conditions in a current license for a hydroelectric power project licensed under the federal power act.

    (5) If the planning unit is unable to obtain unanimity under subsection (1) of this section, the department MAY adopt rules setting such flows.

    (6) The department shall report annually to the appropriate legislative standing committees on the progress of instream flows being set under this chapter, as well as progress toward setting instream flows in those watersheds not being planned under this chapter. The report shall be made by December 1, 2003, and by December 1st of each subsequent year.

    [2003 1st sp.s. c 4 § 4; 1998 c 247 § 4.]

    Notes:

         Findings — 2003 1st sp.s. c 4: See note following RCW 90.82.040.

     


  • High, Dry and Destitute

    High,  Dry and Destitute

    WA State citizens, private property owners and farmers, in Skagit and Clallam County have been left HIGH, DRY AND DESTITUTE by WA State DOE WATER RULES.

    DESTITUTE  by definition, WITHOUT THE BASIC NECESSITIES OF LIFE.

    Our Elected Representative “MUST” Legalize Citizen’s Water Rights.

    Water, is our lifeblood. It is used to grow food and to grow cities. It provides power to run our homes, factories, and businesses.

    PLEASE FORWARD TO ALL WA STATE ENTITIES CONCERNED WITH CITIZENS WATER RIGHTS

    Our WA State elected legislators need to hear how Ecology’s Destitute/Destitution is impacting your life, liberty and pursuit of happiness, in the United States of America.

    DESTITUTE,  by definition, WITHOUT THE BASIC NECESSITIES OF LIFE.

    DESTITUTION, by definition poverty so extreme that one lacks the means to provide for oneself.

    ——————————————————————————-

    Our Elected Representative MUST Legalize Citizen’s Water Rights,

    OR, THEY SHALL  leave our DESTITUTE  private property owners, citizens, no choice, but to continue to “duke it out”  in court with EXPENSIVE CITIZEN FUNDED LAWSUITS against the WA State DOE.

    If you have not signed the petition requesting the Washington State Legislature to provide the Skagit Watershed with water, please do!  They are seeing the signatures and reading your comments.

     —– Original Message —–

    From: Zachary Barborinas

    The Department of Ecology is tasked to regulate water for ALL citizens of the state and they have not done their job. Rural farmers and landowners need legislative action to reinstate basic legal access to water to ease the economic hardships and uncertainty before them because of this unconstitutional action. 

    For those of you unable to make it, please provide comments for the Legislature so they see these bills are supported.  They need to hear about how this is impacting you!

    ——————————————————————————————–

    Ecology’s Skagit and Dungeness Water Rule

    They need to hear about how this is impacting you!

    WA State Legislated Intent?

    Posted on March 21, 2013 1:02 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    ——————————————————————–

    An introduction to a series by Pearl Rains Hewett
    Deprived Of Our Water

    Posted on February 13, 2013 12:35 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    DEPRIVED OF OUR WATER RIGHTS AND OUR RIGHT TO WATER

    An introduction to a series by Pearl Rains Hewett
    “behindmyback.org” – CLOUDED WATERS

    DEPRIVED OF OUR WATER
    BY THE APPOINTED FEDERAL – STATE AGENCIES – TRIBAL TREATY -TAPPED
    This series of on the taking and depravation of our water rights will report, document and expose the many ways we the people are being deprived not only of our water right, but to our right to water.

    —————————————————————-

    WA STATE DEPT OF ECOLOGY (DOE)
    It will examine and document the many parts that appointed State agencies, the WA State DOE specifically plays in the deprivation of our water private and riparian rights in Counties in WA State. It will question both the DUE PROCESS of LAW and competency of the WA State DOE in creating and imposing and the WA Rules in WA State. The topics of DOE coerced monopoly and Commodity trading will also be discussed

    THE DUNGENESS WATER RULE
    Any and all OTHER related documented information that fit under this category and have previously been posted on “behindmyback.org”

    PUBLIC COMMENT
    It will address the documents the nearly 1000 public comments sent to the WA State DOE on the Dungeness Water Rule from the people of Clallam County and the mote effective that those comments had on the decision of the DOE Appointed State Agency. Why did we bother with nearly 1000 comments? When all we got back was 525 pages of response from DOE and no change in The Dungeness Water Rule.

    —————————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | “Ecology Sucks”

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/04/15/ecologysucks/

    Apr 15, 2013 – “Ecology Sucks” And, the rest of the story. The local news papers did report that I said it. WHAT THE LOCAL NEWSPAPERS DID NOT REPORT …

    —————————————————————————————-

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Zachary Barborinas

    There is a long road ahead, but only our continued pressure will get us closer to a solution

    Furthermore, if you have not signed the petition requesting the Washington State Legislature to provide the Skagit Watershed with water, please do!  They are seeing the signatures and reading your comments.

    SB 5129 – Concerning overriding considerations of the public interest in management of the waters of the state.

    SB 5135 – Ensuring that certain existing water uses are not subject to interruption.

    SB 5136 – Repealing an instream flow rule and adopting a new instream flow rule.

    SB 5491 – Maintaining reservations of water for certain future uses.

    Petitioning Washington State House and 15 others

    This petition will be delivered to:

    Washington State House

    Washington State Senate

    Washington Governor

    District 40

    Senator Kevin Ranker

    District 40

    Rep. Kristine Lytton

    District 40

    Rep. Jeff Morris

    District 10

    Senator Barbara Bailey

    District 10

    Rep. Norma Smith

    District 10

    Rep. Dave Hayes

    District 39

    Senator Kirk Pearson

    District 39

    Rep. Dan Kristiansen

    District 39

    Rep. Elizabeth Scott

    District 42

    Senator Doug Ericksen

    District 42

    Rep. Jason Overstreet

    District 42

    Rep. Vincent Buys

    Governor Inslee’s Chief of Staff

    Joby Shimonmura

    Washington State Legislature: Provide Water for Rural Landowners in Skagit Watershed

    Zachary Barborinas

    United States

    Legal access to well water has been eliminated for rural farmers and landowners in the Skagit River Basin, the 3rd largest watershed on the West Coast. A result so unbalanced and scientifically unsupported amongst our abundant resources, it has left over 6,000 landowners without any legal source of water, including 475 homes already built and occupied. The Department of Ecology is tasked to regulate water for ALL citizens of the state and they have not done their job. Rural farmers and landowners need legislative action to reinstate basic legal access to water to ease the economic hardships and uncertainty before them because of this unconstitutional action.

    Please help support rural farmers and landowners by signing this petition. You will be asking Washington state legislators to legislatively amend the 2001 Instream Flow Rule to provide water to 6,000 rural citizens in the Skagit Watershed.

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Zachary Barborinas

    To: Skagit Watershed

    Sent: Friday, January 30, 2015 11:45 AM

    Subject: Senate Hearing for Skagit Watershed

    Yesterday’s Senate hearing provided a tremendous opportunity to see support from many different perspectives. Thank you to everyone that were able to make it to Olympia. There is a long road ahead, but only our continued pressure will get us closer to a solution. For those of you unable to make it, please provide comments for the Legislature so they see these bills are supported.  They need to hear about how this is impacting you!

    1. SB 5129 – Concerning overriding considerations of the public interest in management of the waters of the state.
    2. SB 5131 – Concerning the Skagit instream flow rule.
    3. SB 5407 – Concerning existing lots and the Skagit instream flow rule.
    4. SB 5134 – Concerning base flows and minimum instream flows.
    5. SB 5135 – Ensuring that certain existing water uses are not subject to interruption.
    6. SB 5136 – Repealing an instream flow rule and adopting a new instream flow rule.
    7. SB 5491 – Maintaining reservations of water for certain future uses.

     

    Furthermore, if you have not signed the petition requesting the Washington State Legislature to provide the Skagit Watershed with water, please do!  They are seeing the signatures and reading your comments.

    Have a good weekend!  Go Hawks!

    Regards,

    Zachary J. Barborinas

    Just Water Alliance

    www.justwateralliance.org

     


  • Legislated Crackdown on DOE?

    Legislated Crackdown on DOE?

     Please note that the following legislative actions have been taken.

    House Bill 1202: Providing that an administrative rule or policy of the department of ecology may be abrogated by act of the governor or either house of the legislature
    Introduced by Rep. Elizabeth Scott (Monroe) (R) on January 15, 2015, For Bill Information, please click HERE.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=166246

    ——————————————————————–

    WOW! DON’T YOU JUST LOVE THAT WORD

    ABROGATE, abrogated repeal or do away with (a law, right, or formal agreement) repeal, revoke, rescind, repudiate, overturn, annul; More?

    ————————————————–

    House Bill 1233: Specifying that the ability to withdraw a certain amount of groundwater for domestic purposes without first obtaining a permit from the department of ecology is not subject to relinquishment through nonuse
    Introduced by Rep. Bruce Chandler (Granger) (R) on January 15, 2015, For Bill Information, please click HERE.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=166277

    ——————————————————————

    House Bill 1203: Limiting the enforcement of administrative rules and policies
    Introduced by Rep. Elizabeth Scott (Monroe) (R) on January 15, 2015, For Bill Information, please click HERE.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=166247

    ——————————————————————

    House Bill 1204: Limiting the enforcement of policies of the department of ecology
    Introduced by Rep. Elizabeth Scott (Monroe) (R) on January 15, 2015, For Bill Information, please click HERE.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=166248

    ——————————————————————–

    House Bill 1200: Limiting the enforcement of policies of the department of fish and wildlife and providing for abrogation of policies by act of the governor or either house of the legislature
    Introduced by Rep. Elizabeth Scott (Monroe) (R) on January 15, 2015, For Bill Information, please click HERE.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=166244

    —————————————————————————-

    House Bill 1201: Providing that an administrative rule may be abrogated by act of the governor or either house of the legislature
    Introduced by Rep. Elizabeth Scott (Monroe) (R) on January 15, 2015, For Bill Information, please click HERE.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=166245

    —————————————————————–

    House Bill 1202: Providing that an administrative rule or policy of the department of ecology may be abrogated by act of the governor or either house of the legislature
    Introduced by Rep. Elizabeth Scott (Monroe) (R) on January 15, 2015, For Bill Information, please click HERE.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=166246

    ——————————————————————————————-

    THERE IS  REALLY A LONG LIST (A quick read provided the above)

    SORRY, THE CLICK HERE DOES NOT WORK

    Read more at http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=165801

    for legislative actions, and their impact on issues of local and state wide concern.

    Thank Lois for providing this http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=165801


  • Water Out of DOE Control?

    Who’s in and Who’s out  of Water  Power?

    NEWS FLASH January 15, 2015 ECOLOGY’S WATER RULERS  document in a letter, that, THEY ARE POWER-LESS, RULE-LESS, TOOL-LESS,  INEFFECTIVE? AND INADEQUATE?

     “Under current law, Ecology has no rule making tools that would allow us to adequately protect instream resources and effectively make water available for new year-round consumptive uses in the Skagit Basin.”

     ———————————————————————————————————————

    WHY IS WA STATE ECOLOGY (DOE) POWERLESS?

    IT’S COMPLICATED, GREAT QUESTION, GLAD YOU ASKED

    I once received a response from WA STATE ATTORNEY GENERAL, BOB FERGUSON

    The response, ABOUT WATER, was ? IT’S COMPLICATED

    COMPLICATED by definition,  difficult to understand, deal with, or explain

    1. A REASONABLE PERSON WOULD BE INCAPABLE OF  UNDERSTANDING THE DIFFICULTY OF IT?

    2. That the issues of the problems are too difficult to deal with?

    3. That the issues of the problems are too difficult to explain?

     I MUST BE A  REALLY UNREASONABLE PERSON (I posted this in response)

    Everything is too Complicated

    Posted on February 17, 2014 12:57 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett

    —————————————————————————————

    HOW COMPLICATED ARE THE IN’S AND OUT’S OF WATER CONTROL?

    This short form IS NOT in chronological order

    The individual States own all of their water?

    BUT THE  FEDS CONTROL all of the  water?

    Congress Acts? The Clean Water Act

    The Clean Water Act was linked  to,  the Endangered Species Act,

    Which in turn, was  linked to the Boldt decision,

    Which in turn, was  linked to first right of WATER for tribes,

    Which in turn was  linked to the  taking of WATER  FOR FISH BEFORE PEOPLE,

    Which in turn was  linked to the feds giving ownership of the water to the individual states

    Which in turn was  linked to Ecology’s state water rulers

    Which in turn was  linked to Ecology’s taking of water from a multitude of private property owners.

    Which in turn was  linked to a multitude of objections, appeals,  lawsuits, and repeals.

    Which in turn was  linked to  Ecology letter, January 15, 2015,  in  response to the Petition to Repeal the 2001 Instream Flow Rule

     Which in turn was  linked to  Ecology letter “Under current law, Ecology has no rule making tools that would allow us to adequately protect instream resources and effectively make water available for new year-round consumptive uses in the Skagit Basin.”

    Which in turn was  linked to  the Jan 17, 2015 posting of The Ins and Outs of Water Control

    Which in turn was  linked to  the NEWS FLASH on ECOLOGY’S WATER RULERS  document in a letter, that, THEY ARE POWER-LESS, RULE-LESS, TOOL-LESS,  INEFFECTIVE? AND INADEQUATE?

    ——————————————————————-

    (I wouldn’t even support a man in that condition) Sorry, I just can’t help myself

    ———————————————————————————————

    WHO HAS THE POWER TO CONTROL ALL WATER?

    MOTHER NATURE…

    ———————————————————-

    IT’S COMPLICATED

    WHO? WHEN? WHERE? WHY? AND WHAT? IS  REALLY  IN CONTROL? AND CONTROLLING AMERICA’S WATER?   OUR ELECTED CONGRESS? GOVERNING?, THE APPOINTED, GOVERNMENT AGENCY, TRIBAL TREATY? THE TRIBES? THE FISH? THE EPA? SUPPORTED BY THE NGO SELFIES, AKA WATER WITCHES?

    ————————————————————————

    I HAVE A REALLY BIG PROBLEM WITH ECOLOGY AND OUR WA STATE LEGISLATORS

    THEY LEGISLATED THE POWER TO ECOLOGY TO RULE AND TAKE OUR WATER

    which in turn was  linked to Ecology’s state water rulers

    which in turn was  linked to Ecology’s taking of water from a multitude of private property owners.

    AND THE ALL POWERFUL ECOLOGY HAS RUN AMOK EVER SINCE,  RULING, AND TAKING, AND TAKING, AND RESTRICTING, AND DENYING US WATER

    which in turn was  linked to a multitude of objections, appeals,  lawsuits, and repeals.

    AND WHAT HAVE OUR ELECTED WA STATE LEGISLATORS DONE TO CORRECT THE WATER DEBACLE  THEY LEGISLATED?

    AS LITTLE AS POSSIBLE

    Which in turn was  linked to  the Jan 17, 2015 posting of The In’s and Out’s of Water Control

    documentation below

    BACK TO THE TOP

    From: Zachary Barborinas

    To: Skagit Watershed

    Sent: Friday, January 16, 2015 2:29 PM

    Subject: Skagit Watershed: Ecology Petition Denied

    The Department of Ecology has responded to the Petition to Repeal the 2001 Instream Flow Rule. Not surprisingly, they have denied the request (see attached). Ecology agrees that a plain reading of the rule only requires mitigation at the main stem gauge, but as expected, cautions such a reading could result in litigation.  And perhaps my favorite part of their response:

    “Under current law, Ecology has no rule making tools that would allow us to adequately protect instream resources and effectively make water available for new year-round consumptive uses in the Skagit Basin.”

    Once again, the Legislature must engage this situation since the managers of our water cannot find a solution in the third largest watershed on the west coast.  The Petitioners will be meeting in the days ahead to discuss their next step.

    Have a good weekend.

    Regards,

    Zachary J. Barborinas

    Just Water Alliance

    www.justwateralliance.org

     


  • SMP Cumulative Impact on People

    SMP  Cumulative Impact on People

    This is my Clallam County SMP Public comment and objection

    comment code CIA – Cumulative Impacts Report

    directed to Deputy Director Steve Gray and Planning Commission

    on the  Nov. 2014 Clallam County SMP Updated Draft

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    ———————————————————

    I have been researching documenting and commenting on the Clallam County Shoreline Management Plan Update since Jan.26, 2011.

    I  have 156 SMP Public Comments posted on the SMP website on the CUMULATIVE IMPACT OF THE SMP UPDATE ON THE 3300 VESTED PRIVATE SHORELINE PROPERTY OWNERS IN CLALLAM COUNTY WA.

    But? Then?  WHAT DO I KNOW ABOUT THE SMP UPDATE WEBSITE?

    The vast majority of my “CUMULATIVE IMPACT” SMP Public Comments on “We The People” have been posted  and coded as “GENERAL COMMENTS?”.

    How could a thing like that happen?

    ————————————————————-

    The  Nov. 2014 Clallam County SMP Updated Draft?

    By his own admission to me, with no help from ESA facilitator, Margaret Clancy, Steve Gray, Deputy Director/Planning Manager has completely rewritten, revised, altered, edited, expanded, reworded, and RE-DRAFTED the the Clallam County Shoreline Management Update.

    Steve Gray has presented two meetings of his Updated SMP RE-DRAFTED SMP  to The Clallam County Planning Commission, ESA facilitator, Margaret Clancy, is assisting him.

    ———————————————————————————————————–

    I strenuously object to the hastily rewritten RE-DRAFTED SMP Update presentations of maps and language. Using  the ESA consultants and ECOLOGY’S SUSTAINABILITY NO NET LOSS jargon,

    Sometimes including a brief stop to mention the  Advisory Committee

    The  SMP GOBBLEDYGOOK being presented, using more words than necessary, especially to avoid expressing it directly,  to an ill-prepared Planning Commission, goes far beyond the understanding of a reasonable person. (why Lake Sutherland has a 35 foot setback)

    THE OVERLAPPING MAPS? UNUSUALLY  hard to understand THE SHALL AND MUST PROTECT  of , 200 foot setback, the critical areas set- backs, plus the exceptional feeder bluffs, plus the flood plain, plus the rivers meander line, PLUS THE ASSOCIATED WETLANDS, plus the protected wetland habitat,  and the mention of SEASONAL STREAMS…

    UNUSUALLY, HARD TO UNDERSTAND HARD TO SWALLOW.

    ———————————————-

    Obama Administration Is Writing Huge “Rule Change” to Take Private Land

    —————————————————————————————–

    The new rules and wording added to our Nov. 2014   Shoreline Management Update by Steve Gray indicate that it is a done deal… plus the associated wetlands, plus seasonal streams.

    ————————————————————————

    The changed suggested by the Army Corps of Engineers and the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency is being protested by the Pacific Legal Foundation, a group which has challenged water-related regulation before the Supreme Court — and won.

    “On its face, the proposed rule covers virtually every water in the nation,” PLF told the government in public comments, according to WND.

    ———————————————————————————-

    The understanding of a reasonable man? The intent of a party can be determined by examining the understanding of a reasonable person, after consideration is given to all relevant circumstances of the case including the negotiations, any practices the parties have established between themselves, usages and any subsequent conduct of the parties.

    —————————————————————————————

    Why call it GOBBLEDYGOOK? in an SMP Update in ESA and ECOLOGY language characterized by circumlocution and the use of more words than necessary to express something, especially to avoid saying it directly.

     And saying the word water, and more water, Indicates water, the movement of water, standing still water, the high water mark, failed to mention the difference between an SMP shoreline and the SMP shorelines of Statewide significance, past the  taking of  private property value, somebody, vested private property owners… 

    Sometimes including a brief stop to mention the  mitigation process, so a vested Clallam County private property owner can use and develop his own private property.

    Using  the ESA consultants and ECOLOGY’S SUSTAINABILITY NO NET LOSS jargon

    Sometimes including a brief stop to mention the  Advisory Committee

    And THIS IS  really, really hard to swallow after spending over two years as a vested private shoreline property owner on the …….

    Shoreline Master Program (SMP) Advisory Committee

     MEMBER FROM  first meeting April 11, 2011 to last April 9, 2013

    But? Then?  WHAT DO I KNOW ABOUT THE SMP UPDATE?

    Shoreline Advisory Committee.

    With 29 members include some (5) vested private Clallam County citizens, but most (24) members of the committee represent environmental and other advocacy groups or are paid staff of the Department of Ecology (DOE), Department of Fish and Wildlife (DFW) and Puget Sound Partnership. The Tribes, The Serra club, and NGO special interest groups.

    ——————————————————————————————————–

    The SMP Advisory Committee was under the direction of,  E.S.A. Adfolson Consultants, Margaret Clancy  and Jim Kramer. How could anyone forget to mention the Facilitators?

     ———————————————————–

    E.S.A. Adfolson Consultants had already COOKIE CUT  24 SMP UPDATES ACROSS WA STATE by the time they got down to their $599,930 grant from Ecology’s business on the Clallam County SMP Update.

    ————————————————————————————

    COOKIE CUTTING   24 WA STATE SMP UPDATES?

    ONE PREDETERMINED SMP  PATTERN DOES NOT FIT ALL SHORELINES

    SMP E.S.A. Adfolson Consultants Public Participation Meeting Jan. 26, 2011

    The OXYMORON Public Participation Meeting by invitation only?

    —————————————————————————

    THEN ON TO THE MAIN EVENT

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, April 9, 2013:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Draft Agenda – April 9, 2013
    • SMP Committee PowerPoint Presentation – April 9, 2013
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes – April 9, 2013 pending
    • Memo RE: Cumulative Impacts Analysis (CIA) & No Net Loss Report (2-2013)
    • DRAFT Clallam Co. Cumulative Impacts Analysis and No Net Loss Report (2-2013)
    • Memo RE: Clallam Co. SMP Shoreline Restoration Plan February 2013 (2-2013)
    • DRAFT Clallam Co. SMP Shoreline Restoration Plan February 2013 (2-2013)

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, January 15, 2013 materials pending:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – January 15, 2013
    • SMP Committee PowerPoint Presentation – January 15, 2013
    • SMP CMZ Implications – January 15, 2013
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes – January 15, 2013

    ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

    2012 SMP Committee Meetings:

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, December 11, 2012:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – December 11, 2012
    • SMP Committee PowerPoint Presentation – December 11, 2012
    • Clallam County Feeder Bluff Mapping for SMP Update Presentation by Jim Johannessen – December 11, 2012
    • SMP Committee Meeting draft Notes – December 11, 2012
    • Memo RE: Explanantion of proposed shoreline buffer widths – December 11, 2012

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, July 10, 2012:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – July 10, 2012
    • SMP Committee PowerPoint Presentation – July 10, 2012
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes – July 10, 2012
    • Clallam SMP Revised Buffer Strategy Outline
    • SMP Work Activities Completed/In Progress Since April 24, 2012
    • Preliminary Working draft SMP comments summary (since Feb. 2012)

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, April 24, 2012:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – April 24, 2012
    • SMP Committee PowerPoint Presentation – April 24, 2012
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes – April 24, 2012
    • WDOE Handbook Chapter 11:  Vegetation Conservation, Buffers and Setbacks
    • WDOE Handbook Section:  Existing Development

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, March 27, 2012:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – March 27, 2012
    • SMP Committee PowerPoint Presentation – March 27, 2012
    • SMP Committee Clallam County Public Access Presentation – March 27, 2012
    • SMP Shoreline Environmental Decision Tree – 4-20-2012
    • Matrix of Issues – March 27, 2012
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes – March 27, 2012

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, March 6, 2012:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – March 6, 2012
    • SMP Committee PowerPoint Presentation – March 6, 2012
    • SMP Committee draft Meeting Notes – March 6, 2012
    • Memo RE:  Basis of proposed shoreline buffer width recommendations
    • Introduction to the Preliminary Draft Clallam County Shoreline Master Program

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, February 28, 2012:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – February 28, 2012
    • SMP Committee Meeting PowerPoint Presentation – February 28, 2012
    • SMP Commitee Meeting Notes – February 28, 2012 – REVISED
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes – February 28, 2012
    • SMP Summary Comparison Matrix
    • Clallam County SMP Preliminary Working Draft Document
    • Clallam County SMP Draft Shoreline Environmental Designation Maps
    • Clallam County SMP Update:  Shoreline Environment Designations (SEDs) (Working Draft Memo)
    • Clallam County Shoreline Draft Designation Maps
    • FINAL WRIA 17-19 Clallam County SMP Update Vision Report
    • WDOE Statutory Basis for SMP

     

    2011 SMP Committee Meetings:

     

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, November 15, 2011:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – November 15, 2011
    • SMP Committeee Meeting PowerPoint Presentation – November 15, 2011
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes Appended – November 15, 2011
    • Clallam County SMP Update: Shoreline Environment Designations (SEDs) (Working Draft)
    • Clallam County Shoreline Draft Designation Maps

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, October 18, 2011:

    • SMP Committee Agenda – October 18, 2011
    • SMP Committee Meeting PowerPoint Presentation – October 18, 2011
    • SMP Committee Meeting Notes – October 18, 2011
    • Clallam County Shoreline Draft Designation Maps
    • Clallam County SMP Update: Shoreline Environment Designations (SEDs) (Working Draft)
    • Final Consistency Review Report
    • 1976 Clallam County SMP
    • WAC 173-26-211

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, September 27, 2011:

    • SMP Committee  Agenda – September 27, 2011
    • SMP Committee Meeting PowerPoint Presentation – September 27, 2011
    • SMP Committee Notes – September 27, 2011
    • SMP Committee  Meeting Materials Packet – September 27, 2011

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Tuesday, July 11, 2011:

    • SMP Committee Meeting Memo – July 12, 2011
    • SMP Committee Meeting Agenda – July 12, 2011
    • SMP Committe Notes – July 12, 2011
    • Draft Clallam County SMP Update Vision Report – June 27, 2011
    • Draft WRIA 17-19 (Straits) Shoreline Inventory and Characterization Report
    • Draft WRIA 17-19 (Straits) Shoreline Maps

    SMP Committee Meeting Materials for Monday, April 11, 2011:

    • Welcome Letter
    • Meeting Agenda – April 11, 2011
    • Meeting Presentation – April 11, 2011
    • Meeting Notes – April 11, 2011
    • General Operating Procedures & Ground Rules
    • Draft CC-SMP Consistency Report

    Reference Documents:

    • SMP Committee Work Plan & Structure for Committee Meetings
    • General Operating Procedures & Ground Rules
    • CC-SMP Process Overview Timeline – February 2011
    • SMP Committee List as of 1-2012
    • Clallam County Shoreline Master Program (1992)
    • Chapter 173-26 WAC Shoreline Master Program Guidelines
    • Introduction to WA´s SMP (WDOE)
    • SMP:  Making Sense of Tough Issues (WDOE)
    • SMP:  Frequently Asked Questions (WDOE)
    • WRIA 20 (Pacific Coast) Visioning Forum Report (October 2010)
    • CC-SMP Summary of Focus Group Meetings (January 2011)
    • CC-SMP Revised Public Participation Strategy (March 2011)
    • Summary – SMP Public Forums (April 2011)
    • WRIA 20 (Pacific Coast) Revised Draft Inventory and Characterization Report (June 2011)
    • Comments – Consistency Review Report (June 2011)


    THANK YOU SMP COMMITTEE  FOR YOUR TIME, DEDICATION and ATTENTION TO DETAIL,COMPREHENSIVE COMMENTS, EXTRAORDINARY EFFORTS,EXTENSIVE INPUT, and HARD WORK!

    THE NEW November 2014 draft Clallam County Shoreline Master Program Update :

    Prepared by The CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE ADVISORY COMMITTEE has been hastily completely rewritten, revised, modified, altered, expanded, reworded,  SMP Update

     

    Nov.18,2014

    ———————————————————————————————————-

    I strenuously object to the hastily rewritten SMP Update presentation of maps and language.The  SMP gobbledygook being presented, using more words than necessary, especially to avoid expressing it directly,  to an ill-prepared Planning Commission, goes far beyond the understanding of a reasonable person.

    BUT THEN? WHAT DO I KNOW ABOUT THE SMP UPDATE?

    November 2014 … THE NEW draft Clallam County Shoreline Master Program Update :

    Prepared by The CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE ADVISORY COMMITTEE?

    With Assistance?  by the CLALLAM COUNTY DEPT. OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PLANNING DIVISION.

    Steve Gray, Deputy Director/Planning Manager
    Clallam County Dept. of Community Development
    223 East Fourth Street, Suite 5
    Port Angeles, WA 98362-3015
    Phone: (360)417-2520; Fax: (360)417-2443
    sgray@co.clallam.wa.us

     

     


  • Tribal Water Approved by Congress?

    Tribal Reserved Water Right Settlements

     It takes an act of the  US Congress to make SETTLEMENT/QUANTITY (AC-FT/YR) of reserved water rights with Indian tribes.

     

    SETTLEMENTS APPROVED BY CONGRESS Updated August 2011

     SIGNIFICANT FEATURES OF SETTLEMENT/QUANTITY (AC-FT/YR)

     ——————————————————————

    Indeed,

     

    It takes an act of the  U.S. Congress to make SETTLEMENT/QUANTITY (AC-FT/YR) of reserved water rights with Indian tribes.

     

    In States, the tribes demand quantities of  instream flow water, to be reserved for the fish?

     ON, quantities of Indian Reserved water rights that have not yet been determined or settled, BY AN ACT OF U.S. CONGRESS?

     

     See the attachment for the

    (request an email copy of the attachment phew@wavecable.com)

     

    SIGNIFICANT FEATURES OF SETTLEMENT/QUANTITY (AC-FT/YR)

     

    This is the list of Congressional Acts  of Indian Water Rights Settlements

    1) Ak-Chin Indian Water Rights Settlement Act final 2000

     

     

    (2) Fallon Paiute Shoshone Indian Tribes Water Rights Settlement Act of 1990

     

     

    (3) Fort Hall Indian Water Rights Act of 1990

     

     

    (4) Fort McDowell Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of 1990

     

     

    (5) Jicarilla Apache Tribe Water Settlement Act of 1992

     

     

    (6) Northern Cheyenne Indian Reserved Water Rights Settlement Act of 1992

     

     

     

    (7) Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Community Water Rights Settlement Act of 1988

     

     

    (8) San Carlos Apache Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act

     

     

    (9) San Luis Rey Indian Water Rights Settlement Act of 1988

     

     

    (10) Seminole Indian Land Claims Settlement Act of 1987

     

     

    (11) Southern Arizona Water Rights Settlement Act

     

     

    (12) Truckee-Carson-Pyramid Lake Water Rights Act

     

     

     

    (13) Ute Indian Rights Settlement Act of 1992

     

     

    (14) Yavapai-Prescott Indian Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 1994

     

     

    (15) Chippewa Cree Tribe of the Rocky Boy’s Reservation Indian Reserved Water Rights Settlement Act of 1999

     

     

    (16) Shivwits Band of the Paiute Indian Tribe of Utah Water Rights Settlement Act

     

     

    (17) Colorado Ute Settlement Act Amendments of 2000

     

     

    (18) Zuni Indian Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2003

     

     

    (19) Arizona Water Settlements Act of 2004

     

     

    (20) Snake River Water Rights Act of 2004

     

     

    (21) Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians Settlement Act

     

     

    (22) Northwestern New Mexico Rural Water Projects Act (Navajo-Gallup Water Supply Project/Navajo Nation Water Rights)

     

     

    (23) Shoshone-Paiute Tribes of Duck Valley Water Rights Settlement Act

     

     

     (24) Crow Tribe Water Rights Settlement Act of 2010

     

     ————————————————————————————————————- 

     

    Let us climb the ladder of responsibility, to the U.S. Congress for failure to “ACTon Tribe Water Rights Settlements

     

    That has caused  the TRIBES and WA State DOE, to have expensive, taxpayer paid lawsuits,  in the WA State.

     

    AND, as a result of these TRIBES and WA State DOE, expensive, taxpayer paid lawsuits, in WA State? 

     

    Private property owners and farmers, in Skagit County and Clallam County, our citizens,  have been left HIGH AND DRY by the WA State DOE.

     

    Thus,leaving private property owners, citizens, no choice, but to “duke it out”  in court with EXPENSIVE PRIVATE LAWSUITS against the WA State DOE.