+menu-


  • Category Archives Goliath’s Green Consortiums
  • Past and Present Drought in WA State

    History of Droughts in Washington State

    An interesting read on WA State DROUGHT PLANS

    BEFORE THE INSTREAM FLOW RULES.

    History of Droughts in Washington State_1977.pdf  A 43 page document

    ———————————————————————————–

    PRESENT DROUGHT PLANS FOR CITIZENS IN WA STATE?

    AFTER THE INSTREAM FLOW RULES?

    May 24, 2015  The WA statewide drought emergency PLAN?.

    Hmmm…  LAWMAKERS have yet to act on DOE’s request for $9.6 million in drought relief funds. The request came in late March, weeks after legislators began putting together spending plans.

    UPDATE: WHAT’S THE HOLDUP ON THE $9.6 MILLION IN DROUGHT RELIEF FUNDS?

    What’s the problem?

    WATER FOR CITIZENS IS WORTH FIGHTING FOR…

    IT’S A VALUE JUDGMENT

    At a drought committee meeting Monday, Honeyford reminded Stanford that he had been willing to embrace Stanford’s drought preparation bill in exchange for the House approving legislation to let the city of Lynden draw water from the Nooksack River in Whatcom County.

    Tribes and environmental groups oppose the bill, which passed the Senate.

    ————————————————————————-

    THE “CITIZENS  REVIEW” OF ECOLOGY’S DROUGHT PLANS IN WA STATE?

    What YOU can expect at a COMMUNITY DROUGHT FORUM?

    This  Report by Lois Krafsky-Perry
    for Citizen Review
    Posted Saturday, May 23, 2015

    Sequim/Dungeness community listens to drought concerns

    IT’S A MUST READ

    http://citizenreviewonline.org/sequimdungeness-community-listens-to-drought-concerns/

    CITIZENS REVIEW  is an online  resource for disseminating critical information to keep citizens informed

    —————————————————————————————————

    AS PROVIDED ABOVE BY LOIS…

    We the people have partners too….

    My website, behindmyback.org,  is dedicated to investigating, researching, documenting, UPDATING and disseminating critical information to help keep American citizens informed by posting and reporting things they don’t know. This is just one chapter in the book of revelations by Pearl Revere.

    ————————————————————————————————

     A 43 page document History of Droughts in Washington State_1977.pdf

    MEDIA Drought alert Sun., Feb. 6, 1977  

    WOW! THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

    Dear Reader: On February 16, 1977, Governor Dixy Lee Ray established the “Governor’s … drought occurrences in the State of Washington since 1900. Various.

    OCR Text

    Northwest Officials ponder energy outlook By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Some nfflntnla HUn n*a« nn n_.. «-L. nn«<m.»». .i~-i_i_n.. M .-. THE DAILY NEWS—21 Angeles, Wash., Sun., Feb. 6, 1977

    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS Nervous government weather- watchers are mobilizing for battle should a Pacific Northwest drought short-circuit electric power and whither crops this spring. Homeowners may be asked — or forced — to reduce their electrical use. During Christmas, Seattle City Light asked its 370,000 customers not to use outdoor decorative lighting. Further sacrifices may be around the corner if a serious drought occurs.

    —————————————————————————-

    MEDIA COVERAGE?   2015 WA STATE DROUGHT?  

    NOT SO MUCH..

    CAPITAL PRESS  Published:  

    Their full media report is  here

    Washington’s late reaction to drought revives legislation …

    www.capitalpress.com/Washington/…/washingtons-late-react

    Capital Press May 14, 2015 – A House bill to revise how the state prepares for a drought sank in the Senate, but may resurface in the special session.

    ——————————————————————————-

    Ecology’s  current drought report is sort of an interesting reading.

    Last revised: May 22, 2015

    Washington Drought 2015 | Washington State Department …

    www.ecy.wa.gov/drought/

    3 days ago – Washington State Weekly Drought Update – Office of Washington State … Current Snow Water Equivalent (SWE) % of Normal – View Map …

    ——————————————————–

    And more history…. a response from Ecology

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Marti, Jeff (ECY)

    To: pearl hewett

    Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 5:23 PM

    Subject: RE: History of Droughts in Washington State

    Pearl, good sleuthing.   1977 was indeed a bad drought year, which triggered the (still ongoing) Yakima water rights adjudication.

    Here’s a couple more reports that you might find interesting.

    Jeff

    ————————————

    Jeff Marti

    Water Resources Program

    360-407-6627

    jeff.marti@ecy.wa.gov

    2005 Drought Response Report to the Legislature

    www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0611001.html

    • 2005 Drought Response Report to the Legislature … While it is generally viewed as a climate anomaly, in fact drought is the dry part of the normal climate cycle.

    Drought Response 2001: Report to the Legislature

    www.ecy.wa.gov/biblio/0111017.html

    Author(s), Curt Hart. Description, This legislative report outlines how the state agencies responsible for managing Washington’s emergency drought activities .

    ——————————————————————————-

    History of Droughts in Washington State 1900 to 1977 etc…

    Title History of Droughts in Washington State
    Publication Type Report
    Year of Publication 1977
    Authors Staff, GAHEWEC
    Keywords climate, droughts, environment, historic, history, washington, water
    Title History of Droughts in Washington State
    Publication Type Report
    Year of Publication 1977
    Authors Staff, GAHEWEC
    Keywords climate, droughts, environment, historic, history, washington, water

     



  • Part (1) Who’s Planning Our Future?

    Part (1) Who’s Planning Our Future?

    NOT ONE SINGLE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES OF AMERICAN CITIZENS?

    http://openspacepugetsound.org/people-partners

    PEOPLE INVOLVED IN ROSS?  American Citizens? Not so much

    Who’s Paying for ROSS? American taxpayers, pretty much

    Where are they doing ROSS?  From Washington DC to Washington State

    APPOINTED GOVERNMENT INVOLVED IN ROSS? Up to their  eyeballs

    WHO’S INVESTING IN THE GREEN FUTURES MARKET?

    NON GOVERNMENT TAX EXEMPT ORGANIZATIONS?

    SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS?

    GLOBAL INVOLVEMENT? WATER INVOLVED? NATURAL RESOURCES?

    WHO’S 100-YEAR PLAN FOR  GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE?

    WHO’S REGIONAL PLAN TO ADVANCE GREEN URBANISM?

    ———————————————————–

    Part (1) Who’s Planning Our Future?

    NOT ONE SINGLE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE OF “WE THE PEOPLE”

    MENTIONED IN THE ROSS PLAN?

    Read it and weep.Of the People? By the People? For the People?

    Draw your own conclusions, Good? Bad? Ugly? Outrageous?

    http://openspacepugetsound.org/people-partners

    ————————–

    WHO IS ROSS?

    ————————————————-

    PEOPLE INVOLVED

    ROSS Project Team

    Nancy Rottle, ROSS Co-Director

    Director, Green Futures Research + Design Lab, University of Washington

    Nancy is a registered landscape architect with over fifteen years of leadership roles in professional practice and eight years teaching at the University of Washington. She has a wide range of practice experience including large scale GIS-based planning and has won numerous awards for research, planning and design. In 2005 she co-directed Open Space Seattle 2100, a planning process to develop a 100-year plan for Seattle’s green infrastructure.

    The University of Washington’s Green Futures Research + Design Lab is the organizational home to the ROSS.

    John Owen, ROSS Co-Director

    AIA, Partner, Makers Architecture, Planning and Urban Design

    John’s experience in urban design, regional and statewide planning spans decades. in that time he has helped the State prepare a new WAC for the Shoreline Management Act, and worked with the Puget Sound Regional Council to develop environmental management in addition to implementing numerous urban design strategies. In addition to his work at Makers, John provides leadership on the Watershed Open Space Strategies work of the ROSS

    Jeff Raker, ROSS Senior Planner

    Jeff has ten years of expertise in regional growth, transportation, and economic development planning. He has provided technical analysis; decision support; and policy development guidance on issues ranging from smart growth in rural areas and transit-oriented development to workforce development and “social capital” initiatives to improve access to cultural organizations. His Masters in Urban & Regional Planning from University of Greenwich & Saxion Universities of Applied Sciences explored the role of regional planning in advancing Green Urbanism. Jeff has led the development and coordination of the ROSS for the past three years

    Ginger Daniel, ROSS Planner – Regional Initiatives

    Ginger has over fifteen years of experience working for governments and non-governmental advocacy organizations to advance large-scale social and environmental change on international, national and local levels. With a Masters in Landscape Architecture from the University of Washington, she also brings green infrastructure planning and design expertise with a focus on social equity. Ginger oversees the ROSS’ open space services approach, regional task forces and communications work.

    Steve Whitney, ROSS Leadership

    As a Program Officer with the Bullitt Foundation, Steve focuses on the protection of natural capital and associated ecosystem services in the major metropolitan regions of the Pacific Northwest and Alaska. Prior to joining the Foundation, he spent fourteen years with The Wilderness Society first as director of its National Parks Program in Washington D.C., and later as Northwest Regional Director and Deputy Vice President. Under his direction, the Bullitt Foundation had been an anchor funder for the ROSS.

    Sue Abbott, ROSS Leadership

    Sue has worked with the National Park Service’s Rivers, Trails and Conservation (RTCA) program for over 20 years. Her work specializes in building coalitions and partnerships, designing public outreach strategies, facilitation, organizational development, community visioning, resource assessment, plan development and environmental education and stewardship. The National Park Service generously provides technical assistance to the ROSS project.

    Executive Committee

    Executive Committee Chair

    • Ron Sims, Puget Sound Partnership, Executive Committee

    Committee Members

    • Dave  Somers , Snohomish County, Councilmember
    • Elizabeth Babcock, National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, Natural Resource Specialist
    • Steve Whitney, The Bullitt Foundation, Program Officer
    • Michael Linde, National Park Service, RTCA Program Manager
    • Ron Shultz, Washington State Conservation Commission, Director of Policy
    • Barb Chamberlain, Bicycle Alliance of Washington, Executive Director
    • Kelly Mann, Urban Land Institute Northwest, Executive Director
    • Howard Frumkin, University of Washington School of Public Health, Dean
    • Kaleen Cottingham, Washington Recreation & Conservation Office, Director
    • Thatcher Bailey, Seattle Parks Foundation, Executive Director
    • Marc Daily, Puget Sound Partnership, Deputy Director
    • Jennifer Eberlien, United States Forest Service, Mt. Baker-Snoqualmie Forest Supervisor
    • Charlotte Garrido, Kitsap County, County Commissioner
    • Cynthia Welti, Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust, Executive Director
    • Joanna Grist, Washington Wildlife & Recreation Coalition, Executive Director
    • Joe Kane, Washington Association of Land Trusts, Vice President (Executive Director, Nisqually Land Trust)
    • Paul Kundtz, The Trust for Public Land, Washington State Director
    • Christie TRUE, King County Department of Natural Resources &Parks, Director
    • Dennis Canty, American Farmland Trust, Pacific Northwest Regional Director
    • Gene Duvernoy, Forterra, President
    • Brian Boyle, UW School of Forest Resources, NW Environmental Forum Leader
    • Terry Williams, Tulalip Tribes, Fisheries & Natural Resources Commissioner
    • Josh Baldi, WA Department of Ecology, Special Assistant to Director
    • David Fleming, Public Health Seattle-King County, Director
    • Ken Konigsmark, , Rural Resident & Conservation Specialist
    • Andrew Hayes, Washington State Department of Natural Resources, Alternate to Peter Goldmark
    • Ryan Dicks, Pierce County, Alternate to Pat McCarthy
    • Lisa Dulude, Snohomish County, Office of Energy & Sustainability
    • Tracy Stanton, Earth Economics, Policy Director & Program Leader

    Technical Advisory Committees (TACs)

    Role: Work Sessions & Targeted Strategy Development for Preliminary Comprehensive Strategy.

    Ecosystems Technical Advisory Committee

    Committee Co-Leads

    • Bob  Feurstenberg, King County, Co-lead
    • Critter Thompson, Independent, Co-lead

    Committee Members

    • George Blomberg, Port of Seattle
    • Gordon Bradley, University of Washington, School of Forest Resources
    • Taylor Carroll, Forterra
    • Dave Cook, Geoengineers
    • Nicole Faghin, Faghin Consulting
    • Keith Folkerts, Kitsap County Natural Resources Division
    • Abby Hook, Hook Knauer LLP
    • Peter Hummel, Anchor QEA
    • Mark Isaacson, King County Water and Land Resources Division
    • Gino Luchetti, King County Department of Natural Resources
    • Tom Murdoch, Adopt-a-Street Foundation
    • Susan O’Neil, Puget Sound Partnership
    • Doug Osterman, Puget Sound Partnership
    • James Rasmussen, Duwmamish River Cleanup Coalition
    • Elaine Somers, USEPA Region 10
    • Kari Stiles, Puget Sound Partnership
    • Jennifer  Thomas, Parametrix
    • Chris  Townsend, Puget Sound Partnership

    Rural and Resource Lands Technical Advisory Committee

    Committee Co-Leads

    • Lauren  Smith, King County Executive’s Office, Co-lead
    • Skip  Swenson, Forterra, Co-lead

    Committee Members

    • Melissa Campbell, PCC Farmland Trust
    • Ryan Dicks, Pierce County
    • Mary Embleton, Cascade Harvest Coalition
    • Leif Fixen, Snohomish Conservation District
    • Joy Garitone, Kistap Conservation District
    • Brock Howell, Futurewise
    • Joe Kane, Nisqually Land Trust
    • Kirk Kirkland, Pierce County Open Space Taskforce
    • Joan Lee, King County Rural and Regional Services Section
    • Bobbi Lindemulder, Snohomish Conservation District
    • Doug McClelland, Washington State Department of Natural Resources and Mountains to Sound Greenway
    • Jay Mirro, King Conservation District
    • Linda  Neunzig, Snohomish County Agricultural Services
    • Rene Skaggs, Pierce Conservation District
    • Sandra Staples-Bortner, Great Peninsula Conservancy
    • Dan Stonington, Northwest Natural Resource Group

    Recreation and Trails Technical Advisory Committee

    Committee Co-Leads

    • Jennifer  Knauer, Hook Knauer LLP, Co-lead
    • Amy  Shumann, Public Health – Seattle + King County, Co-lead

    Committee Members

      • Kevin Brown, King County Parks Division
      • Karen Daubert, Washington Trails Association
      • Martha Droge, National Park Service Pacific West Region
      • Jessica Emerson, King County DNRP
      • Robert Foxworthy, King County DNRP
      • Deborah Hinchey, University of Washington School for Public Health
      • John  Hoey, Trust for Public Land
      • Amalia Leighton, SVR Design
      • Ian  Macek, Washington Department of Transportation
      • Josh Miller, Bicycle Alliance of Washington
      • Jane  Moore, Washington Coalition of Promoting Physical Activity
      • Thomas O’Keefe, American Whitewater
      • Dennis Oost, Kitsap County
      • Chris Overdorf, Elm
      • Lisa  Quinn, Feet First
      • Kimberly Scrivner, Puget Sound Regional Council
      • Tom Teigen, Snohomish County Parks and Recreation
      • Diane Wiatr, City of Tacoma
      • Don Willot, North Kitsap Trails Association
      • James Yap, Snohomish County Parks and Recreation

    Urban and Community Technical Advisory Committee

    Committee Co-Leads Chair

    • Ben Bakkenta, Puget Sound Regional Council, Co-lead
    • Joe  Tovar, TovarPlanning, Co-lead

    Committee Members

    • Gordon  Bradley, University of Washington School of Envirionment and Forest Resources
    • Vicky Clarke, Kitsap Regional Coordinating Council
    • Dan Dewald, City of Bellevue
    • Leif Fixen, Snohomish Conservation District
    • Eric Hanson, Port of Seattle
    • Gwendolyn High, Washington Wildlife & Recreation Coalition
    • John  Hoey, Trust for Public Land
    • Mark  Hoppen, Snohomish Health District
    • Amalia Leighton, SVR Design
    • Joshua Monaghan, King County Conservation District
    • Chip Nevins, City of Seattle Parks Division
    • Rocky Piro, Puget Sound Regional Council
    • Andrea Platt-Dwyer, Seattle Tilth
    • Lauren  Smith, King County Executive’s Office
    • Sean Sykes, NAIOP Sustainable Development Committee
    • Chris Townsend, Puget Sound Partnership
    • Tim  Trohimovich, Futurewise
    • Alison VanGorp, Forterra
    • Julie West, Seattle and King County Public Health

    Regional Challenges Task Forces

    Climate Change Mitigation + Adaptation

    Task Force Chair

    • Rachel Gregg, EcoAdapt

    Task Force Members

    • Paul Fleming, Seattle Public Utilities
    • Hilary Franz, Futurewise
    • Bob Freitag, UW Institute of Hazards Mitigation Planning and Research
    • Lara Hansen, EcoAdapt
    • Lyn Keenan, GeoEngineers
    • Meade Krosby, University of Washington Climate Impacts Group
    • Keith Maw, Independent
    • Eileen Quigley, Climate Solutions
    • Jeff Rice, Puget Sound Institute
    • Nancy Rottle, University of Washington, Green Futures Research and Design Lab
    • Amy Snover, UW Climate Impacts Group
    • Tracy Stanton, Earth Economics
    • Jill Sterett, Sterett Consulting, LLC

    Biodiversity

    Task Force Co-chairs

    • Fred Koontz, Woodland Park Zoo, Co-chair
    • Abby Hook, Hook Knauer, Co-chair

    Task Force Members

    • Kitty Craig, The Wilderness Society
    • Keith Folkerts, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife
    • Josh Lawler, University of Washington
    • Lorna Smith, Western Wildlife Outreach
    • Kari Stiles, Puget Sound Partnership
    • Jennifer van der Hoof, King County
    • Jen Watkins, Conservation NW
    • Cynthia Wilkerson, Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

    Human Health

    • Brian Saelens, Seattle Childrens Research Institute, Co-Chair
    • Leann Andrews, University of Washington, Coordinator

    Task Force Members

    • Kathleen Wolf, UW School of Environmental & Forest Sciences Co-Chair
    • Branden Born, UW Department of Urban Design & Planning
    • Andrew Dannenberg, UW Environmental & Occupational Health Sciences
    • Barbara Wright, Public Health Seattle-King County

    Social Equity

    • Richard Gelb, King County Department of Natural Resources, Co-chair
    • Ginger Daniel, Regional Open Space Strategy, Staff Coordinator

    Contributors to date

    • Steve Hamai, Seattle Public Utilities,  Contributor
    • Rashad Morris, The Bullitt Foundation,  Contributor
    • Skye Schell, Forterra,  Contributor
    • Ben Bakenta, Puget Sound Regional Council,  Contributor

    Economic Development

    • Jeff Raker, Regional Open Space Strategy, Staff Coordinator

    Contributors to date

    • Henry Izumizaki, The Russelll Family Foundation, Contributor
    • Ken Konigsmark,  Contributor
    • Sarah Lee, Puget Sound Regional Council, Contributor
    • Doug Peters, WA Department of Commerce,  Contributor
    • Vikram Sahney, REI,  Contributor
    • Jason Thibideau, Puget Sound Regional Council,  Contributor

    Ecosystem Services and Regional Prioritization

    Committee Chair

    • Tracy Stanton, USFS Urban Waters Partnership, Committee Chair

    Committee Members

    • Dale Blahna, US Forest Service
    • Josh Baldi, WA Department of Ecology
    • David Batker, Earth Economics
    • Fletcher Beaudoin, PSU Institute for Sustainable Solutions & Cascadia Ecosystem Partnership
    • Mark Buckley, ECONorthwest
    • Ginger Daniel, Regional Open Space Strategy
    • Brent Davies, EcoTrust
    • Tom DeLuca, University of Washington
    • Zach Ferdana, The Nature Conservancy
    • Ricahrd Gelb, King County Department of Natural Resources
    • Anne Guerry, University of Washington
    • Kevin Halsey, EcoMetrix Solutions
    • William Labiosa, US Geological Survey
    • Josh Lawler, University of Washington
    • Sara O’Brien, Willamette Partnership
    • Jeff Raker, Regional Open Space Strategy
    • Scott Redman, Puget Sound Partnership
    • Elaine Somers, US Environmental Protection Agency – Region 10
    • Stephanie Suter, Puget Sound Partnership
    • Paula Swedeen, Swedeen Consulting
    • Brian Walsh, Puget Sound Partnership

    Governance and Finance

    Committee Listing, Coming Soon

    Puyallup-White Watershed Advisory Group

    • Leslie Ann Rose, Citizens for a Healthy Bay
    • Jennifer Arnold, Bonneville Environmental Foundation
    • Bryan Bowden, National Park Service
    • Dennis Canty, American Farmland Trust
    • Ryan Dicks, Pierce County Dept. of Sustainability
    • Kimberly Freeman, Pierce County
    • John Garner, Metro Parks & PC Biodiversity Network
    • Andrew  Hayes, Washington Department of Natural Resources
    • Colin Hume, WA Department of Ecology
    • Tom Kantz, Pierce County Surface Water Management
    • Kirk; Kirkland, Forever Green Council
    • Krystal Kyer, Tahoma Audubon
    • Russ; Ladley, Puyallup Tribe
    • Teresa Lewis, Pierce County
    • Ryan Mello, Pierce Conservation District
    • Jane Moore, Forever Green Council
    • Tristan Peter-Contesse, Puget Sound Partnership
    • Jordan Rash, Forterra
    • Lorin Reinelt, King Co. River & Floodplain Mgmt.
    • Dave Seabrook, Puyallup River Watershed Coalition
    • Marianne Seifert, Tacoma-Pierce County Health Dept.
    • Lisa Spurrier, Pierce County Watershed Services
    • Jeffrey; Thomas, Puyallup Tribe
    • Michelle Tirhi, Washington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife
    • Robert Warren, Bonneville Environmental Foundation
    • Sarah Wilcox, Pierce Conservation District

  • The Out of Town NGO’s Are Back

    The Out of Town NGO’s Are Back

    Funding for this work is provided by SURFRIDER FOUNDATION, PATAGONIA, Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, Rose Foundation and the Coastal Watershed Institute.

    WHO ARE THESE OUT OF TOWN Living on the Edge  NON-GOVERNMENT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS?

    WHY ARE THEY HERE?

    Big meeting? Landowner Update and Discussion?

    ———————————————————–

    WHO INVITED THEM? Who’s collaborating with them?

    AND WHO AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF COUNTY FUNDS FOR THIS?

    http://www.coastalwatershedinstitute.org/earthEconomics.pdf

    NATURE’S VALUE IN CLALLAM COUNTY: THE ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF FEEDER BLUFFS and 12 Other Ecosystems. Earth Economics: Tacoma, Washington (a 146 page document)

    EARTH ECONOMICS would like to thank all who contributed valuable information to this project: Anne Shaffer and Nicole Harris from the Coastal Watershed Institute, CATHY LEAR AND STEVE GRAY FROM CLALLAM COUNTY, Dave Parks from Department of Natural Resources, George Kaminsky and Heather Barron from Department of Ecology, Kathryn Neal from the City of Port Angeles, Clea Rome from the WSU Extension, Ian Miller from WA Seagrant and Helle Andersen, formerly of CWI

    We deeply appreciate those who helped review and edit this document, Donna J. Nickerson, Aaron Schwartz, CATHY LEAR, Anne Shaffer and Dave Parks

    ——————————————————————

    COASTAL WATERSHED INSTITUTE CWI IS A 501C3 NON-PROFIT

    EARTH ECONOMICS IS A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION

    ———————————————————————————

    WHAT DO THEY REALLY WANT?

    Behind My Back | Surfrider Foundation Wants?

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/07/14/surfrider-foundation/

    Jul 14, 2013 – The WE’S WHO WANT OUR WA STATE WAVES? THE WE’S WHO … ENTER Surfrider Foundation ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES. Surfrider …

    THE WAVES OF 18 COUNTRIES AROUND THE WORLD

    ———————————————————————

    THE CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE UPDATE IS A LOCAL PROCESS

    Why are THEY being given  an special SMP UPDATE before the first notification, publication, workshop, has been sent or given to the 3300 affected private shoreline property owners in Clallam County?

    WHO AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF COUNTY FUNDS FOR THIS?

    Why is Clallam County paying A COUNTY EMPLOYEE, our Taxpayer Dollars, TO GIVE THEM AN SPECIAL SMP UPDATE BEFORE NOTIFICATION OF THE AFFECTED CITIZENS?

    Clallam County will provide an update on the Shoreline Master Program (SMP)

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

    WHO ARE THESE OUT OF TOWN  NON-GOVERNMENT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS?

    Living on the Edge? OR ARE THEY LIVING ON THE FRINGE OF AGENDA 21?

    Landowner Update and Discussion?

    How much land do THEY own CLALLAM COUNTY?

    —————————————————————————————–

    Why do THEY keep showing up in OUR back yard? THEY Pretend to be living on the edge?

    THEY Pretend they represent, “US”  the 3300  VESTED CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS  AFFECTED BY THE CLALLAM COUNTY SHORELINE UPDATE.

    ———————————————————————————-

    THEY ARE NOT MY REPRESENTATIVES.

    THEY ARE THE CHOIR, THAT SINGS TO THE EPA, ECOLOGY, THE TRIBES, AND a plethora of PAID GOVERNMENT (including Clallam County) EMPLOYEES AND NGO SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS GLOBAL, AND OTHER, AND FOR-PROFIT CONSULTING GROUPS.

    ———————————————————————–

    And, Clallam County employees are in collaboration with THEM?

    —————————————————————————-

    AND? THEY ARE GOING ALL WORKING TOGETHER?  THEY ARE GOING TO DEFINE THE BEST STEWARDSHIP? AND? THEY ARE GOING PROVIDE LONG TERM MANAGEMENT ACTIONS? THEY ARE GOING TO PROTECT THE DUNGENESS FEEDER BLUFFS?

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

    OUR FAMILY HAS PROVIDED OVER 60 YEARS OF PRISTINE LONG TERM MANAGEMENT AND STEWARDSHIP ON OUR PRIVATE PROPERTY.

    OUR PRIVATE PRISTINE  SHORELINE FAMILY TRUST PROPERTY IS NONE OF THEIR BUSINESS.

    —————————————————————————————————

    BUT WOW, IF I GO TO THEIR MEETING?

    THEY ARE GOING TO GIVE ME A LANDOWNER UPDATE AND DISCUSSION

    THE CWI and collaborators, including Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Natural Resources and Ecology, North Olympic Land Trust, Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge, the Surfrider Foundation, and the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe are working together to define the best community stewardship and long term management actions to protect the Dungeness feeder bluffs.

    ——————————————————————————————

    THESE OUT OF TOWNER’S ARE ALL  coming here, to CLALLAM COUNTY WITH THEIR NGO AGENDA.

    ——————————————————————————————–

    WHO ARE THESE OUT OF TOWN  NON-GOVERNMENT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS?

    —————————————————————————————–

    Coastal Watershed Institute (CWI)

    CWI IS A SMALL 501C3 NON-PROFIT FIRST FORMED IN 1996. CWI’s goal is to advance protection of intact and critical natural ecosystems thru long-term wise ecosystem management, nearshore restoration at the ecosystem level, and mentoring our next generation of scientists and managers, and citizen partnerships. Over our careers we at CWI have learned that -without exception- what is good for the environment is good for community. CWI has also learned that saving what we have is best for the ecosystem and economy- so CWI emphasizes protection,. We also know that when we are restoring, true restoration must occur at the ecosystem level to be successful.. Our experience is also that the majority of the community – which is growing rapidly – wants to be wise stewards but need the tools to do so. Our work is extremely challenging. Preservation and restoration can take decades-and that bureaucratic and political challenges (sometimes significant) are not reasons to quit. In total our work is to link senior scientists, managers, and citizens to motivate for the best, not just the easiest, management actions and solutions. Our work is never ending and crosses generations. Collectively CWI senior scientists have hundreds of years of experience managing and researching the natural history of this region CWI engages these scientists with college students, citizens, and landowners on the ground to understand how our natural ecosystems function and how to protect them while training the next generation of managers and scientists. We bring science to management in a rural, and sometimes extremely conservative, but ecologically critical region of the Pacific Northwest. Top priority work for CWI include coordinating the Elwha Nearshore Consortium, a group of scientists, citizens, and managers dedicated to understanding and promoting the nearshore restoration associated with the Elwha dam removals, and conduct unique and critical research to understand and promote nearshore habitat function, and define how to protect the nearshore functions, including cross regional fish use of nearshore habitats, and the importance of Dungeness and Elwha feeder bluffs for surf smelt. CWI also regularly sponsor’s community forums on emerging and ongoing topics including Elwha nearshore science, management, and restoration, and net pen aquaculture. Nearshore ecosystem services are complex, compelling, and integral element of CWI’s work. We are honored to be a partner in this new frontier of ecosystem management

    ————————————————————————————————-

    Earth Economics

    EARTH ECONOMICS IS A NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION located in Tacoma, Washington, dedicated to researching and applying the economic

    solutions of tomorrow, today.Earth Economics provides robust, science-based, ecologically sound economic analysis, policy recommendations and tools to

    positively transform regional, national and international economics, and asset accounting systems. Working with leading ecologists, economists and modelers, we serve a large circle of businesses, non-profits, government agencies, policy makers and media channels with research, reports, presentations, workshops and investigations. Our goal is to help communities shift away from the failed

    economic policies of the past, towards an approach that is both economically viable and environmentally sustainable.Mission Statement: Earth Economics applies new economic tools and principles to meet challenges of the 21st century: achieving the

    need for just and equitable communities, healthy ecosystems, and sustainable economies.

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

    SO HERE IS YOUR  BIG INVITE

    (I called Jamie Michel 206-282-3025 no response)

    Press Release

    Date: December 5, 2014

    **For Immediate Release**

    FROM: COASTAL WATERSHED INSTITUTE, PO box 2263, Port Angeles www.coastalwatershedinstitute.org, 360.461.0799

    Contact: Jamie Michel, jamie.michel@coastalwatershedinstitute.org, 206-282-3025

    Living on the Edge

    Landowner Update and Discussion

    Tuesday January 27th, 2015

    6:00-8:00 pm at Dungeness Schoolhouse 2781 Towne Road, Sequim

    The Coastal Watershed Institute (CWI) and partners invite the community to a bluff management workshop the evening of 27 January 2015 at the historical Dungeness Schoolhouse from 6:00 – 8:00 pm.

    This workshop will provide an update to our ongoing work to understand and promote wise stewardship of this important region of the nearshore. CWI will provide an update on efforts including the development of a realtor funding pool for distressed landowners (see photo), and protection grants.

    Clallam County will provide an update on the Shoreline Master Program (SMP), and Washington Department of Natural Resources will present findings long term bluff erosion study just published. Staff from the Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge will provide details on their upcoming anniversary celebration in May.

    CWI and collaborators, including Washington Departments of Fish and Wildlife, Natural Resources and Ecology, AND THE NORTH OLYMPIC LAND TRUST,

    —————————————————————————————-

    UPDATE

    The Land Trust has completed its largest land conservation project ever! We are pleased to announce that we have purchased a 280-acre property just east of the Lyre River on the Strait of Juan de Fuca. This stunning property features the estuary at the mouth of the Lyre River, streams, wetlands, tidelands, kelp beds and bluff-backed beaches.   It also includes a large upland area with a diverse forest at various ages of growth,  Learn more ›  “The Land Trust has been working with community partners for years to conserve this property,” Planning is underway for the use of the property.  VISITORS WILL BE ABLE TO PARK ABOUT A MILE FROM THE BEACH and walk in from there. Visitors can enjoy DAY-USE activities such as birdwatching, wildlife viewing, surfing, picnicking, and beach walking. The area will be closed to all motor vehicles.

    THE USUAL? NO HORSES? NO RUNNING? NO JOGGING? NO BARKING?

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

    AND, Dungeness National Wildlife Refuge, the Surfrider Foundation, and the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe are working together to define the best community stewardship and long term management actions to protect the Dungeness feeder bluffs.

    The January 27th workshop will continue this dialogue between scientists, managers and bluff landowners on next steps for all of us to the benefit of our community and the environment. Join us!

    —————————————————————————————-

    The bottom line

    WHO INVITED THEM?

    Who’s collaborating with them?

    AND WHO AUTHORIZED PAYMENT OF COUNTY FUNDS TO COUNTY EMPLOYEES FOR THIS MEETINGS SMP PRESENTATION?

    Funding for this work is provided by Surfrider Foundation, Patagonia, Puget Soundkeeper Alliance, Rose Foundation and the Coastal Watershed Institute.


  • EPA RESTORATION OF PUGET SOUND

    IF THE EPA CALCULATES AND MANDATES THE COST OF AN UNFUNDED WA STATE RESTORATION “RAIN TAX” TO CLEAN UP PUGET SOUND?

    AT THE GOING EPA RATE OF $3,304,309.00 @ SQ MI FOR THE EPA MANDATED UNFUNDED RESTORATION OF CHESAPEAKE BAY, for the clean-up of 4479 sq mi of Chesapeake Bay.

    NO PROBLEM, PUGET SOUND (PER) PSP HAS ONLY 2500 SQ MI,

    IT WOULD ONLY BE $8,260,772,500.00  OVER  EIGHT BILLION DOLLARS

    FOR AN EPA UNFUNDED MANDATE “RAIN TAX” RESTORATION OF PUGET SOUND

    SIGN ARE POSTED AT THE KINGSTON FERRY TERMINAL

    THE HAND WRITING IS ON THE DOCK.

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

    Mar 21, 2014 – The people in Maryland are PROTESTING THE $14.8 BILLION DOLLAR RESTORATION “RAIN TAX” AN UNFUNDED AND MANDATED BY THE EPA FOR THE RESTORATION OF CHESAPEAKE BAY

    IN MARYLAND, CITIZENS HAVE, ONLY THREE THINGS ARE CERTAIN — DEATH, TAXES AND RAIN

    IN WASHINGTON STATE, CITIZENS HAVE, THINGS THAT ARE CERTAIN  DEATH,TAXES AND RAIN

    AND…  WOW,  

    922,000 acres of restricted public use and access in the WILD Olympic National Park, ONP UN Man and the Biosphere, ONP UN World Heritage Site, taxes, RAIN, fish, the Boldt decision, tribes, instream flows, $2.4 BILLION Dollar Federal Judgment for culverts for fish, 37 rivers in Washington  state designated as National Wild and Scenic, manipulated balding, breeding and seeding of endangered butterflies, reintroduction of endangered species, reintroduction of the sage grouse, critical areas for endangered species, (3) national monuments,San Juan Islands National Monument, Thanks to the Washington state house and senate for uniting to provide $65 million for the WWRP grant program AND ESRP has received and invested $26.5 million in state capital funds and an additional $2.5 million in federal partnership funds in restoration or protection projects.

    PATTY MURRAY WILL BE BACK FOR MORE WILDING IN WA STATE

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

    April 22, 2013 by Pearl Rains Hewett comment

    SHALL THE PEOPLE OF WA STATE START PROTESTING NOW?

    INDEED, TODAY IS APRIL 9, 2014

    WHEN SHALL THE PEOPLE OF WA STATE START PROTESTING?

    INDEED,SIGNS ARE POSTED AT THE KINGSTON FERRY TERMINAL

    THE HAND WRITING IS ON THE DOCK.

    ———————————————————————-

    MARYLAND LAWMAKERS FINALLY CONSIDER REPEALING

    THE SO-CALLED “RAIN TAX”

    www.theblaze.com/…/maryland-lawmakers-finally-consider-rep…

    TheBlaze

    Jan 22, 2014 – Maryland lawmakers in 2012 passed a bill to levy a fine on anything that prevented … meaning many state residents had no choice but to literally pay a tax on rain. … of the STORM WATER MANAGEMENT WATERSHED AND RESTORATION PROGRAM. … THE EPA ESTIMATED THAT THE PROJECT WOULD COST ROUGHLY $14.8 BILLION.


  • If Corporations Are Not People?

    What ARE  the GLOBAL NON- GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS OF non-profit, tax exempt, special interest, radical extremist groups that are suing, settling, manipulating, coercing and unduly influencing, to a very great extent, or to an excessive, improper, or unjustifiable degree, our federal, state and local elected government officials and appointed agencies?

    OUR SILENCE ENABLES THE COLLECTIVE US GOVERNMENT, APPOINTED AGENCIES AND PRESIDENTIAL EXECUTIVE ORDERS

    To litigate and legislate the middle class, vested, hard working American man and his family down the bottom less EPA ENVRIONMENTAL poverty hole with unfunded federal mandates from the Affordable Care Act, the Clean Water Act, The Clean Air Act, The Endangered Species Act and indeed The proposed UNFUNDED Wild Olympics Wilderness & Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 2014.

    THE UNITED STATE OF AMERICA IS IN AN ECONOMIC CRISIS $17,264,902,213.00 TRILLION DOLLARS IN DEBT,  NOT AN ENVIRONMENTAL CRISIS

    ———————————————————————————————

    Yes, they THE COLLECTIVE US  GOVERNMENT are smothering the goose that laid the gold egg.

    At every level of government in the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    The ways and means? call them what you will, by which the government takes  more of our taxpayer dollars in an endless manipulated quagmire of the U.S. governments incomprehensible fiscally irresponsible new math.

     At every level, they are heaping more and more  layers of financial oppression on to “we the people” using unfunded trickle down mandates, tax, sale tax, road tax, transit taxes, taxes to study, medical care, tolls, fees, services, taxes for schools,  gas we are being nickeled and dimed into poverty.

    —————————————————————————————–

    And, what are they doing with our tax dollars? Indeed, they are THROWING OUR MONEY  into the NGO and EPA environmental endangered, restoration, sue and settle  poverty hole

    They are giving and granting our tax dollars to Global NON-Government Organizations to  pay for sue and settlements, for  endangered species, purchase, restoration, manipulated balding and seeding land with endangered butterflies for land trusts, selling us out  and selling us off to land conservation groups, open spaces, millions and millions of dollars in grants to  every global non-profit environmental group  that sticks out their GREEN  hand out!

    And,  every dollar of taxpayer money spent for and given to these non-government organizations, IS IN DIRECT CONFLICT WITH THE ECONOMIC RECOVERY OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    the bottom line

    If corporations are not people?

    What SHALL WE CALL the GLOBAL NON- GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS OF non-profit, tax exempt, special interest, radical extremist groups that are suing, settling, manipulating, coercing and unduly influencing, to a very great extent, or to an excessive, improper, or unjustifiable degree, our federal, state and local elected government officials and appointed agencies?

    —————————————————————————————-

    If no one ever researches, documents and disseminates what Is going on?

    IF NO ONE EVER DEMANDS ACCOUNTABILITY FOR WHAT THE COLLECTIVE US GOVERNMENT IS DOING TO “WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE”?

    If no one ever makes anything they are doing to “We THE AMERICAN PEOPLE” a matter of public record?

     If no one publicly challenges them ?

    If no one publicly questions them?

    If no one publicly exposes them?

     Then, they, THE COLLECTIVE US  GOVERNMENT will continue to do what they have always done without being censored by anyone.

    THE COLLECTIVE US  GOVERNMENT will continue to be the somebody and the something that suppresses and controls everything that may offend or harm others.

     

     


  • “Sue and Settle Sucks”

    Estimates are $300-$500 Billion dollars in unfunded mandated COST to “We the People” for EPA SECRET “SUE-AND-SETTLE” deals, $300-$500 Billion dollars for JUST THE NEW RULES for The Clean Water Act and The Clean Air Act.

    Importantly, these new rules are not the outcome of legislation or rigorous scientific findings, but a DIRECT RESULT of a number of lawsuits with environmentalists

    In the past 3 years, the Administration has concluded approximately 60 settlements with special interest – 29 of these agreements bound EPA to make major policy changes. THE PLAINTIFFS IN THESE CASES ARE OFTEN THE VERY SAME REOCCURRING PLAYERS – THE SIERRA CLUB, NRDC, DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE, WILD EARTH GUARDIANS, AND CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY.
    ———————————————————————–
    Sen. Vitter on Sue and Settle
    Posted on December 9, 2013 7:14 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    Federal agencies, including the Fish and Wildlife Service and EPA, use SECRET “SUE-AND-SETTLE” deals to advance their radical environmental agenda WITHOUT ANY INPUT from those who will be affected, including states, local governments, and private citizens.
    ————————————————————–
    VITTER: Endangered Species Act’s hidden costs – Washington Times
    www.washingtontimes.com/news/…/ENDANGERED-SPECIES-ACTS-HIDDEN-COST…‎
    ——————————————————————————–
    $300-$500 BILLION DOLLARS FOR THE CLEAN WATER AND CLEAN AIR ACT AND MORE HIDDEN-COST…‎ FOR 757 NEW ENDANGERED SPECIES?
    —————————————————
    Behind My Back | How Big is Sue and Settle?
    www.behindmyback.org/2013/11/09/how-big-is-sue-and-settle/‎
    Nov 9, 2013 – HELLO CONGRESS ANYBODY HOME? September 9, 2011 – A FEDERAL JUDGE APPROVED THE LANDMARK 757 SPECIES LEGAL AGREEMENT …
    ————————————————————————————————-
    The Sue and Settle documents of TRUTH have been denied to 12 states by the EPA, they are NOT on the table.
    Twelve states are suing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for not complying with their PUBLIC-RECORDS requests for information on the implementation of …

    ———————————————————————————————————-
    My comment

    The Sue and Settle handwriting is a matter of record, , Global, Non-government, special interest groups have usurped the US Congress, the sovereignty of our states, the constitutional rights of the American People AND, TAKEN OVER THE RULE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN

    What is an American Grandmother so worried about?

    America in Crisis

    The credibility of the collective US Government

    The National Debt $17.2 Trillion Dollars

    The Obamacare debacle

    The Middle East 10 year war crisis

    The unresolved WA DC political scandals

    What ELSE really bothers me?

    Goggle behindmyback.org for the full text of “Sue and Settle Sucks”,
    more comments, media reports and Documentation.

    260 results (0.17 seconds)

    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 EPA’s War Against the States: States are supposed to lead in …
    capitalresearch.org/…/the-epas-war-against-the-states-states-are-supposed…‎

    In the preamble of THE CLEAN AIR ACT (1963), Congress declared that “air pollution prevention . . . at its source is the primary responsibility of STATES and local governments.” According to the opening of THE CLEAN WATER ACT (1972), “It is the policy of the Congress to recognize, preserve, and protect the primary responsibilities and RIGHTS OF STATES TO PREVENT, REDUCE, AND ELIMINATE POLLUTION.”

    Oct 7, 2013 – EPA TAKEOVERS OF STATE PROGRAMS ARE UP AN ASTONISHING 2750%. … Sue-and-settle is made possible primarily by the fact that the EPA has more … and “green” groups reached 48 sue and settle agreements, a 380% increase.

    Behind My Back | Sue and Settle up 380%
    www.behindmyback.org/2013/10/16/sue-and-settle-up-380/‎
    Oct 16, 2013 – The EPA HAD 48 SUE AND SETTLE AGREEMENTS during President Obama’s first term, representing A 380 PERCENT INCREASE from the …
    ————————————————————————————————-
    Under EPA secret “SUE-AND-SETTLE” deals

    The EPA unfunded mandated COST for the Clean Water Act and The Clean Air Act have been estimated to be $300-$500 Billion dollars a year dumped on the backs of “We the People” strangling economic growth and holding us back from prosperity.
    States are projecting BILLIONS IN COSTS under the threat of an EPA takeover of STATE WATER PROGRAMS.

    AND, the current BILLIONS IN EPA unfunded mandated COSTS for the EPA takeover of state water programs

    Does not reflect costs associated with controlling combined sewer and sanitary overflows or the implementation of the “Health Air Act”
    —————————————————————————————————–
    WHY IS THE US CHAMBER OF COMMERCE REPORTING ON
    SECRET “SUE-AND-SETTLE” deals ?
    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world’s largest business federation representing the interests of more than 3 million businesses of all sizes, sectors, and regions, as well as state and local
    chambers and industry associations

    SUE AND SETTLE – US Chamber of Commerce
    www.uschamber.com/sites/default/…/SUEANDSETTLEREPORT-Final.p…‎
    additional methodology and the development of a database of sue and settle cases. … The U.S. Chamber of Commerce undertook an investigation of the sue.
    —————————————————————————————————
    Is the DOJ ignoring Obama’s Executive order 13563?
    “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” provision
    provision (a) Regulations SHALL be adopted through a process that involves PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
    ——————————————————————————————————–
    What does the EPA have to hide?
    12 States Sue EPA over Clean Air Records – Governing
    www.governing.com/…/12-States-Sue-EPA-over-Clean-Air-Records.htm…‎
    Twelve states are suing the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for not complying with their PUBLIC-RECORDS requests for information on the implementation of …
    —————————————————————————————————
    THE BEST NEWS (full text on behindmyback.org)
    Sen. Vitter on Sue and Settle
    Posted on December 9, 2013 7:14 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    U.S. Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), top Republican on the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, has been scrutinizing the Obama Administration’s problems with transparency, specifically focusing on SECRET “SUE-AND-SETTLE” deals.

    The “sue and settle” maneuver that federal agencies, including the Fish and Wildlife Service and EPA, use to advance their radical environmental agenda
    That Administration officials will make with far-left environmental groups to enact unnecessary and burdensome regulations WITHOUT ANY INPUT FROM THOSE WHO WILL BE AFFECTED, INCLUDING STATES, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, AND PRIVATE CITIZENS.
    ————————————————————————————————-
    HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN GOING ON?
    UNITED STATES SENATE REPORT Clouded Waters – U.S. Senate …
    www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View…‎
    Jun 30, 2011 – UNITED STATES SENATE REPORT. Clouded Waters: A Senate Report Exposing the High Cost of EPA’s Water Regulations and Their Impacts …
    Importantly, these new rules are not the outcome of legislation or rigorous scientific findings, but a DIRECT RESULT of a number of lawsuits with environmentalists

    These charges aren’t exactly new. Industry groups and EPA critics have given A NAME TO THIS SPECIAL BRAND OF RULEMAKING. IT’S CALLED “SUE AND SETTLE.”

    ——————————————————————————
    Is the DOJ ignoring Obama’s Executive order 13563?
    Executive order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,”
    (a) Regulations SHALL be adopted through a process that involves PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
    ——————————————————————————————————-
    HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN GOING ON?
    UNITED STATES SENATE REPORT Clouded Waters – U.S. Senate …
    www.epw.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?FuseAction=Files.View…‎
    Jun 30, 2011 – UNITED STATES SENATE REPORT. Clouded Waters: A Senate Report Exposing the High Cost of EPA’s Water Regulations and Their Impacts …
    Us Senate report Clouded Waters
    Importantly, these new rules are not the outcome of legislation or rigorous scientific findings, but a DIRECT RESULT of a number of lawsuits with environmentalists
    The agreements to regulate often DID NOT INCLUDE any meaningful opportunity
    for input from state and local entities
    ————————————————————————————–
    States are projecting BILLIONS IN COSTS under the threat of an EPA takeover of
    state water programs
    —————————————————————————————————-
    MORE NEWS? UPDATE NEEDED?
    Judge: EPA Exceeded Authority Trying To Regulate Stormwater Runoff As Pollutant
    A federal judge has ruled that the Environmental Protection agency exceeded its authority by The judge agreed with Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli, who argued that the EPA was trying to regulate water itself as a pollutant.
    In his ruling, O’Grady said:
    “Stormwater runoff is not a pollutant, so EPA is not authorized to regulate it.” attempting to regulate stormwater runoff into a Fairfax County creek as a pollutant.
    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/01/03/court-stormwater-runoff-not-a-pollutant-epa-cant-regulate-it/#ixzz2nIx4EdeJ
    ——————————————————————————————————-
    Maryland’s $14.8 BILLION DOLLAR EPA MANDATED, UNFUNDED, RAIN TAX

    PER RESPONSE FROM SENATOR MARIA CANTWELL SEPT. 24, 2013
    EPA Sued and Settled

    Posted on November 3, 2013 12:02 pm by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment
    Indeed the EPA was sued, the EPA settled and
    Sen. Maria Cantwell documented that the “sue and settle” legal settlement and rule created by and for the epa unfunded mandate did result in the $14.8 billion dollar Maryland rain tax.
    was not a result of legislation by congress, but was in fact caused by an EPA settlement.
    Thank you for contacting me about federal stormwater standards. I appreciate hearing from you on this important matter.

    FOLLOWING A 2010 LEGAL SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE EPA AND THE CHESAPEAKE BAY FOUNDATION (FOWLER V. EPA),
    THE EPA AGREED TO CREATE A NEW FEDERAL STORMWATER RULE.
    The RULE will create performance standards for stormwater discharges at both newly developed and redeveloped sites, broaden the EPA’s oversight of Chesapeake Bay stormwater permits and set a standard for the total maximum daily discharge.

    The RULE will also potentially increase the number of cities regulated as Municipal Separate Storm Sewer Systems, which can include underground pipes, roads with drainage pipes, gutters and ditches. Prior to developing the proposed stormwater rules, the EPA sought input from stakeholders in public forums. The EPA expects to finalize the RULE by December 10, 2014.
    Following a 2010 legal settlement between the EPA and the Chesapeake Bay Foundation (Fowler v. EPA), the EPA agreed to create a new federal stormwater rule.
    ———————————————————————————————

    Excerpt from “Clouded Waters”
    Importantly, these rulemakings are not the result of legislation or the outcome of scientific findings. Instead, these are the result of lawsuits by environmentalists and represent changes in long-held EPA positions, making discretionary duties non-discretionary. Additionally, in a rush to regulate, EPA is moving ahead without solid science and with no input from the communities who will shoulder the costs.

    Limited state and federal assistance leaves many communities with few options other than to pass the extra costs of these programs and mandates onto residents, and the benefits of regulation do not outweigh the costs.
    As this report also shows, they will likely be significant pain for little, if any environmental gain

    The law’s fiscal policy note pegs the price tag for implementing the program at $14.8 billion.
    The law’s fiscal policy note pegs the price tag for implementing the Maryland program at $14.8 billion.
    Notes: Exhibit does not reflect costs associated with controlling combined sewer and sanitary overflows or the implementation of the “Health Air Act”
    ———————————————————————————————————-
    As Gazzette columnist Blair Lee notes, the law is not so firm on where the money can be spent. In addition to funding stream and wetlands protection, a great deal of the tax revenue will flow into the bureaucratic maw for monitoring and inspection. Also, like the carbon pork in Maryland’s Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative law taxpayer dollars from the rain tax will flow into the hands of the environmental groups that lobbied for the law, for “outreach” and “education.”

    ————————————————————————————————-
    Presidential Documents
    Executive Order 12866, “Regulatory Planning and Review,” 58 Fed. Reg. 51735 (Oct. 4, 1993), as
    supplemented by Executive Order 13563, “Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review,” 76 Fed. Reg. 3821
    (Jan. 21, 2011).
    FEDERAL REGISTER
    Vol. 76, No. 14
    Friday, January 21, 2011
    Title 3—
    The President
    Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011
    Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review
    Sec. 2.
    PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.
    (a) Regulations SHALL be adopted through a process that involves PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. To that end, regulations shall be based, to the extent feasible and consistent with law, ON THE OPEN EXCHANGE OF INFORMATION and perspectives among State, local, and tribal officials, ex¬perts in relevant disciplines, affected stakeholders in the private sector, and the public as a whole.
    (b)
    To promote that open exchange, each agency, consistent with Executive
    Order 12866 and other applicable legal requirements, shall endeavor to
    PROVIDE THE PUBLIC with an opportunity to participate in the regulatory
    process. To the extent feasible and permitted by law, each agency SHALL
    AFFORD THE PUBLIC A MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT through the Internet on any proposed regulation, with a comment period that should generally
    be at least 60 days.
    —————————————————————————————————–
    Inserted for clarity
    June 28, 2012 |
    9:00am in 2203 Rayburn House Office Building
    THE OVERSIGHT AND GOVERNMENT REFORM COMMITTEE has focused a significant amount of attention this Congress on the red tape that is strangling economic growth and holding us back from prosperity.
    At today’s hearing, we will continue this inquiry by examining the highly questionable practice perfected by THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY – KNOWN AS “SUE AND SETTLE,” which has emboldened the Administration to pursue an aggressive green agenda while escaping political accountability for the cost and burdens these regulations impose on job creators.
    In the past 3 years, the Administration has concluded approximately 60 settlements with special interest – 29 of these agreements bound EPA to make major policy changes. THE PLAINTIFFS IN THESE CASES ARE OFTEN THE VERY SAME REOCCURRING PLAYERS – THE SIERRA CLUB, NRDC, DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE, WILD EARTH GUARDIANS, AND CENTER FOR BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY.

    But let us be clear – What EPA claims the law requires them to do is nothing more than what EPA has agreed to do in A COLLUSIVE ARRANGEMENT WITH SPECIAL INTEREST ALLIES. These arrangements are fundamentally unfair, lack transparency, are DESIGNED TO CIRCUMVENT other regulatory checks CONGRESS HAS PUT IN PLACE. environmental regulations only work when they are made in an open process that involves all stakeholders. SUE-AND-SETTLE RULEMAKING is an affront to that process.
    —————————————————————————————

    Executive Order 13563 of January 18, 2011 continued

    To the extent feasible and permitted by law, each
    AGENCY SHALL ALSO PROVIDE, for both proposed and final rules, timely online access to the rulemaking docket on regulations.gov, including relevant sci¬entific and technical findings, in an open format that can be easily searched and downloaded. For proposed rules, such access SHALL INCLUDE, to the extent feasible and permitted by law, AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT on all pertinent parts of the rulemaking docket, including relevant scientific and technical findings
    (c)
    Before issuing a notice of proposed rulemaking, each agency, where
    feasible and appropriate, shall seek the views of those who are likely to
    be affected, including those who are likely to benefit from and those who
    are potentially subject to such rulemaking.
    Sec. 3.
    Integration and Innovation.
    Some sectors and industries face a signifi¬cant number of regulatory requirements, some of which may be redundant, inconsistent, or overlapping. Greater coordination across agencies could re¬duce these requirements, thus reducing costs and simplifying and harmo¬nizing rules. In developing regulatory actions and identifying appropriate approaches, each agency shall attempt to promote such coordination, sim¬
    plification, and harmonization. Each agency shall also seek to identify, as
    appropriate, means to achieve regulatory goals that are designed to promote
    innovation.
    Sec. 4.
    Flexible Approaches.
    Where relevant, feasible, and consistent with
    regulatory objectives, and to the extent permitted by law, each agency shall
    identify and consider regulatory approaches that reduce burdens and main¬tain flexibility and FREEDOM OF CHOICE FOR THE PUBLIC. These approaches
    include warnings, appropriate default rules, and DISCLOSURE REQUIREMENTS
    AS WELL AS PROVISION OF INFORMATION TO THE PUBLIC IN A FORM THAT IS CLEAR AND INTELLIGIBLE
    Sec. 5.
    Science.
    Consistent with the President’s Memorandum for the Heads
    of Executive Departments and Agencies, ‘‘Scientific Integrity’’
    (March 9, 2009), and its implementing guidance, each agency SHALL ensure the objectivity of any scientific and technological information and processes used to support the agency’s regulatory actions.
    Sec. 6.
    Retrospective Analyses of Existing Rules.
    (a) To facilitate the periodic review of existing significant regulations, agencies shall consider how best to promote retrospective analysis of rules that may be outmoded, ineffective, insufficient, or EXCESSIVELY BURDENSOME, and to modify, streamline, expand, OR REPEAL THEM in accordance with what has been learned. Such retrospective analyses, including supporting data, should be released online whenever possible.
    (b)
    Within 120 days of the date of this order, each agency shall develop
    and submit to the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs a preliminary
    plan, consistent with law and its resources and regulatory priorities, under
    which the agency will periodically review its existing significant regulations
    to determine whether any such regulations should be modified, streamlined,
    expanded, OR REPEALED SO AS TO MAKE THE AGENCY’S REGULATORY PROGRAM MORE EFFECTIVE OR LESS BURDENSOME in achieving the regulatory objectives.

    ———————————————————————————

    Sue and Settle – The Growing Problem of Closed-Door Rulemaking …
    www.jdsupra.com/…/sue-and-settle-the-growing-problem-of-16599/‎
    Apr 8, 2013 – So-called “sue and settle” tactics are becoming an increasingly … the accelerated timelines can afford little or no opportunity for review of new …
    ———————————————————–

    SUE AND SETTLE – US Chamber of Commerce
    www.uschamber.com/sites/default/…/SUEANDSETTLEREPORT-Final.p…‎
    additional methodology and the development of a database of sue and settle cases. ….. with no participation by other affected parties or the public.12 ….. states an estimated $2.16 billion over and above what they had been prepared to spend …
    —————————————————————————————————–
    12 states sue EPA over agency’s alleged ‘sue and settle’ tactics
    Fox News ^ | July 17, 2013/
    ————————————————————————————————-
    States Investigate EPA’s “Sue-and-Settle” Practice – ACOEL
    www.acoel.org/…/States-Investigate-EPAs-Sue-and-Settle-Practice.aspx‎
    Jan 15, 2013 – At issue is the EPA’s practice of entering into voluntary settlements of … public participation and judicial review; (ii) how billions of dollars in added costs … Tags: EPA, SUE-AND-SETTLE, OFF-RAMP RULEMAKING, COLLUSIVE SETTLEMENTS.
    Chamber of Commerce Senior Vice President William Kovacs said at yesterday’s hearing that sue and settle is the vehicle by which EPA has instituted at least 16 rules in recent years, including such controversial regulations as New Source Performance Standards for greenhouse gas emissions from electric utilities and refineries; revisions to the definition of solid waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act; and Clean Air Act regulations on oil and gas drilling operations.
    Kovacs said, the Treasury Department’s Justice Fund is set up in such a way that information on who and how much money is paid in the settlement process is not disclosed.
    http://www.nytimes.com/gwire/2011/07/15/15greenwire-house-republicans-accuse-epa-enviros-of-collus-69925.html
    House Republicans Accuse EPA, Enviros of Collusion
    By JOHN MCARDLE of Greenwire

    Published: July 15, 2011
    ———————————————————————————————————–
    What Do SECRET “SUE-AND-SETTLE” deals have to do with the Dodd Frank Act?
    Dodd-Frank Act Regulatory Reform Rules – Federal Reserve Bank of …
    www.stlouisfed.org › Banking‎
    Dodd-Frank Act Regulatory Reform Rules. A roadmap for tracking the rulemaking process from start to finish?
    President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act into law. yet another landmark piece of legislation putting the middle class ABOVE THE SPECIAL INTERESTS? THAT FOR SO LONG HAD A STRANGLEHOLD ON AMERICA’S GOVERNMENT?
    GO FIGURE?
    Quayle says that more sue and settle regulations could come out of the Dodd-Frank financial regulatory law, which has already missed a series of regulatory deadlines.


  • To Kilmer on Forest Plan

    The Bottom line
    How will your Olympic Peninsula Collaborative plan work?
    Are you confident that the US Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution has achieved a National Forest System Land Management Planning Rule that will satisfy the conflict “We the people” have with the NGO Environmental Groups?

    The formation of your new partnership is called the Olympic Peninsula Collaborative.

    Can you give the specific “Collaboration Process” that will be used in the context of this partnership?

    Page 21254
    Public Participation: Requirements for public participation (including collaboration) have not changed between the proposed and final rules?

    Please define exactly what collaboration is required in and for public participation?

    Page 21189
    Comments: Collaboration costs.Many respondents supported public participation opportunities in the decision making process. Some respondents felt collaboration will not be cost effective. Some felt that coordination, as mandated by law, is effective and will save time and expense in planning, implementation, and management. They said increased costs for collaboration are foreseeable.

    How was this resolved?

    This is page 21270 definition?
    Collaboration or collaborative process.A structured manner in which a collection of people with diverse interests share knowledge, ideas, and resources while working together in an inclusive
    and cooperative manner toward a common purpose.

    Please explain? Collaboration, in the context of this part, falls within the full spectrum of public engagement described in the Council on Environmental Quality’s publication of October, 2007: Collaboration in NEPA
    —————————————————————————————-

    http://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5362536.pdf

    DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
    Forest Service
    36 CFR Part 219 RIN 0596–AD02
    National Forest System Land Management Planning
    AGENCY Forest Service, USDA.
    ACTION: Final rule and record of decision

    The 2012 planning rule was published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2012 and became effective on May 9, 2012, 30 days following publication.

    Page 21162 Federal Register / Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations
    Thru Page 21276 Federal Register/ Vol. 77, No. 68 / Monday, April 9, 2012 / Rules and Regulations

    115 pages of National Forest System Land Management Planning

    This planning rule sets forth process and content requirements to guide the development,
    amendment, and revision of land management plans to maintain and restore
    NFS land and water ecosystems while providing for ecosystem services and multiple uses.
    The planning rule is designed to ensure that plans provide for the sustainability
    of ecosystems and resources; meet the need for forest restoration and
    conservation, watershed protection, and species diversity and conservation;

    AND LAST, BUT NOT LEAST

    TO ASSIST THE AGENCY IN PROVIDING A SUSTAINABLE FLOW OF BENEFITS, SERVICES, AND USES OF NFS LANDS THAT PROVIDE JOBS AND CONTRIBUTE TO THE ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY OF COMMUNITIES.
    —————————————————————————————

    PART 219—PLANNING
    Subpart A—National Forest System Land
    Management Planning
    Sec.
    219.1 Purpose and applicability.
    219.2 Levels of planning and responsible officials.
    219.3 Role of science in planning.
    ———————————————————-
    This concerns me?
    219.4 Requirements for public participation.
    ———————————————————–
    219.5 Planning framework.
    219.6 Assessment.
    219.7 New plan development or plan revision.
    219.8 Sustainability.
    219.9 Diversity of plant and animal communities.
    219.10 Multiple use.
    219.11 Timber requirements based on the NFMA.
    219.12 Monitoring.
    219.13 Plan amendment and administrative changes.
    219.14 Decision document and planning records.
    219.15 Project and activity consistency with the plan.
    219.16 Public notifications.
    219.17 Effective dates and transition.
    219.18 Severability.
    219.19 Definitions.

    ——————————————————————–
    219.10 Multiple use.
    The management of all the various renewable surface resources of the NFS so that they are utilized in the combination that will best meet the needs of the American people…
    without impairment of the productivity of the land, with consideration being given to
    the relative values of the various resources, and not necessarily the combination of uses that will give the greatest dollar return or the greatest unit output, consistent with the Multiple-
    Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 (16 U.S.C. 528–531).
    ————————————————————————————-
    ECOLOGICAL PRODUCTIVITY?
    The capacity of NFS lands and their ecological systems to provide the various renewable resources in certain amounts in perpetuity. For the purposes of this subpart, productivity is an ECOLOGICAL term, PRODUCTIVITY, not an ECONOMIC term.

    ————————————————————————————————–

    Overall Collaboration and Public Involvement Strategy
    The Forest Service partnered with the US Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution to gather input from various stakeholders on how to build the best possible collaboration and public involvement strategy for the planning rule. (The Institute is a program of the Udall Foundation, an independent federal program based in Tucson, Arizona.) Using what we heard from those interviews, we worked with the Institute to design a comprehensive collaborative strategy for the rulemaking process.

    http://www.fs.usda.gov/main/planningrule/collaboration
    COLLABORATION & PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT

    The Forest Service began the planning rule revision process with a commitment to developing a new planning rule that would endure over time. We utilized a transparent and participatory method to accomplish this effort. The 2012 planning rule requires collaboration throughout the planning process.
    This new rule was developed using an open collaborative process, and was refined by nearly 300,000 public comments that were received in response to the proposed rule and draft environmental impact statement. These comments were in addition to the 26,000 comments to the Notice of Intent, which also refined the development of the proposed rule.
    In addition to public comments, the rulemaking process was enhanced by a science forum, regional and national roundtables, national and regional tribal roundtables, Tribal consultation meetings, national and regional public forums, Forest Service employee feedback, and comments posted to the Planning Rule blog. The agency considered all feedback received through these efforts, and used public input, science, and agency expertise to develop the 2012 planning rule.
    Detailed information on the collaboration and public involvement process can be found on the Overall Collaboration and Public Involvement Strategy webpage.
    ——————————————————————————————-
    Overall Collaboration and Public Involvement Strategy

    The Forest Service partnered with the US Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution to gather input from various stakeholders on how to build the best possible collaboration and public involvement strategy for the planning rule.

    (The Institute is a program of the Udall Foundation, an independent federal program based in Tucson, Arizona.) Using what we heard from those interviews, we worked with the Institute to design a comprehensive collaborative strategy for the rulemaking process. We have used this strategy to identify the following inter-related collaborative activities:
    —————————————————————————————————
    Next Steps and How to Stay Involved
    The 2012 planning rule was published in the Federal Register on April 9, 2012 and became effective on May 9, 2012, 30 days following publication. There are ways for the public to stay engaged in the planning process throughout implementation of the planning rule:
    • Federal Advisory Committee: In January 2012 the Secretary announced a new Federal Advisory Committee to advise the Chief and Secretary on implementation of the planning rule. A total of 21 members were selected. The committee began meeting in September 2012; all committee meetings are open to the public.
    • Directives: The Forest Service is currently developing a set of planning directives to provide further guidance on implementation of the planning rule; the public will have an opportunity to review and comment on those directives.

    • Plan Revisions: A number of national forests and grasslands have begun plan revisions. As individual units begin to implement the planning rule of 2012 and revise their forest plans, we encourage the public to become involved and provide input throughout the planning process on individual forest units.

    Features
    Overall Collaboration and Public Involvement Strategy?

    The Bottom line
    How will your Olympic Peninsula Collaborative plan work?
    Are you confident that the US Institute for Environmental Conflict Resolution has achieved a Rule that will satisfy the conflict “We the people” have with the NGO Environmental Groups?
    .
    The collaboration strategy for the development of a new planning rule has consisted of national and regional roundtables, a science forum, national and regional public forums, and tribal consultation. Click the above link for further information on this effort.

    Tribal Relations
    In addition to government to government consultation, the Forest Service invited Tribes to participate in the collaborative process for the development of a new National Forest Planning Rule. Visit the Overall Collaboration and Public Involvement Strategy webpage for further information.

    Thank You,
    Pearl Rains Hewett
    A concerned American Grandmother


  • The Nature Conservancy

    A RED FLAG WARNING FROM PEARL REVERE. EPA’s Secret And Costly ‘Sue And Settle’ Collusion “stewards from THE NATURES CONSERVANCY.. THE NATURES CONSERVANCY COLLABORATE with government
    ——————————————————-

    …THE NATURES CONSERVANCY is back for more Public Hearing in Grays Harbor County

    ON TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 12TH, AT 6:00PM, QUEETS CLEARWATER SCHOOL WILL BE HOSTING A PUBLIC MEETING TO HEAR WHAT “THE NATURE CONSERVANCY” VIEWS ARE
    ————————————————————–
    Sue and Settle – Hawaii Free Press
    www.hawaiifreepress.com/…/lsquoSue-and-Settlersquo-Secret-backroom…‎
    Jul 26, 2013 – Sue and Settle process has left Hawaii burdened with an EPA mandated ‘Regional … as tools to shut down the development of our country’s natural resources and, incidentally, destroy jobs. ….. Inside THE NATURES CONSERVANCY
    —————————————————–
    Behind My Back | Goliath’s Green Consortiums
    www.behindmyback.org/category/goliaths-green-consortiums/‎
    Oct 12, 2013 – EPA’s Secret And Costly ‘Sue And Settle’ Collusion With … ….. “stewards from THE NATURES CONSERVANCYCOLLABORATE with government …

    ———————————————————–
    Behind My Back | Politically Motivated
    www.behindmyback.org/category/politically-motivated/‎
    Oct 10, 2013 – By Stephen Moore: Using ‘Sue and Settle’ to Thwart Oil and Gas Drillers …… It did not sit well with a member of THE NATURES CONSERVANCY
    ——————————————————————-
    Behind My Back | Diverting Our Tax Dollars
    www.behindmyback.org/category/diverting-our-tax-dollars/‎
    Oct 10, 2013 – By Stephen Moore: Using ‘Sue and Settle’ to Thwart Oil and Gas Drillers ….. The Seattle Foundation | THE NATURES CONSERVANCY in Washington
    Behind My Back | Goliath’s Fish Consortium
    ————————————————————————
    www.behindmyback.org/category/goliaths-fish-consortium/‎
    Oct 10, 2013 – By Stephen Moore: Using ‘Sue and Settle’ to Thwart Oil and Gas Drillers …. “stewards from THE NATURES CONSERVANCY COLLABORATE with …

    —– Original Message —–
    From: Karl Spees
    To:
    Sent: Monday, October 28, 2013 10:35 AM
    Subject:THE NATURES CONSERVANCY is back for more Public Hearing in Grays Harbor County

    more land sir? (aka david copperfield in a dickens novel)

    Sorry, guys, I will be out of state for this one. I encourage you to go stand ground and keep this God-given land for it’s purpose…..man’s stewardship, not worship.
    You guys are awesome! Be there if you can.
    T

    The View link worked on my computer.
    The Open Link came up in code.


  • The Departure of Justice

    IN ALL OF THE SUE AND SETTLE CASES the Chamber found, the Department of Justice represented the agency. Virtually all lawsuits against federal agencies are handled by U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE attorneys.

    SUE AND SETTLE – US Chamber of Commerce
    www.uschamber.com/sites/default/…/SUEANDSETTLEREPORT-Final.p…‎
    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is the world’s largest business federation …… 33 See Clouded Waters: A Senate Report Exposing the High Cost of EPA’s Water …

    ——————————————————————

    A NUMBER OF EPA (SUE AND SETTLE) LAWSUITS WITH ENVIRONMENTALISTS
    SIERRA CLUB
    WILDEARTH GUARDIANS
    CENTER OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
    KENTUCKY ENVIRONMENTAL FOUNDATION
    ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED RESIDENTS
    DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE
    ———————————————————————
    A dozen states sue EPA over FOIA stonewalling | The Daily Caller
    dailycaller.com/2013/07/…/a-dozen-states-sue-epa-over-foia-stonewallin…‎
    Jul 17, 2013 – After months of haggling, 12 states are suing the Environmental Protection Agency to compel them to release documents related to the …

    The states asked for EPA communications with environmental groups — including GREENPEACE, Defenders of Wildlife, WildEarth Guardians and the Sierra Club — all of which engaged in SUE-AND-SETTLE lawsuits to control the EPA’s enforcement of the Regional Haze program, critics say.

    Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/07/17/a-dozen-states-sue-epa-over-foia-stonewalling/#ixzz2hXRZuQUy

    ————————————————————

    EPA’s Secret And Costly ‘Sue And Settle’ Collusion With … – Forbes
    www.forbes.com/…/epas-secret-and-costly-sue-and-settle-collusion-with-…‎
    Feb 17, 2013 – Sadly, and alarmingly, this all falls far short of what would logically be expected from that “most transparent administration in history” we were …

    —————————————————————–
    12 states sue EPA over agency’s alleged ‘sue and settle’ tactics | Fox …
    www.foxnews.com/…/oklahoma-11-other-states-sue-epa-over-sue-and-se…‎
    Jul 17, 2013 – Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt and the attorneys general of 11 other states sued the Environmental Protection Agency Tuesday …
    —————————————————————–
    Behind My Back
    www.behindmyback.org/‎
    2 days ago – 33 See CLOUDED WATERS: A Senate Report Exposing the High Cost … THE U.S. CHAMBER OF COMMERCE thanks William Yeatman, assistant …
    ——————————————————————-

    The bottom line
    Indeed, “We the People” shall demand answers…
    Who is ULTIMATELY responsible for this?

    “DEPARTURE FROM JUSTICE”

    ——————————————————————–
    TWO US GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT PRACTICE (by definition, to perpetrate something morally bad such as deceit or cruelty) TURNING “SUE AND SETTLE” DISCRETIONARY RULE MAKING AUTHORITY INTO MANDATORY DUTIES.

    THE (EPA) ENVRIONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
    THE (DOI) DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    —————————————————————-
    HISTORY
    (excerpts from) Memorandum on Department Policy Regarding Consent Decrees and Settlement
    National Archives and Records Administration Record Group 60, Department of Justice Files of Stephen Galebach, 1985-1988 Accession 060-89-1,
    ——————————————————————-
    Where such discretionary power was committed to him (THE AGENCY) BY CONGRESS OR THE CONSTITUTION to respond to changing circumstances.
    ——————————————————————
    Such proposed departure must be submitted for the approval of the
    Attorney General The settlement agreement signed, with a concise statement of the case and of reasons WHY DEPARTURE FROM THESE GUIDELINES will not tend to undermine their force AND,

    IS CONSISTENT WITH THE CONSTITUTIONAL PREROGATIVES OF THE EXECUTIVE OR THE LEGISLATIVE BRANCHES
    ———————————————————————

    Written approval of the Attorney General, the Deputy Attorney General, or the Associate Attorney General will be required to authorize departure from these guidelines

    ———————————————————————

    (excerpts from) ( US SENATE REPORT “CLOUDED WATERS) Importantly, these new rules

    ARE NOT THE OUTCOME OF LEGISLATION
    or rigorous scientific findings,

    BUT A DIRECT RESULT OF A NUMBER OF LAWSUITS WITH ENVIRONMENTALISTS
    The agreements to regulate often DID NOT INCLUDE any meaningful opportunity for input from state and local entities
    ——————————————————————–
    (excerpts from) http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/reports/SUEANDSETTLEREPORT-Final.pdf

    HISTORY
    The sue and settle problem dates back at least to the 1980s. In 1986, Attorney General Edward Meese III issued a
    Department of Justice policy memorandum, referred to as the “Meese Memo,” addressing the problematic use of consent
    decrees and settlement agreements by the government, including the agency practice of turning discretionary rulemaking
    authority into mandatory duties.
    See Meese,

    Memorandum on Department Policy Regarding Consent Decrees and Settlement

    Agreements (March 13, 1986).17 5 U.S.C. Subchapter II.18 Sam Batkins, American Action Forum, “President Obama’s $488 Billion Regulatory Burden” (September 19, 2012).19Id.Mr. Batkins estimates the regulatory burden added by EPA in 2012 alone to be $12.1 billion
    —————————————————————-
    WHO ARE THEY?

    A NUMBER OF (SUE AND SETTLE) LAWSUITS WITH ENVIRONMENTALISTS
    SIERRA CLUB
    WILDEARTH GUARDIANS
    CENTER OF BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
    ENVIRONMENTAL DEFENSE FUND
    KENTUCKY ENVIRONMENTAL FOUNDATION
    ASSOCIATION OF IRRITATED RESIDENTS
    DEFENDERS OF WILDLIFE
    ADD GREENPEACE
    ——————————————————————-

    http://www.uschamber.com/sites/default/files/reports/SUEANDSETTLEREPORT-Final.pdf
    SEVERAL ENVIRONMENTAL ADVOCACY GROUPS have made the SUE AND SETTLE process a significant part of their legal strategy. By filing lawsuits covering significant EPA rulemakings and regulatory initiatives, and then quickly settling, these groups have been able to circumvent the normal rulemaking process and effect immediate regulatory action with the consent of the agencies themselves.

    Virtually all lawsuits against federal agencies are handled by
    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE attorneys. In all of the SUE AND SETTLE cases the Chamber found, the Department of Justice represented the agency
    ——————————————————————
    The bottom line
    Indeed, “We the People” shall demand answers…
    Who is ULTIMATELY responsible for this?

    DEPARTURE FROM JUSTICE
    ——————————————————————

    See, e.g.
    , 75 Fed. Reg. 21,394 (August 30, 2010).
    55
    Stipulated Settlement Agreements,
    WildEarth Guardians v. Salazar
    (D.D.C. May 10, 2011) and
    Center for Biological Diversity v.
    Salazar
    (D.D.C. July 12, 2011). The requirement to ADD MORE THAN 720 CANDIDATES for listing as endangered species would significantly add to THE EXISTING ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST THAT CONTAINS 1,118 PLANT AND ANIMAL SPECIES, which could significantly expand the AMOUNT OF CRITICAL HABITAT IN THE U.S. This would be a NEARLY TWO-THIRDS EXPANSION IN THE NUMBER OF LISTED SPECIES.
    Fish and Wildlife Species Reports, at
    http://ecos.fws.gov/tess_public/pub/Boxscore.do.
    56
    Testimony of Hon. Dan Ashe, Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service before the House Natural Resources Committee
    (December 6, 2011)

    ——————————————————————-
    DEPARTURE OF JUSTICE?

    JUSTICE? the legal system, or the act of applying or upholding the law, validity in law, fairness or reasonableness, especially in the way people are treated or decisions are made.

    INDEED, IN A COUNTRY WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL

    WHY WOULD ANY ONE SUGGEST THAT THERE HAS BEEN A DEPARTURE OF JUSTICE
    IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?

    ABUSE OF POWER?
    DERELICTION OF DUTY?
    COLLUSION?
    DUE PROCESS OF LAW?
    —————————
    THE EPA HAS RECENTLY PROMULGATED, to proclaim or declare something officially, ESPECIALLY TO PUBLICIZE FORMALLY THAT A LAW OR DECREE IS IN EFFECT

    OR IS INTENDING TO IMPLEMENT IN THE NEXT FEW MONTHS: NEW WATER QUALITY CRITERIA IN TOTAL MAXIMUM DAILY LOAD (TMDL) AND NUMERIC NUTRIENT CRITERIA(NNC)FOR GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS,

    NEW STORMWATER RULES, AND THE NEW PESTICIDE GENERAL PERMIT(PGP)

    ALL OF WHICH WILL IMPOSE COSTS ON LOCAL COMMUNITIES AND THEIR RESIDENTS
    ————————————

    TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION?
    CONFLICT OF INTEREST?
    UNDUE INFLUENCE?
    USURPING STATE AUTHORITY?
    OPEN AND TRANSPARENT?
    OVERSIGHT?
    DUE PROCESS OF LAW?

    EPA IS USURPING, seize something without right, to use something without the right to do so, STATE AUTHORITY AND INSTITUTING ,an established? principle or RULE? expensive regulations that will provide uncertain environmental benefits

    The bottom line
    Indeed, “We the People” shall demand answers…
    Who is ULTIMATELY responsible for this?

    DEPARTURE FROM JUSTICE


  • Wall Street Journal p.11

    A version of this article appeared October 4, 2013, on page A11 in the U.S. edition of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: USING ‘SUE AND SETTLE’ TO THWART OIL AND GAS DRILLERS. (prompted by the)
    —————————————————————–
    “SUNSHINE FOR REGULATORY DECREES AND SETTLEMENTS ACT OF 2013”
    ——————————————————————–
    SUE AND SETTLE – US Chamber of Commerce

    SUE AND SETTLE: REGULATING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS
    www.uschamber.com/sites/…/reports/SUEANDSETTLEREPORT-Final.p…‎
    33 See CLOUDED WATERS: A Senate Report Exposing the High Cost of EPA’s Water Regulations and Their Impacts on State and. Local Budgets, U.S. Senate …

    ——————————————————————–
    A DOCUMENTED 49 page expose NAMING the NAMES OF THE APPOINTED FEDERAL AGENCIES PRACTICING Sue and Settle: Behind Closed Doors AND Regulating THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

    The Wall Street Journal article on October 4, 2013 inspired this article
    By Stephen Moore: Using ‘Sue and Settle’ to Thwart Oil and Gas Drillers (continued below)

    THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT IS BEING EMPLOYED MORE THAN EVER TO BLOCK DEVELOPMENT.
    ——————————————————

    ONE GLARING EXAMPLE OF THE DEPT OF THE INTERIOR (DOI)
    www.sueandsettle.com uschamber.com/sites/default/files/reports/SUEANDSETTLEREPORT-Final.pdf08-00689
    —————————-
    10,346 ACRES OF PUBLIC LAND designated as CRITICAL HABITAT FOR A FROG?

    pdf08-00689
    (D. Ariz.)
    Settled:
    4/29/2009
    WildEarth Guardians v.
    Kempthorne
    DOI
    CRITICAL HABITAT DESIGNATION
    for the Chiricahua leopard frog
    Result
    : DOI under the Bush administration listed the leopard frog as
    threatened under the Endangered Species Act but declined to designate a critical habitat because doing so would not be “prudent,” as is permitted by the Endangered Species Act.

    WildEarth Guardians SUED to challenge this
    decision, and the OBAMA ADMINISTRATION’S DOI settled the case.
    The terms of the settlement provided that DOI would reconsider its prudency determination.

    On March 20, 2012, DOI finalized a rule that reversed its
    prudency decision and designated approximately 10,346 acres as critical habitat for the Chiracahua leopard frog.
    ——————————————————————–
    WAKE UP AND SMELL THE STENCH OF APPEASMENT
    Take the time to goggle and read the 49 page EXPOSE
    49 pages of TRUTH on the lawsuits, A DOCUMENTED WHO’S SUING WHO? AND WHO’S SETTLING?
    GRAPHS AND CHARTS documenting where the thousands OF NEW REGULATIONS FROM THE CLEAN WATER AND CLEAN AIR ACTS ORIGINATED.

    Sue and Settle: BEHIND OUR BACKS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND THREATENING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.
    ————————————————————-

    SEIRRA CLUB IS #1 PROFITING FROM SUE AND SETTLE
    Storm water run off?
    Chesapeake Bay restoration?
    Haze and particulates?

    DO YOU WANT TO KNOW WHERE THESE EPA UNFUNDED MANDATES CAME FROM?
    DID CONGRESS LEGISLATE? DEBATE? VOTE? PASS? AND AUTHORIZE?
    —————————————————————

    SUE AND SETTLE – US Chamber of Commerce
    The lead authors and the project team are from the U.S. Chamber Environment, Technology &
    Regulatory Affairs Division.
    Recognition
    The U.S. Chamber of Commerce thanks William Yeatman, assistant director of the Center for
    Energy and Environment at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, for helping us formulate an
    additional methodology and THE DEVELOPMENT OF A DATABASE OF SUE AND SETTLE CASES. The database was used to check the validity of, and supplement, the Chamber’s database of cases.
    ——————————————————————–

    By Stephen Moore: Using ‘Sue and Settle’ to Thwart Oil and Gas Drillers (continued)

    THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT IS BEING EMPLOYED MORE THAN EVER TO BLOCK DEVELOPMENT.

    By Stephen Moore: Oklahoma City
    Last week the U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE and an environmental advocacy group agreed to a legal settlement that will place nine species—including the Panama City crayfish, moccasin shell mussel and boreal toad—on the fast track for placement on the endangered species list. It is only the latest of many such listings.

    The Center for Biological Diversity has petitioned Fish and Wildlife to designate some 250 species as endangered since 2008. Many of CBD’s petitions—and lawsuits—are still in the pipeline. About 97% of the species that are designated as endangered never move off the list.

    Next March, FISH AND WILDLIFE will make a determination about whether to add the lesser prairie chicken, found in Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico and Kansas to the list.

    Harold Hamm, president of Continental Resources, says that the habitat for the prairie chicken overlaps “some of the most promising land for oil and gas leases in the country.”

    Many Westerners suspect that this environmental activism isn’t only or even mostly about saving species and obscure subspecies.

    Instead, it is about restricting land use on hundreds of thousands of acres of private and state land.

    The concern is that if these species are listed as endangered, their habitat could be placed off limits for economic development.

    Associated Press
    The lesser prairie chicken, near Laverne, Okla.

    In the 1980s, ENVIRONMENTALISTS successfully used a listing of
    the Northern Spotted Owl as threatened to cripple the timber industry in Oregon and Washington, throwing many thousands out of jobs.

    This is the playbook now being used by groups like the CBD—which boasts on its website of its desire to end most oil and gas production in the United States.

    Since taking office, the Obama administration and its green allies inside and outside federal agencies have been making expanded use of a tactic called “SUE AND SETTLE” to issue new and expensive regulations.

    Groups like CBD and WildEarth Guardians, for example, petition Fish and Wildlife to list a species as endangered.
    Other environmental groups use a similar tactic to get new water and air regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency.

    Then, sometimes the very same day, the environmental groups file a lawsuit against Fish and Wildlife or the EPA to force the government to act—arguing that the regulatory process is too slow.

    Amos Eno, a former Fish and Wildlife Service official who worked to save the grizzly bear and the condor, is critical of the tactic. Mr. Eno, who now runs Resources First, says the money wasted on these lawsuits could be used on conservation efforts to actually save species from extinction.

    Because the federal agencies include former employees of green organizations, sue and settle can be a collaborative, not adversarial, process.

    The agency may be only too happy to sign a consent DECREE THAT COURTS THEN RUBBER STAMP. OFTEN, STATE AND INDUSTRY OFFICIALS DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE SETTLEMENTS HAVE NO OPPORTUNITY TO WEIGH IN.

    Increasingly, sue and settle is how rules are made in Washington. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has found that more than 60 times in the last four years the EPA agreed to settlements with environmental groups to pass regulations that in some cases impose tens of billions of dollars of costs on industry and land owners.

    The feds have even paid green groups millions of dollars in legal fees for the favor of suing the government.
    The Obama administration didn’t invent sue and settle, but the pace has increased dramatically since 2009—an era that Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt calls

    “SUE AND SETTLE ON STEROIDS.”

    Last September Mr. Pruitt and 11 state attorneys general presented a Freedom of Information Act request to investigate the communications between the Obama administration and environmental litigants. Their suspicion is that the two are secretly working hand in hand to grease the process of regulating industries it doesn’t like. A year has passed, but the EPA has refused to fully comply.

    This summer Mr. Pruitt has joined with the other attorneys general—including from Texas and Utah—

    TO SUE THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION TO COMPLY WITH THE FREEDOM OF INFORMATION ACT.

    Mr. Pruitt also believes that sue and settle “is an end run around the Administrative Procedures Act.” This is the law that governs how regulations are promulgated, and requires among other things transparency and a reliance on science to justify new rules. “An administration which claims to only want to ‘follow the science’ has exploited a litigation mechanism to enact new rules imposed on us without reviewing the science,” Mr. Pruitt says.

    The attorneys general also cite new EPA REGIONAL HAZE RULES—which came into being because of sue and settle—that could raise electricity costs in their states by as much as 20%. On behalf of his fellow attorneys general, Mr. Pruitt says that “we’re very worried that under Obama sue and settle will be used by the EPA to issue new regulations on fracking.” This could kneecap the oil and gas boom in Western states.

    In its report “SUE AND SETTLE: REGULATING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS,” the U.S. Chamber of Commerce has counted more than 100 new major rules “with estimated compliance costs of more than $100 million annually” that arose from this tactic. The result is a giant tax on the economy brought to you by the Sierra Club and the Environmental Defense Fund

    WITH LITTLE OR NO INPUT OR OVERSIGHT FROM CONGRESS.

    Sen. Charles Grassley (R., Iowa) and Rep. Doug Collins (R., Ga.) have introduced
    “SUNSHINE FOR REGULATORY DECREES AND SETTLEMENTS ACT OF 2013”
    that would require all proposed consent decrees to be posted for 60 days for public comment before being filed with a court—and allow affected parties to challenge them.
    MEMBERS OF CONGRESS IN BOTH PARTIES who are worried about the Obama regulatory assault will need to take corrective action if they have ANY HOPE OF A TRUE ECONOMIC TURNAROUND.

    Mr. Moore is a member of the Journal’s editorial board.

    • Stephen Moore: Using ‘Sue and Settle’ to Thwart Oil and Gas Drillers
    Wall Street Journal ‎- 5 days ago
    In The Wall Street Journal, Stephen Moore writes that THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT IS BEING EMPLOYED MORE THAN EVER TO BLOCK DEVELOPMENT.
    ———————————————-

    QUOTATIONS TO PONDER ON PUBLIC SERVANTS

    It may serve for a great lesson of humiliation to mankind to behold the habits and passions of men trampling over interest, friendship, honour, and their own personal safety, as well as that of their country.

    When our betters tell us they are our humble servants, but understand us to be their slaves.

    Civility, intended to make us easy, is employed in laying chains and fetters upon us, in debarring us of our wishes, and in crossing our most reasonable desires.
    Jonathan Swift.

    ——————————————————————-