+menu-


  • Category Archives Legislated Economic Oppression
  • More DOE Fees Increased By Rule

    ——————————————————————–

    ——————————

    —– Original Message —–

    From:Ballard, Laura (ECY)

    To:ECOLOGY-WAC-TRACK@LISTSERV.WA.GOV

    Sent: Tuesday, July 25, 2017 6:43 AM

    Subject: The following rulemaking adoption was filed with the Office for Chapter 173-224 WAC, Water Quality Permit Fees

    The following rulemaking adoption was filed with the Office of the Code Reviser:

    July 20, 2017

    Chapter 173-224 WAC, Water Quality Permit Fees (previously called Wastewater Discharge Permit Fees) For more information:

    http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/ruledev/wac173224/1611ov.html

    To join or leave ECOLOGY-WAC-TRACK click here:

    http://listserv.wa.gov/cgi-bin/wa?A0=ECOLOGY-WAC-TRACK

    Thank you for using WACTrack.

    Have a good day!

    —————————————————————

    RCW 90.48.465 – Water Pollution Control requires that Ecology establish, by rule, annual fees that fund the wastewater and stormwater permit programs.

    Ecology amended Chapter 173-224 WAC – Wastewater Discharge Permit Fees. This amendment allows permit fees to be increased for Fiscal Year 2018 (July 2017 – June 30, 2018) and Fiscal Year 2019 (July 2018 – June 2019) so that we can recover the cost of administering the wastewater and stormwater programs this biennium.

    Scope of rule development

    State law (RCW 80.48.465 – Water Pollution Control) requires Ecology to fund its wastewater and stormwater permit programs through annual fees paid by permit holders.

    The proposed changes sought to continue moving the program toward payment equity between permit categories. Ecology adopted a larger percentage fee increase for underpaying categories and a smaller percentage fee increase for overpaying categories.

    Ecology’s goals in establishing the percentage splits are to honor the need for fund equity while not over-burdening the under-paying categories with an increase that is not sustainable.

    We updated rule language to account for changes in current business practices relating to electronic payment options, collection processes, and data collection. We also removed the winery general permit fee category for the 2017-19 biennium, as this new permit will not be effective until July 1, 2019.

    The adopted percentages increases by category are:

    Underpaying Fee Categories
    SFY 2018
    (July 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018)
    6.37%
    • Aluminum Alloys
    • Aluminum and Magnesium Reduction Mills
    • Aluminum Forming
    • Aggregate Production – Individual and General Permits
    • Aquatic Pest Control
    • Boatyards (Individual and General Permits)
    • Coal Mining and Preparation
    • Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
    • Dairies
    • Iron and Steel
    • Metal Finishing
    • Nonferrous Metals Forming
    • Ore Mining
    • Private and State Owned Facilities
    • Shipyards
    • Stormwater Construction (Individual and General Permits)
    • Stormwater Industrial (Individual and General Permits)
    • Stormwater Municipal Phase 1 and 2 Permits
    SFY 2019
    (July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019)
    5.58%
    Overpaying Fee Categories
    SFY 2018
    (July 1, 2017 – June 30, 2018)
    5.50%
    • Aquaculture
    • Combined Industrial Waste Treatment
    • Combined Food Processing Waste Treatment
    • Combined Sewer Overflow System
    • Commercial Laundry
    • Crop Preparing (Individual and General Permits Facilities
    • Not Otherwise Classified (Individual and General Permits)
    • Flavor Extraction
    • Food Processing
    • Fuel and Chemical Storage
    • Hazardous Waste Cleanup Sites
    • Ink Formulation and Printing
    • Inorganic Chemicals Manufacturing Noncontact Cooling Water With Additives (Individual and General Permits)
    • Noncontact Cooling Water Without Additives (Individual and General Permits)
    • Municipal Wastewater – >250,000 Residential Equivalents
    • Organic Chemical Manufacturing
    • Petroleum Refining
    • Photofinishers
    • Power and/or Steam Plants
    • Radioactive Effluents and Discharges
    • RCRA Corrective Action Sites
    • Seafood Processing
    • Solid Waste Sites
    • Textile Mills
    • Timber Products
    • Vegetable/Bulb Washing Facilities
    • Vehicle Maintenance and Freight Transfer
    • Water Plants (Individual and General Permits)
    SFY19
    (July 1, 2018 – June 30, 2019
    4.50%

    More information on the fees is available for Fiscal Years 2018 and 2019.

    INDEED, THE DOE DID…..  update their rules language to account for changes in current business practices relating to electronic payment options, collection processes, and data collection.

    ———————————————————————-

    More information on DOE  fees is available……

    WHERE THE GOVERNMENT DOES MOST OF MY BUSINESS!

    Behind My Back | Drowning in Stormwater Runoff Tax?

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/03/16/drowning-in-stormwater-runoff-tax/

    Mar 16, 2014WHO IS Drowning in WA STATE Stormwater Runoff Tax? …. http://daily.sightline.org/2013/05/09/the-skinny-on-was-new-stormwater-permits-1/.

    THE Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program (RSMP)

    Participants in The Phase I and II permit will help fund the monitoring and data analysis  (KING COUNTY, FOR EXAMPLE, MUST PAY $15,000 FOR THE FIRST YEAR AND $74,540 FOR SUBSEQUENT YEARS TO PARTICIPATE.)

    The updated rules are contained in the state’s new Municipal Stormwater permits which are administered by the Washington Department of Ecology.

    ECOLOGY IS DESIGNATED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY TO UPHOLD THE FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT

    Phase I Washington Municipal Stormwater Permit

    (COERCED) Participants in THE PHASE I permit will help fund the monitoring and data analysis. (KING COUNTY, FOR EXAMPLE, MUST PAY $15,000 FOR THE FIRST YEAR AND $74,540 FOR SUBSEQUENT YEARS TO PARTICIPATE. in The Regional Stormwater Monitoring Program (RSMP)

    Phase II Western Washington Municipal Stormwater Permit

    The Phase II permit for western Washington covers at least 80 cities and portions of five counties with an effective date of September 1, 2012. The updated 2013-2018 permit became effective on August 1, 2013.

    The new PHASE II MUNICIPAL STORMWATER PERMIT, which covers the next most populated areas and affects nearly 100 cities around the state.

    (COERCED) Participants in THE PHASE II permit will help fund the monitoring and data analysis.

    ECOLOGY IS DESIGNATED BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY TO UPHOLD THE FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT


  • Trump Jr Human Toll Issues – WA DC Edicts

    Donald Trump Jr has been informed of the issues.

    Toni Webb’s  issues are…  THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC CATASTROPHE CAUSED BY FEDERAL CONTROL IN JOSEPHINE COUNTY OREGON

    ————————————————————

    February 13, 2016

    Toni Webb meets with Donald Trump Jr to discuss Timber Issues and Land Ownership.

    Donald Trump Jr with Toni Web

    The bottom line from Toni…

    We would appreciate the support of Presidential Candidate Donald Trump for the transfer of our lands from federal mismanagement. We need your help to prevent further loss and to reverse the losses that have plunged our county into poverty. Whichever candidate emerges from the Presidential race, we will be looking to support the candidate who will be in favor of transferring the control of public lands to the states. If you want to Make America Great Again, start with Josephine County and help us help ourselves.

    ——————————————————

    The bottom line from Pearl Rains Hewett

    If you want to Make America Great Again

    VOTE FOR DONALD J. TRUMP

    ———————————————————————

    From Toni…

    TO: Presidential Candidate Donald Trump & Donald Trump, Jr.

    Gentlemen:

    Thank you for reaching out to the American Lands Council to learn more about our position on the necessity of federal land transfer to the States and the divesting of that land. I have come from Josephine County, Oregon, to attend this meeting with Donald Trump Jr.

    text continues below..

    ———————————————————————

    I sent this email June 11, 2016

    Dear Toni,

    February 26, 2016 Toni Webb’s  story is here… OREGON CANDIDATE EXPOSES SOCIAL, ECONOMIC CATASTROPHE CAUSED BY FEDERAL CONTROL IN JOSEPHINE COUNTY OREGON

    BLM Bureau of Land Mismanagement

    Posted on February 29, 2016 9:33 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    Word gets around in cyberspace

    THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC CATASTROPHE CAUSED BY (WA DC Edicts) FEDERAL CONTROL, THREE COUNTIES,  THREE STATE, SISKIYOU COUNTY CALIF –  CLALLAM COUNTY WASHINGTON And JOSEPHINE COUNTY OREGON

    Liz and I both saw this … As the history of our three counties in three different states. Washington State, Oregon and Calif. Liz Bowen is from Siskiyou County, Calif. Pie N Politics Pearl Rains Hewett is from Clallam County WA

    The Human Toll of WA DC Edicts 2012-2016

    ————————————————————————–

    Toni’s  text continued…

    Because of federal land-taking, we now have a broken county with a median household income less than the State of Mississippi. My father owned a sawmill here in the 1940’s; anyone who wanted to work could easily find a job. In the 1960’s, Josephine County had 53 sawmills; the revenue for Public Safety was around $18 million per year. Josephine County, Oregon, has relied on the use of our natural resources for Public Safety, Education, and necessary Public Projects. We now live under the constant threat of having to close the jail; and this July we will receive our last congressional subsidy of $4.3 million. Use of our resources has declined to the point that we are now an impoverished county largely dependent on welfare and government social services.

    Yesterday—the last remaining sawmill in our county closed indefinitely because they could not get enough logs to fill orders. We’ve gone from 19 sheriff’s patrols to a budget for only three patrols by this summer. Our County government laid off 127 people in 2012; 90 of those people were in the Sheriff’s Department.

    All promises from the Federal government to Josephine County have been broken. The government has not honored its commitment in the 1937 O&C Act, and the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service have reduced the timber harvests for two decades.

    The BLM and Forest Service close vital roads throughout the county, so that we can’t put out forest fires. Those agencies then refuse to let us log the burnt areas and derive some income from the catastrophe. Management of our lands by Washington, DC, has proved to be a disaster to our county, both in terms of revenue for necessary services and in terms of modern forest management practices for sustainability.

    The EPA runs roughshod over our private and public lands; overly-zealous environmental activists derive much of their income from government grants. Environmental groups consistently portray logging as environmentally-destructive “clear-cutting”, when in fact, timber companies in Oregon are well-known for responsible, sustainable forest management.

    With this loss of use of our land to generate revenue and provide jobs come many of the predictable social problems, as indicated on the following page: drug abuse, health problems, rise in student dropout rate, children living in poverty, increased homelessness, and reliance on welfare subsidies. This is the result of not having control and benefit of our county land.

     Poverty in Josephine County has reached the point that we cannot pass a property tax levy to fund public safety. Having bare bones public safety negatively impacts our ability to retain and attract businesses and qualified workers.

    We would appreciate the support of Presidential Candidate Donald Trump for the transfer of our lands from federal mismanagement. We need your help to prevent further loss and to reverse the losses that have plunged our county into poverty. Whichever candidate emerges from the Presidential race, we will be looking to support the candidate who will be in favor of transferring the control of public lands to the states. If you want to Make America Great Again, start with Josephine County and help us help ourselves.

    Thank you and Best Wishes,
    Toni Webb

    Josephine County, Oregon, population: 84,000   Area: 1,642 sq. miles

    68% of Public Land is controlled by the Federal Government

    • Out-migration of younger population, who cannot find work.
    • Influx of seniors, largely from out-of-state, attracted by the low property tax ($.58 per thousand in the county, outside the City of Grants Pass).
    • 24% of the county population is over 65 years old.
    • 30% of children in Josephine County live in poverty; 20% of adults 18-64 live below the poverty line.
    • 65% of the children eligible for free/reduced cost lunches.
    • Increased homelessness and reliance on welfare subsidies.

    Drug abuse – #1 in Oregon for Rx drug abuse (seniors selling Opioids to supplement income). Rampant heroin, methamphetamine drug use. Approximately 125 babies born each year at hospital with drug addiction. read more…

    High school dropouts – 30-36% dropout rate throughout county. Misuse of funds allocated to school district. Dropout rate has not changed in 30 years. read more…

    Unemployment – 11%, estimated to be 20% in 18-30 age group. Rise in young people working part-time and growing marijuana. Largest % employers: schools, health care, and social assistance. read more…

    County Health Ranking: 29th out of 33 counties in Oregon. High level of obesity-44% of adult population has chronic high blood cholesterol. 23% of children, grades 1-3, have rampant tooth decay; 62% of lower income children have at least one cavity.

    Along with those who have become acutely aware, I agree that we cannot wait any longer for an outside entity to create local jobs and meaningful careers. We have created the nonprofit Josephine County Economic Development Alliance.

    ——————————————————————–

    Along with those who have become acutely aware,

    June 11, 2016 Word gets around in cyberspace

    New post on Pie N Politics

     

    Human toll of Washington D.C. edicts — especially Siskiyou Co.

    by Liz Bowen

    PNP comment: The below info was recently brought to our attention by Pearl Hewett in Clallam County, Washington, who stated her county has the same problems as Siskiyou in California and Josephine Co. in Oregon. Below is the link to Pearl’s webpage connecting the dots. Also, a BIG thank you to our local KARE Assoc. for putting these facts together. They have followed and documented the destruction to the environment by the Greenies and government for more than 25 years! — Editor Liz Bowen

    http://www.behindmyback.org/2016/06/10/the-human-toll-of-wa-dc-edicts-2012-2016/

     From KARE, Klamath Alliance for Resources and Environment in Siskiyou County, CA.

    The Human Toll in Siskiyou County

    Siskiyou County has been hard hit by the environmental movement during the past twenty years. Time and again, we are promised that tourism will rise and offset any damage to our resource driven economy, and yet those dollars refuse to materialize. For 20 years, timber has been excluded from our national forests (see this shocking graph) which consume nearly two thirds of our entire county. Mining has been all but eliminated, agriculture (the largest remaining industry in this county) and now KS Wild has the temerity to claim that our county will be better off with another 200,000 acres (of 600,000 total) of timberland locked up in some “climate refuge?” Next time somebody trots out that line, give them some of these demographic statistics:

    Unemployment, July 2011

    (State wide data by county: PDF file)

    California: 12.4%

    Siskiyou Co: 16.6%

    Shasta Co: 15.0%

    Modoc Co: 13.9%

    Humboldt Co: 11.9%

    LA Co: 13.3%

    Sacramento Co: 12.9%

    San Franscsco Co: 9.0%

    Siskiyou County 2010 Snapshot

    (PDF file)

    Population: around 48,000

    The median age of the population is 43

    36% of the population is employed

    Unemployment is 18.5%

    Median Household Income $35,692 ($59,928 for CA)

    28% of households have children under 18 (46% USA)

    18% of the population lives below the poverty line (13% CA)

    27% of children live below the poverty line (18.5% CA)

    18% of the population is eligible for food stamps

    22% are eligible for Medi-Cal programs (18% CA)

    Substantiation of Child Abuse and Neglect 31.7 per 1,000 ( 9/1,000 for CA)

    Siskiyou Co. has higher rates of all violent crime (aggravated assaults, forcible rape and robbery) except homicide than Los Angeles Co. 11% of Seniors aged 60 and above have been abused.

    Methamphetamine accounts for 44% of substance abuse treatment admissions. Roughly 11.9 percent of adolescents under 18 reported binge drinking over the past month (CA 6.6 percent.)

    Of youth between age 10-17 admitted for treatment, 72% were for marijuana, 17% methamphetamine, and 11% alcohol. 83% were male. This age group also accounts for 13% of drug-related arrests.

    Individuals between 25 and 34 years account for 25 percent of admissions to alcohol and drug treatment. This age group also accounts for 22 percent of drug related arrests

    Individuals between 35 and 44 years accounts for 27 percent of alcohol-related arrests

    Twenty Year Trends

    (PDF file)

    Demographic Trends — Age distribution: The census indicates that between 1990 and 2008, Siskiyou County experienced a 25% loss in the population of children under the age of 18. The County saw a 45% increase in the population age 45-64 and an 18% increase of those age 65 and older. This shows that our population is aging dramatically, and younger family wage earners are migrating elsewhere.

    Income Trends; The BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis) indicates that in 1987, the average wage for jobs in Siskiyou County were 73% of the California average. There was a steady decline down to as low as 57% in the year 2000, then the percentage stabilized at 61 % with an increase to 63% in 2008. This shows that our wages are depressed, not keeping pace with inflation and the rest of the state.

    Unemployment — The EDD statistics indicate that from 1990-2009, the highest rates of unemployment occurred in individual months in 1991-1993 (19.3-21.1%.) The average rate of unemployment for 1991 was 13.2, for 1992 — 15.8 and for 1993 -15.6. This high rate likely reflects the closure of the four timber mills in Siskiyou County between 1989-1999. The rate of unemployment then very gradually decreased each year until it plateaued around 2001 -2007 at 8-9.5% It climbed to an average of 10.2% in 2008 and was at 15.8% average in 2009.

    Median Household Income The census (SAIPE) reports that in 1989, the median household income of Siskiyou County residents was $22,077. This was 66% of the California median, (down $11,000 from the CA median.) In 2008, the Siskiyou County median was $36,823. It had decreased to 60% of the California median, (down $24,000 from the CA median household income.) Siskiyou County ranks 51 out of 58 California Counties in median income.

    Poverty Rates — The census (SAIPE) reports that in 1989, 14.4% of Siskiyou County residents lived below the poverty line. This was 1.7% higher than the poverty rate for California in general. In 1989, 23.5% of children under 18 in Siskiyou County lived in poverty. This was 2.2% higher than the California rate. In 2008, 16.4% of all residents in Siskiyou County lived in poverty. This is a 2 percent increase in the rate over that of 1989 and is 3.1% higher than the California rate. In 2008, 25.4% of children under the age of 18 in Siskiyou County lived in poverty. That is a 2 percent increase in the rate over that of 1989 and is 6.9% greater than the California rate.

    Summary Comment: Siskiyou County is an aging county. A large percentage of children in the county live in poverty and this is getting worse. Average wages are poor compared to the rest of California and getting worse. The household median income in the County has historically lagged far behind that of California and is getting worse. Unemployment has always been substantially higher than California in general. After stabilizing from high employment in the aftermath of mill closures and Forest Service layoffs, unemployment has substantially increased in the past two years and is climbing. It is currently 15.6% (May 2010.) The well-being of a substantial number of Siskiyou County residents is depressed and trending downward.

    Liz Bowen | June 11, 2016 at 8:38 am | Categories: Agenda 21 & Sustainable, Agriculture, CORRUPTION, CRIMINAL, Endangered Species Act, Federal gov & land grabs | URL: http://wp.me/p13fnu-6HU

    The bottom line

    From Pearl Rains Hewett Trump campaign chair for Clallam County

    If you want to Make America Great Again

    VOTE YES FOR DONALD J. TRUMP


  • The Human Toll of WA DC Edicts 2012-2016

    2012 TWO COUNTIES – same problem – water and land use REGULATIONS

    SISKIYOU COUNTY CALIF –  CLALLAM COUNTY WASHINGTON

    WHAT HAVE OUR COUNTY’S GOT IN COMMON?

     WATER AND LAND USE REGULATIONS AND LITIGATION ARE DESTROYING US.

    —————————————————————————————–

    2016  THREE  COUNTIES – same problem – water and land use REGULATIONS

    FEBRUARY 26, 2016  THE SOCIAL, ECONOMIC CATASTROPHE CAUSED BY (WA DC Edicts) FEDERAL CONTROL, THREE COUNTIES,  THREE STATE, SISKIYOU COUNTY CALIF –  CLALLAM COUNTY WASHINGTON And JOSEPHINE COUNTY OREGON CAUSED BY THE….

    ———————————————————————

    THIS IS A MUST READ FIRST

    BLM Bureau of Land Mismanagement

    Posted on February 29, 2016 9:33 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    February 26, 2016 Toni Webb’s  story is here… OREGON CANDIDATE EXPOSES SOCIAL, ECONOMIC CATASTROPHE CAUSED BY FEDERAL CONTROL IN JOSEPHINE COUNTY OREGON

    Liz and I both saw this … As the history of our three counties in three different states. Washington State, Oregon and Calif. Liz Bowen is from Siskiyou County, Calif. Pie N Politics Pearl Rains Hewett is from Clallam County WA

    —————————————————————————-

    JUNE 10, 2016

    The Bottom line….

    Pearl Rains Hewett,  LET ME ASK AMERICA A QUESTION

    HOW HAS THE ‘SYSTEM’ BEEN WORKING OUT FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY?

    —————————————————————————–

    By Donald J. Trump April 14, 2016 7:18 p.m. ET

    (unedited full text)

     LET ME ASK AMERICA A QUESTION

    HOW HAS THE ‘SYSTEM’ BEEN WORKING OUT FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY?

    Behind My Back | Let Me Ask America a Question

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/04/26/letmeaskamerica-a-question/

    Apr 26, 2016 – Let Me Ask America a Question. How has the ‘system’ been working out for you and your family? No wonder voters demand change.

    ————————————————————————————-

    MAY 9, 2016 DONALD J. TRUMP SAID ” AS A BUSINESSMAN I THINK REGULATIONS ARE EVEN WORSE THAN TAXES”.

    WOW, GETTING RID OF THE EPA?  Environmental Protection Agency

    THE ESA THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT?

    May 27, 2016 – Trump accused state officials of denying water to Central Valley farmers so they can send it … so they can send it out to sea ‘to protect a certain kind of threeinch fish‘. The theory that California’s water shortage is all the fault of the Environmental Protection Agency is, like most conspiracy.

    GO FIGURE? WATER FOR PEOPLE NOT A THREE INCH ENDANGERED SMELT.

    The Human Toll of WA DC Edicts 2012-2016

    Apr 26, 2016 – Let Me Ask America a Question. How has the ‘system’ been working out for you and your family? No wonder voters demand change.

    ———————————————————————————-

    DONALD J. TRUMP, AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES, A BUSINESS MAN, WILL BE TRANSFERRING THE CONTROL OF OUR PRIVATE AND PUBLIC LANDS BACK TO WESTERN STATES, LIKE OREGON, BACK TO WE THE PEOPLE, BECAUSE IT IS SO CRITICAL TO OUR SURVIVAL.

    ——————————————————

     The Human Toll in Siskiyou County – KARE

    www.klamathalliance.org/information/the-humantoll-in-siskiyoucounty/

    Siskiyou County has been hard hit by the environmental movement during the past twenty years. Time and again, we are promised that tourism will rise and …

    ———————————————————————————

    Nov 18, 2012- June 10, 2016

    CLALLAM COUNTY WASHINGTON- SISKIYOU COUNTY CALIF-  

    OUR TIMBER INDUSTRIES  HAVE BEEN HARD HIT BY THE “ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT” DURING THE PAST TWENTY YEARS.

    TIME AND AGAIN, WE ARE PROMISED THAT TOURISM WILL RISE AND …

    ————————————————————————————

    from Pearl Rains-Hewett

    Posted 11/18/2012

    WHAT HAVE OUR COUNTY’S GOT IN COMMON?

    OUR TIMBER INDUSTRIES AND,

    How Water and Land Use REGULATIONS and Litigation Are DESTROYING Us

    2012 “The hand writing on the wall” is an idiom for “imminent doom or misfortune” and for “the future is predetermined”.

    CLALLAM COUNTY

    Timber harvesting is the dominant land use in the County with 285,842 acres in large commercial timber holdings. Widespread timber harvesting in the area began in the 1920’s and continued intensively through the 1980’s, when the rate slowed significantly due in part to federal listings of the northern SPOTTED OWL AND MARBLED MURRELET.

    At one time, it was the largest timber production area in the state.

    However, OUR FOREST INDUSTRIES HAVE BEEN DEVASTATED BY FEDERAL AND STATE REGULATIONS.

    How many sawmills and wood processing facilities are gone?

    There is no doubt that the restrictions on timber harvest from public lands under the Northwest Forest Plan have played a significant role in this decline.

    Eighty- one % (81%) of the land base in Clallam County proper is in Federal (or state) ownership.

    Olympic National Forest Is over 1 million acres.

    There are more than ? miles of wild and scenic rivers in Clallam County.

    What is the unemployment rate? 9.1% of the labor force Sep 2012

    One aspect of this is land conversion from private to Federal lands.

    acquisition or conservation easements

    new wildlife refuge

    convert acres of farmland to wetlands

    There are many forest-dependent communities in our county where local unemployment is estimated from?

    ——————————————————————————————

    SISKIYOU COUNTY

    Siskiyou County accounts for 15% of the timber harvested in California.

    At one time, it was the second largest timber production area in the state.

    However, our forest industries have been devastated by Federal and State regulations.

    There are many forest-dependent communities in our county where local unemployment is estimated from 30-40%.

    There is no doubt that the restrictions on timber harvest from public lands under the Northwest Forest Plan have played a significant role in this decline.

    all 17 sawmills were gone and wood processing facilities

    Sixty-three % (63%) of the land base in Siskiyou County is in Federal (or state) ownership.

    There are more than 152 miles of wild and scenic rivers in the County.

    National Forest’s 1.7 million acres alone comprises 42% of Siskiyou County’s land base.

    In March of 2012, the unemployment rate was 18.7%, ranking Siskiyou 50th out of 56 counties in the state.

    The AP Economic Stress Index ranks Siskiyou County as the 14th most economically stressed county in the United States.

    One aspect of this is land conversion from private to Federal lands.

    Since 1999, 8,625.71 acres valued at $3,922,179 have been converted to Federal land.

    Another 11,236 acres of ranch land in the Shasta Valley is currently proposed for conversion to a new wildlife refuge.

    In addition, the proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement seeks to convert 44,479 acres of farmland in the Upper Klamath Basin to wetlands, (some of which may be in Siskiyou County.)

    It also proposes to secure 21,800 acres of farmland by acquisition or conservation easements in the Scott and Shasta Valleys of Siskiyou County.

    ————————————————————————-

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Please read on if you are concerned

    —————————————————————————

    Siskiyou County Supervisor Marcia Armstrong 5/31/12

    “I have completed part I of my report on (Integrated Water Resources Management) IWRM. http://users.sisqtel.net/armstrng/IRWM%20siskiyou%20part1.htm This includes an economic and social impact study, a briefing on each of Siskiyou County’s Agricultural areas in the Klamath, a briefing on water rights and a chronology of the major actions (legal, regulatory) in the Klamath River/Siskiyou County over the past 15 years.”

    Part 1 – Siskiyou County

    How Water and Land Use Regulations and Litigation Are Destroying Us

    By Marcia H. Armstrong © 2012
    armsrtrng@sisqtel.net
    (reprint granted with attribution)

    Background on Siskiyou County and its Economy

     

    GENERAL:

    Sixty-three % (63%) of the land base in Siskiyou County is in Federal (or state) ownership. There are portions of the Klamath National Forest; Shasta-Trinity National Forest; Six Rivers National Forest;Modoc National Forest; and Rogue Siskiyou National Forest in Siskiyou County. The Klamath National Forest’s 1.7 million acres alone comprises 42% of Siskiyou County’s land base. The county also includes the Tule Lake and Lower Klamath National Wildlife Refuges, as well as the Lava Beds National Monument. There are various BLM lands administered by the Redding, Medford, Ashland and Susanville BLM offices. There are more than 152 miles of wild and scenic rivers in the County. There are lands held in tribal trust for the Karuk and Quartz Valley Indian tribes.

    The entire land base of Siskiyou County is 4,038,843 acres or 6,287 square miles. Of this, 1,153,246 acres (29%) is in farmland, however only 138,000 acres (3% of tot. county acres) are irrigated. 2,525,216 acres is considered rangeland/woodland/ forest (inc. National Forest.) Our relatively sparse population of 44,301 classifies the county as “frontier.” There are nine small incorporated cities that date back to the California Gold Rush. Eight tenths of one percent of private land is urban.

    In the year 2000, the average unemployment rate for the year was 7.5%. By 2008, it had risen to 10.2%, rising again to 15.8% in 2009. In March of 2012, the unemployment rate was 18.7%, ranking Siskiyou 50th out of 56 counties in the state. There are many forest-dependent communities in our county where local unemployment is estimated from 30-40%. The average wage per job in 2008 was $32,707. That was only 63% of the state average. The median household income was $36,823 — or 60% of the state median. Non-household median income is currently $27,718 — a ranking of 47th in the state. The AP Economic Stress Index ranks Siskiyou County as the 14th most economically stressed county in the United States.

    Siskiyou County has a substantial low income population. In 2010, 18.6% of all residents in Siskiyou County, 26.6% of children under the age of 18 and 7.3% of those 65 years or older lived below the poverty line. In 2010, the economic impact of jobs at Human Services and entitlement benefits to County residents was $71,581,874. This includes: $11.6 million in annual “assistance costs” (CalWorks/welfare, Foster Care;) $8.8 million in annual food stamps; $4.7 million in In-Home-Support-Services for the elderly and disabled; and $36.7 million in Medical Assistance/Medi-Cal.

    Social statistics indicate that Siskiyou County has the second highest child abuse/neglect rate in the state – (3 times the state average.) Compared to Los Angeles County, Siskiyou County has higher rates of all forms of violent crime except homicide. [aggravated assaults, forcible rape, and robbery.] Often these crimes have similar underlying causes, namely, social strain combined with the selective disinhibition fueled by alcohol and drug use (read Robert Nash Parker; Robin Room; and Jeffery A Roth). The premature death rate for the general population is almost twice that of the national average.

    According to Indicators of Alcohol and Other Drug Risk and Consequences for California Counties Siskiyou County 2007, the number of local fatalities in alcohol-involved motor vehicle accidents was three times that of the statewide average; the death rate due to alcohol and drug use was 32.5 deaths per 100,000 persons (compared to a state average of 20.9/1000.) Methamphetamine accounted for 44% of admissions for alcohol and drug treatment. Admissions for alcohol use accounted for 31 percent of admissions in 2004. The death rate for cirrhosis if the liver was three times the Healthy People 2010 goal. Drug-induced deaths were 19 times higher than the Healthy People 2010 goal per 1,000. About 85% of child abuse cases involve methamphetamine.

    THE ECONOMY OF SISKIYOU COUNTY IS BASED ON SMALL BUSINESS. In 2008, there were 6,857 non-farm proprietors in Siskiyou County. According to 2007 data, 61% of non-farming establishments in Siskiyou County had less than 4 employees; 82% had less than 10 employees and 93% had less than 20.

    Agriculture is a major economic sector of the county. Our 2010 Siskiyou County Annual Crop and Livestock Report indicates that the agricultural valuation in the county was $195,711,956 (gross and excluding timber.) According to the USDA Ag Census, in 1992 Siskiyou County had 647,446 acres in farms. By 2007, this had been reduced to 597,534 acres. The 1996-2008 Land Use Summary, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program indicates that during the span of the report, Siskiyou County lost 15,164 acres of prime farmland; 3,036 acres of farmland of statewide importance; 40,456 acres of farmland of local importance. With an addition of 16,126 acres of grazing land and 2,390 acres of unique farmland, this mean a total loss of 40,140 acres of farmland. In 2000, there were 895 farm proprietors in Siskiyou County. This declined to only 730 in 2008. The county lost 81 livestock ranches from 1992 to 2007, with an accompanying loss of 20,882 fewer cattle and calves in inventory. According to the CA D.O.T. Siskiyou County Economic Forecast, since 1995, Siskiyou County’s agriculture industries have experienced substantial job loss of about 586 jobs, declining almost 45%.

    During the past 20 years, there has also been a restructuring of size and sales in agricultural operations. Since 1992 to 2007, there has been an increase in the number of small farms: farms under 10 acres doubled to 80. Farms under 50 acres increased 59% to 229. Farms 50-179 acres increased 27% to 228. Farms from 180-449 acres remained about the same at 79. However, there was a 19% reduction in farms 1000 acres or more to 100 farms in 2007. One aspect of this is land conversion from private to Federal lands. Since 1999, 8,625.71 acres valued at $3,922,179 have been converted to Federal land. Another 11,236 acres of ranch land in the Shasta Valley is currently proposed for conversion to a new wildlife refuge. In addition, the proposed Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement seeks to convert 44,479 acres of farmland in the Upper Klamath Basin to wetlands, (some of which may be in Siskiyou County.) It also proposes to secure 21,800 acres of farmland by acquisition or conservation easements in the Scott and Shasta Valleys of Siskiyou County.

    At the same time, farms having less than $2,500 in sales increased 105% to 359. Farms selling $2,500-9,999 stayed about the same at 151. Farms selling $10-$24,999 decreased 10% to 95. Farms selling $25,000-$49,999 decreased about 18% to 60. Farms selling $50,000 to $99,999 decreased 45% to 44 and farms with sales in excess of $100,000 increased by 28% to 137.

    Siskiyou County accounts for 15% of the timber harvested in California. At one time, it was the second largest timber production area in the state. However, our forest industries have been devastated by Federal and State regulations. For instance, the forestry section of Siskiyou County’s 1972 Conservation Element of the General Plan indicated that there were 17 sawmills in the county (employing 2,055 people or 24% of the employment base) and 8 wood processing facilities (employing 294 people or 3% of the employment base). There were 46 logging contractors and support establishments employing 501 people or 5% of the employment base. By 2007, ALL 17 SAWMILLS WERE GONE. The census indicates that there were a total of 6 wood products manufacturing establishments (including veneer mills) employing 380 people (one mill has subsequently closed in Butte Valley). There were 38 Logging, Forestry and Support Establishments employing 157 employees.

    There is no doubt that the restrictions on timber harvest from public lands under the Northwest Forest Plan have played a significant role in this decline. In 1978, 239 MMBF of timber was harvested from the Klamath National Forest (KNF), 274 MMBF from the Shasta Trinity National Forest (STNF) and 73 MMBF from the Six Rivers National Forest (SRNF.) In 2008, 20 MMBF was harvested from the KNF, 22 MMBF from the STNF and 8 MMBF from the SRNF. [Seehttp://users.sisqtel.net/armstrng/regulatory%20impacts.htm for links to tables and reports]

    ————————————————————————–

    The Human Toll in Siskiyou County – KARE

    The Human Toll in Siskiyou County

    SISKIYOU COUNTY HAS BEEN HARD HIT BY THE ENVIRONMENTAL MOVEMENT DURING THE PAST TWENTY YEARS. TIME AND AGAIN,

    WE ARE PROMISED THAT TOURISM WILL RISE AND OFFSET ANY DAMAGE TO OUR RESOURCE DRIVEN ECONOMY, AND YET THOSE DOLLARS REFUSE TO MATERIALIZE.

    For 20 years, timber has been excluded from our national forests (see this shocking graph) which consume nearly two thirds of our entire county. Mining has been all but eliminated, agriculture (the largest remaining industry in this county)

    AND NOW KS WILD HAS THE TEMERITY TO CLAIM THAT OUR COUNTY WILL BE BETTER OFF WITH ANOTHER 200,000 ACRES (OF 600,000 TOTAL) OF TIMBERLAND LOCKED UP IN SOME “CLIMATE REFUGE?” Next time somebody trots out that line, give them some of these demographic statistics:

    Unemployment, July 2011

    (State wide data by county: PDF file)

    • California: 12.4%
    • Siskiyou Co: 16.6%
    • Shasta Co: 15.0%
    • Modoc Co: 13.9%
    • Humboldt Co: 11.9%
    • LA Co: 13.3%
    • Sacramento Co: 12.9%
    • San Franscsco Co: 9.0%

    Siskiyou County 2010 Snapshot

    (PDF file)

    • Population: around 48,000
    • The median age of the population is 43
    • 36% of the population is employed
    • Unemployment is 18.5%
    • Median Household Income $35,692 ($59,928 for CA)
    • 28% of households have children under 18 (46% USA)
    • 18% of the population lives below the poverty line (13% CA)
    • 27% of children live below the poverty line (18.5% CA)
    • 18% of the population is eligible for food stamps
    • 22% are eligible for Medi-Cal programs (18% CA)
    • Substantiation of Child Abuse and Neglect 31.7 per 1,000 ( 9/1,000 for CA)
    • Siskiyou Co. has higher rates of all violent crime (aggravated assaults, forcible rape and robbery) except homicide than Los Angeles Co. 11% of Seniors aged 60 and above have been abused.
    • Methamphetamine accounts for 44% of substance abuse treatment admissions. Roughly 11.9 percent of adolescents under 18 reported binge drinking over the past month (CA 6.6 percent.)
    • Of youth between age 10-17 admitted for treatment, 72% were for marijuana, 17% methamphetamine, and 11% alcohol. 83% were male. This age group also accounts for 13% of drug-related arrests.
    • Individuals between 25 and 34 years account for 25 percent of admissions to alcohol and drug treatment. This age group also accounts for 22 percent of drug related arrests
    • Individuals between 35 and 44 years accounts for 27 percent of alcohol-related arrests

    Twenty Year Trends

    (PDF file)

    • Demographic Trends — Age distribution: The census indicates that between 1990 and 2008, Siskiyou County experienced a 25% loss in the population of children under the age of 18. The County saw a 45% increase in the population age 45-64 and an 18% increase of those age 65 and older. This shows that our population is aging dramatically, and younger family wage earners are migrating elsewhere.
    • Income Trends; The BEA (Bureau of Economic Analysis) indicates that in 1987, the average wage for jobs in Siskiyou County were 73% of the California average. There was a steady decline down to as low as 57% in the year 2000, then the percentage stabilized at 61 % with an increase to 63% in 2008. This shows that our wages are depressed, not keeping pace with inflation and the rest of the state.
    • Unemployment — The EDD statistics indicate that from 1990-2009, the highest rates of unemployment occurred in individual months in 1991-1993 (19.3-21.1%.) The average rate of unemployment for 1991 was 13.2, for 1992 — 15.8 and for 1993 -15.6. This high rate likely reflects the closure of the four timber mills in Siskiyou County between 1989-1999. The rate of unemployment then very gradually decreased each year until it plateaued around 2001 -2007 at 8-9.5% It climbed to an average of 10.2% in 2008 and was at 15.8% average in 2009.
    • Median Household Income The census (SAIPE) reports that in 1989, the median household income of Siskiyou County residents was $22,077. This was 66% of the California median, (down $11,000 from the CA median.) In 2008, the Siskiyou County median was $36,823. It had decreasedto 60% of the California median, (down $24,000 from the CA median household income.) Siskiyou County ranks 51 out of 58 California Counties in median income.
    • Poverty Rates — The census (SAIPE) reports that in 1989, 14.4% of Siskiyou County residents lived below the poverty line. This was 1.7% higher than the poverty rate for California in general. In 1989, 23.5% of children under 18 in Siskiyou County lived in poverty. This was 2.2% higher than the California rate. In 2008, 16.4% of all residents in Siskiyou County lived in poverty. This is a 2 percent increase in the rate over that of 1989 and is 3.1% higher than the California rate. In 2008, 25.4% of children under the age of 18 in Siskiyou County lived in poverty. That is a 2 percent increase in the rate over that of 1989 and is 6.9% greater than the California rate.

    Summary Comment: Siskiyou County is an aging county. A large percentage of children in the county live in poverty and this is getting worse. Average wages are poor compared to the rest of California and getting worse. The household median income in the County has historically lagged far behind that of California and is getting worse. Unemployment has always been substantially higher than California in general. After stabilizing from high employment in the aftermath of mill closures and Forest Service layoffs, unemployment has substantially increased in the past two years and is climbing. It is currently 15.6% (May 2010.) The well-being of a substantial number of Siskiyou County residents is depressed and trending downward.

    ———————————————————–

    JUNE 10, 2016

    The Bottom line….

    Pearl Rains Hewett,  LET ME ASK AMERICA A QUESTION

    HOW HAS THE ‘SYSTEM’ BEEN WORKING OUT FOR YOU AND YOUR FAMILY?

     


  • Doing Local Business From WA D.C. Edicts?

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    My website, behindmyback.org, is dedicated to investigating, researching, documenting and disseminating information and reporting. EVERYTHING GOVERNMENT FROM SOUP TO NUTS.… is posted on my website.

    This is my 721st posting on my website, Informing U.S. Citizens of how various government agencies are violating the Constitution, taking away private property rights, and infringing on American liberties–behind my back!

    Doing Local Business From WA DC Edicts?

    1. Obama’s Transgender Bathroom Law?
    2.  Obama’s Executive Orders?
    3. Obama’s Obamacare?
    4. Common Core Education?
    5. Waters of the United States WOTUS?
    6. HIGH DRY AND DESTITUTE?
    7. The Clean Water Act (the EPA)?
    8. The Endangered Species Act?
    9. Weather Modification, Cloud Seeding?
    10. Tribal Rights “The Boldt Decision”?
    11. Appointed Judges Rulings?
    12. Based on United Nations (UN)Demands?
    13. Obama’s Land Grabs by Executive Order?
    14.  Appointed Agencies Federal Management?
    15. Olympic National Park Emergency Road Repairs? US .GOV?
    16. Drugging American School Children?
    17. “WILD” Land Grabs Olympic National Park?
    18.  Permitting Net Pens in the Straits of Juan De Fuca?

    ————————————————————

    JUST TO NAME A FEW

    ————————————————-

    Just saying…. I found this tidbit online…

    NO FEAR Act Questions and Answers?

    NO FEAR ACT MY FOOT!

    FBI — Run, Hide, Fight Video

    —————————————————————–

     IF THE GOVERNMENT OR OBAMA HAS BEEN DOING “IT” TO YOU?  AND “IT” IS BEING DONE TO YOU ….PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING,  IS POSTED….

    Behind My Back | A WA State Bathroom Rule

    www.behindmyback.org/category/a-wastatebathroom-rule/

    Apr 21, 2016 – The Writing’s on the (Bathroom) Wall: State Anti-Transgender Laws Are About ….. A WA State Bathroom Rule … by Joseph Backholm, FPIW.org …

    1. Obama’s Transgender Bathroom Law?

    Behind My Back | Coerced by Federal Bathroom Laws?

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/01/10/coerced-by-federal-bathroomlaws/

    Jan 10, 2016 – Basic Federal Education and Bathroom Laws The feds — specifically, the … www.behindmyback.org/category/a-wa–state–bathroom-rule/.

    ———————————————————————

    Behind My Back | OBAMA’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS

    www.behindmyback.org/category/obamasexecutiveorders/

    Feb 15, 2016 – Category Archives OBAMA’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS … www.perc.org/articles/divided-lands-state-vs-federal-management-west. MAR 3, 2015 …

    Behind My Back | Executive Orders Matter

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/10/05/executiveorders-matter/

    Oct 5, 2015 – Executive Orders Matter page 3 “Things That Matter” OBAMA’SORG AND OTHER CLIMATE-ACTION ORGANIZATIONS WORLDWIDE.

    ———————————————————-

    Behind My Back | The Hidden Costs of Obamacare

    www.behindmyback.org/category/the-hidden-costs-of-obamacare/

    Jan 14, 2015 – How is he going to VOTE to reform the Obamacare debacle? 5. Is he going … And, on my website behindmyback.org in cyberspace. This entry …

    —————————————————————

    Behind My Back | Common Core? an American Tragedy

    www.behindmyback.org/category/commoncore-an-american-tragedy/

    Mar 13, 2016 – Utah v Strieff Oral Argument | Video | C-SPAN.org ….. EMPHASIZING THE OUTCOMES OF TEACHING COMMON CORE CURRICULUM AND …

    ————————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | WOTUS “Water Runs Down Hill”

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/09/04/wotuswater-runs-down-hill/

    Sep 4, 2015 – waters of United States” power grab. WOTUS rule – Pacific Legal Foundation https://www.pacificlegal.org/wotus. Pacific Legal Foundation

    —————————————————–

    IF THE GOVERNMENT OR OBAMA HAS BEEN DOING “IT” TO YOU?  AND “IT” IS BEING DONE TO YOU ….PRETTY MUCH EVERYTHING,  IS POSTED….

    Behind My Back | The Government From Soup to Nuts

    www.behindmyback.org/category/the-government-from-soup-to-nuts/

    Jun 14, 2015 – Category Archives The Government From Soup to Nuts … Pacific Legal Foundation, QUESTION EVERYTHING. WHERE DOES THE REST OF …

    HE SAID, POLITICIANS ARE CLEVER? AND REALLY, AMERICAN VOTERS ARE TOO STUPID TO  VOTE THEM OUT IN 2016?

    SHE SAID, LAST BUT NOT LEAST, WATCH WHAT’S GOING ON BEHIND OUR BACKS BEHIND CLOSED DOORS AND QUESTION EVERYTHING ABOUT THE GOVERNMENT’S PARTISAN POLITICAL AGENDA, period….

    ————————————————————-

    ARE AMERICAN VOTERS STUPID?

    NOPE, THE TRUMP CARD HAS BEEN PLAYED

    MAY 19, 2016 . THE SILENT MAJORITY HAS SPOKEN.

    THE POLITICAL INSIDERS ARE OUT…

    AND, THANK GOD, AN OUTSIDER DONALD J. TRUMP IS IN.

    ———————————————————–

    THE SOUP?

    Behind My Back | Making Stone Soup

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/06/14/3609/

    Jun 14, 2015 – Making Stone Soup? You’ve never heard of it? OK… Let’s start here with the historical record of STONE SOUP, it is a 1548 folk tale some paint …

    ————————————————-

    MAKING STONE SOUP

    THE SHORT FORM OF 1548  PEOPLES COOPERATION

    Hmmm.. Stone Soup of the people, for the people , by the people…

     IN SEVEN EASY STEPS

    ————————————————

    MAKING STONE SOUP

    THE LONG FORM OF 2015 GOVERNMENT COORDINATION  POLICY

    Under The bipartisan Healthy Sustainable Food Act

    In 2015  THE MAKING OF THE STONE SOUP must be coordinated by  an appointed  Soup committee of government  agencies, federal, state, tribal, and  local and their employees. As it requires  federally mandated access to healthy local foods, the appointed politico Soup Coordination Committee must  approve the Soup Making events and the  ingredients, as required by the best  available science on Healthy food.

    —————————————————————–

    THE NUTS?

    WOW! HOW MANY NUTS CAN YOU GET UNDER ONE RESTORATION SHELL?

    Behind My Back | The “RESTORATION” Shell Game

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/06/09/the-restorationshellgame/

    Jun 9, 2014 – The “RESTORATIONShell Game

    A highly convoluted “GAME OF RESTORATION” that is involving the sleight of many, many hands, in which hundreds of inverted Federal agencies, WA State agencies, WAC’S and /or other NGO, NUTSHELLS are moved about, and hard working taxpayers must attempt to spot which is the one, of many thousands, with  NGO’S or other government agencies are underneath the “RESTORATION” plan.

    “WE’RE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THE MORE THAN 600 PARTNERS TOGETHER,

    ——————————————————————————-

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    18. Permitting Net Pens in the Straits of Juan De Fuca

    Behind My Back | Public Notice of Net Pens NWS-2016-100

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/05/06/public-notice-of-netpens/

    May 6, 2016 – Public Notice of Net Pens in the Strait of Juan De Fuca The PDF document NWS-2016-100 is a Public Notice for a proposed project where a …

    ———————————————————-

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    —– Original Message —–

    From: “Sanguinetti, Pamela NWS” <Pamela.Sanguinetti@usace.army.mil>
    Sent: Monday, May 02, 2016 12:51 PM
    Subject: FW: Public Notice for NWS-2016-0100-; Icicle Acquisition Icicle Acquisition Subsidiary, LLC. -Request for comments

    PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS EMAIL
    For comments or questions regarding this Public Notice, please contact the project manager listed below.

    CONTACT INFORMATION:
    PROJECT NUMBER:  NWS-2016-0100-, Clallam County, Icicle Acquisition
    Icicle Acquisition Subsidiary, LLC.
    PROJECT MANAGER: Pam Sanguinetti
    TELEPHONE: 2067646904
    E-MAIL: Pamela.Sanguinetti@usace.army.mil

    The attached PDF document is a Public Notice for a proposed project where a permit is being requested from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District.

    To view the attached document, you will need to use the Adobe Acrobat Reader.  For a free copy of the Acrobat Reader please visit: http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat/readstep2.html

    To provide any project specific comments in writing or by e-mail, please visit the link below and follow the instructions outlined in the “How to Submit Comments” section.
    Http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Regulatory/PublicNotices.aspx

    For more Regulatory Program information, please visit http://www.nws.usace.army.mil/Missions/CivilWorks/Regulatory.aspx

    ——————————————————–

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Alan Cook

    Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:56 PM

    Subject: Re: List of Permits

    Hi Alan…

    DON’T YOU JUST LOVE BEING “PERMITTED” TO RUN A BUSINESS IN THE U.S.A.?

    Thank you for the list.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Trustee George C. Rains Sr.Estate

    ——————————————

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Alan Cook

    To: phew@wavecable.com

    Sent: Wednesday, May 11, 2016 1:22 PM

    Subject: List of Permits

    Hi Ms. Hewitt:

    Nice talking to you today.

    Below is a list of the permits we require for relocating the farm.  There are 14 items on the list related to 11 different permits (items 4,5 & 6 are effectively one permit).

    Please let me know if you have additional questions.

    Best,

    Alan

     AGS Marine Net Pen Relocation Project: Port Angeles-East

    Permit List

     

    Permit/Approval Applied For

    Date Submitted

    Agency

    1.  SEPA Threshold Determination /

         SEPA Compliance

    SEPA Checklist submitted with SSDP application

    February 1, 2016

    Clallam County, WA

    SEPA Lead Agency

    2.  Shoreline Substantial Development Permit

         (SSDP)

    February 1, 2016

    Clallam County, WA

    3.  Critical Areas Certificate of Compliance

    February 1, 2016

    Clallam County, WA

    4.  Section 10 Rivers & Harbors Act Permit

    for work in navigable waters of the U.S.

    February 1, 2016

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

    (Corps)

    5.  Section 7 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consultation

    Unknown; will be submitted to NMFS by the Corps

    National Marine Fisheries Service

    (NMFS)

    6.  Section 7 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consultation

    Unknown; will be submitted to USFWS by the Corps

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

    (USFWS)

    7.  Section 401 Clean Water Act

    Water Quality Certification

    February 1, 2016

    Washington Dept of Ecology

    (Ecology)

    8.  Section 402 Clean Water Act

    NPDES Waste Discharge Permit

    March 1, 2016

    Ecology

    9.  Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program Consistency Determination

    February 1, 2016

    Ecology

    10.  Aquatic Resources Use Authorization and

    Aquatic Land Lease

    February 1, 2016

    Washington Dept of

    Natural Resources (WDNR)

    11.  Aquatic Farm Registration

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    Washington Dept of

    Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)

    12.  Finfish Aquaculture Permit

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    WDFW

    13.  Finfish Transport Permit

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    WDFW

    14.  Private Aids to Navigation (PATON) permit(s)

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)

    Alan Cook

    Vice President Aquaculture

    Icicle Seafoods Inc.

    Phone:  206-384-9017

    Email:  Alanc@icicleseafoods.com

    ————————————————————

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    DON’T YOU JUST LOVE BEING “PERMITTED” TO RUN A BUSINESS IN THE U.S.A.?

    —————————————————————-

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    NOV 17, 2015  Elwha River claims section of road with massive washout; campground buried in silt, debris

    Elwha River claims section of road with massive washout …

    www.peninsuladailynews.com/article/20151123/…/311239985
    Peninsula Daily News

    Nov 22, 2015Peninsula Daily News

    OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK — The Elwha River flexed its new muscles during the most recent round of storms and severely damaged Olympic Hot Springs Road and effectively buried a campground in silt.

    When the water receded, Olympic National Park officials discovered the water had washed out a 60-foot-long section of Olympic Hot Springs Road, and much of Elwha Campground had nearly disappeared under more than a foot of silt and debris, Barb Maynes, spokeswoman for the park, had said over the weekend.

    “Other areas in the [Elwha] valley have seen damage — extensive damage,” Maynes said.

    Maynes said there is no established timeline yet for repairs or reopening damaged Elwha roads and campgrounds.

    ——————————————————

    Behind My Back | Go Find Your Park? Come Fix My Road?

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/01/28/go-find-your-park-comefixmyroad/

    Jan 28, 2016 – DEC 12, 2015 COME FIX MY ROAD REQUEST TO MY WA DC ELECTED … the full text of this 1430 word comment is on behindmyback.org.

    Behind My Back | Go Find Your Park? Come Fix My Road?

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/01/28/go-findyourparkcomefixmyroad/

    Jan 28, 2016JAN 28, 2016 THERE IS STILL, ZERO RESPONSE TO COME FIX MY ROAD FROM OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK OR MY ELECTED WA DC …

    Behind My Back | Find Your Park Open Doors Remove Barriers

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/02/10/gofind-your-park-opendoorsremovebarriers/

    Feb 10, 2016Open Doors, Remove barriers, Tell your story, Make a difference. ….. ERFO funds can go back to the FLMAs original account or a similar …

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits ?

    ——————————————————————–

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Sergio.Mayorga@dot.gov

    To: phew@wavecable.com

    Cc: Scott.Johnson@dot.gov

    Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 9:25 AM

    Subject: Olympic National Park Issue

    Dear Ms. Pearl Rains Hewett,

    Thank you for your call this morning regarding access to the Olympic National Park. It is my understanding that you are  an “inholder” (owner of private property ) inside the aforementioned NP unit. You asked me about the repairs being done to the road you use for access (Olympic Hot Spring Road). In order to be of further assistance to you. Please send me more information regarding your issue. I would like to know if the road was damaged and if so, when. I would like to know contact on the NPS I can talk. The Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads (ERFO) program provides funds to Federal Agencies for the repair of damaged roads due to natural event. If an event has been approved for funding and the Olympic Hot Spring Road is part of event, more than likely we have provided some funds for the repairs. However, I would need more information.

    Thank you,

    Sergio Mayorga

    BLM/FWS/ERFO Program Manager`

    HFL-1

    Room E61-206

    Federal Lands Highway

    FHWA

    U.S. Department of Transportation

    1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

    Washington, DC 20590

    202 366 9491

    ———————————————————-

    —– Original Message —–

    Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 12:46 PM
    Subject: Re: Olympic National Park Issue
    Dear Mr. Mayorga,
    Thank you for your prompt response.

    On Mon Feb 8, 2016 2:30PM there was a meeting  at Olympic National Park Headquarters regarding the closure of the Olympic Hot Springs Road to all public and private access. I told my story, expressed my concerns on the economic impact to the local community and asked questions.

    Clallam County Commissioner  Bill Peach, and three,
    National Park Service, U.S. Department of the Interior,
    Olympic National Park local Representatives attended the meeting.
    ———————————————————————
    The road was damaged and if so, when.

    Nov. 17, 2015 The Olympic Hot Springs Road (and trails) had a disastrous flooding event

    The damaged roads and trails were due to natural event.

    Jan 2016 received  recognition of Elwha River disastrous flooding event

    As you requested ONP contact information

    M. Sarah Creachbaum (360)565-3004
    Superintendent, of the Olympic National Park

    Lisa Turecek, PE  (360) 565-3150
    Chief of Facilities Management

    Brian Winter
    Elwha River Project Manager

    Clallam County Commissioner Bill Peach (360) 417-2238

    ————————————————

    Lisa Turecek, PE Chief of Facilities Management

    Nov 2015 file a notice notice of intent for Emergency Relief Program for funding

    Dec 2015 file a formal notice notice for Emergency Relief Program for funding

    Jan 2016 received  recognition of Elwha River disastrous flooding event

    Yes, in Jan 2016, the Olympic Hot Spring Road event has been approved for ERFO  funding.

    However,  Jan-Feb 2016?

    A damage survey was required for ERFO amount of funding?

    Has the damage survey been completed?

    Has the ERFO amount of funding been submitted and approved?

    Additionally…

    My understanding from the the Feb 8, 2016 meeting is that there are two specific hold-ups. identified as, the Army Corp of Engineers and  a required NOAA consultation under section 7.

    Commissioner Bill Peach, asked if the Olympic Hot Springs Road would be open by the 4th of July?

    In response, both Lisa Turecek, PE Chief of Facilities Management and Brian Winter Elwha River Project Manager answered.

    the Army Corp of Engineers must, be given time to respond, up to 60 days? Because a 100 foot bridge  must be built.

    Brian, that tentative plans to proceed shall required NOAA consultation under section 7,

    Commissioner Peach, asked When will the road be reopened to  public and private access?

    Lisa’s guesstimated was four months from the time that construction was permitted to start.

    At this point in time I am asking for help from anyone that can expedite the hold-ups, repair the Olympic Hot Springs Roads and trails, and, have public access completed for the 2016 tourist season that starts in late May.

    Tourism runs our local economy, it provides income to our business’s, jobs and income to our unemployeed, and food on the plates of our hungry families.

    Thank you for your assistance

    I am concerned for the economy of our local community.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Inholder Olympic National Park

    What ever it takes to get the job done.

    ————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | PDN What’s Wrong With These Pictures?

    www.behindmyback.org/2016/02/…/pdn-feb-17-2016-whats-wrong-with-these-pictur…

    Feb 18, 2016Behind My Back | Go Find Your Park? Come Fix My Road? Posted on January 28, 2016 8:17 am by Pearl Rains Hewett JAN 19, 2016 STILL, …

    Behind My Back | Public Access to Public land

    www.behindmyback.org/category/public-access-to-public-land/

    Apr 27, 2016Jan 28, 2016 – DEC 12, 2015 COME FIX MY ROAD REQUEST TO MY WA DC ELECTED REPS …. permalink. « Go Find Your Park ONP …

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits

    ——————————————————-

    All Vehicle Access to Public and private Inholder land and facilities  has been denied on the Olympic Hot Springs Road since since No. 17, 2015

    May 18, 2016 Re: vehicle access  to private Inholder Property on the Elwha River

    Brian D. Winter, Ph.D. Elwha Project Mgr/Lands Mgr

    Mr. Winters,  said to feel free to pass it on to the other landowners, each will have to contact him for the combination and agreeing to the conditions.

    Mr. Winters message…

    We believe we have a solution that will meet your needs. Until the new bridge that will allow public access can get installed, the area will remain closed except for administrative use, per my April 28, 2016 email message to you. However, we are procuring a combination lock so we can double lock the gate with that and a NPS lock. Once we get it in place, I will provide you with the combination. Following are conditions you will need to adhere to. If you can not do so or choose not to comply with them, we will need to remove the combination lock.

    At this time, only you can use the combination lock, so you should not share the combination with anyone. If other landowners would like the same access as you, they should contact me directly. I can then give them the combination. This step is necessary so OLYM staff know who is approved to drive past the gate.

    The gate should be locked behind you whenever you pass through it, coming or going. Leaving the gate unlocked will allow unapproved access to occur. Do not leave the gate unlocked assuming someone behind you will lock it.

    Even though there is no public vehicle access beyond the gate, you must comply with all posted speed limits. In fact, we urge extra caution by slowing down further on blind curves. The public is accessing the site by foot and bicycle, and many people assume there are no vehicles on the road so they may in fact be in the middle of the road when you come upon them. There are government vehicles past the gate as well.

    The existing bridge does not have guardrails. Slow down to 5 miles per hour when passing over it, and use a spotter to assist your crossing if you are able to. At all times before crossing the bridge, assess your safety and that of others in the vicinity before doing so.

    Vehicle access to your private property only is approved. Do not access any locations upstream of your property by vehicle.

    Please let me know if you agree with the conditions above for accessing your private property within Olympic National Park.

    Thank you,

    Brian D. Winter, Ph.D.

    Elwha Project Mgr/Lands Mgr

    Olympic National Park

    600 East Park Avenue

    Port Angeles, WA 98362

    (360) 565-3006

    ——————————————————————-

    I called Mr. Winters  May 19, 2016 to request the combination for gate access to our family’s Inholders property at 11:00AM. He is out of his office… so I left him a message.

    ———————————————————-

    I also sent the following email to ONP Superintendent Creachbaum

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Sarah Creachbaum

    Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2016 11:16 AM

    Subject: Inholders property combination for gate access

    Hi Sarah,

    I called Mr. Winters  May 19, 2016 to request the combination for gate access to our family’s Inholders property at 11:00AM. He is out of his office… so I left him a message.

    Will you call me and provide the combination?

    Thanks

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    ————————————————————————-

    Government business as usual


  • Calif. Farmers High Dry and Destitute

    Calif. Farmers HIGH, DRY AND DESTITUTE

    Obama admin allocates water for endangered fish, leaves …

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

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

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

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

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

    ——————————————————-

    New post on Pie N Politics

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

    ———————————————————–

    PLEASE CLICK ON  AND LISTEN TO THE

    subcommittee hearing

    ———————————————————-

    High, Dry and Destitute

    Posted on by Pearl Rains Hewett

    Fish Before People Regardless of Cost

    Fish Before People Regardless of Cost

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

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

    FARMERS BEFORE FISH?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    The petition was denied on January 12, 2015.

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

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

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

    Washington State Declares Drought Emergency

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

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

    ————————————————————————————————–

    How complex is this?

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

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

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

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

    What happened to this?

    Western Water and American Food Security Act (HR 2898)

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

    ——————————————————-

    Dec 4, 2015

    Behind My Back | Congress Must Act on Water Issues

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

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

    Comment


  • WOW Opposition to Wild Olympics

    WOW Opposition to Wild Olympics

    Yesterday, Ross and I, (two 74 year old senior citizens) put up (12) “STOP WILD OLYMPICS” signs on highway 101.

    Yes, it is that important….

    TO THWART THE GOVERNMENTS  GRABBING OF MORE OF OUR PUBLIC AND PRIVATE LAND FOR MORE WILD WILDERNESS LAND AND RIVERS IN THE OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK

    Have you seen the signs? Do you know what is behind them? Why the opposition to MORE Wild Olympics?

    The signs read  Stop Wild Olympics $900 Million Land Grab

    Do you know what is behind them? (more info at the bottom)

    Most people have no knowledge of these vast,  LAND AND POWER GRAB encroachments to take our property and property rights on the Olympic Peninsula, and it is time that the truth be known

    Why the opposition to MORE Wild?

    FEAR…. FEAR OF WHAT THE GOVERNMENT IS GOING TO DO AMERICAN CITIZENS.

    2015  MORE WILD OLYMPICS PLUS MORE WILDERNESS,  CREATES MORE FEAR, MORE ECONOMIC STARVATION, MORE POVERTY, MORE UNEMPLOYMENT, MORE FEAR OF GRABBING OF  MORE PRIVATE PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN IN FAMILIES FOR GENERATIONS BY IMMINENT DOMAIN

    Do you know who is behind this?

    Our own federal elected representatives.

    Grabbing our, public and private land, grabbing our economy,  NO logging, NO mining, NO commercial development or NO motorized vehicle access, grabbing our access to our PUBLIC USE AND ENJOYMENT  on 126,000 acres of public land  It would also designate 19 rivers on the OLYMPIC PENINSULA  as wild and scenic.

    This land grabbing will never STOP  unless we the people, property owners and tax payers start fighting back to STOP THE LAND GRAB and the taking of all our property on the Olympic Peninsula.

    We have a bloated bureaucracy providing nothing, living off of our tax dollars and still grabbing, to take MORE of our public and private land from us, with our more of our own tax dollars.

    How can a Federal Government of ours pay money MORE MONEY for things like this when our government, the  UNITED STATES NATIONAL DEBT IS

     $18,161,486,020,506.42 TRILLION DOLLARS.?

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

    WHO KNEW? DID YOU KNOW?

    WILDERNESS AREAS ARE WITHDRAWN FROM THE PUBLIC LAND LAWS and the mining and mineral leasing laws. (read more, Wilderness: Legislation and Issues in the 113th Congress)

    U.S. Code: Title 43 – PUBLIC LANDS | US Law | LII / Legal …

    www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/43

    Legal Information Institute

    CHAPTER 1—BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT (§§ 1–25_to_25b) · CHAPTER … CHAPTER 13—FEDERAL LANDS INCLUDED IN STATE IRRIGATION …

    ——————————————————————————————-

    WILDERNESS AREAS ARE WITHDRAWN FROM THE PUBLIC LAND LAWS

     The complete 42 chapters of Public Land laws are listed at the bottom.

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

    950,000 ACRES OF WILD WILDERNESS DESIGNATION, of the OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARKS  million acres of AMERICAN public land has already been grabbed  by CONGRESS

    ALREADY  CONTROLLED AND PROTECTED, OFF LIMITS, UNTRAMMELED,  “WILD OLYMPICS” WILDERNESS  BY THE UNITED NATIONS.

    KILMER AND MURRAY WANT TO GRAB MORE “WILD OLYMPICS” WILDERNESS

    The Olympic Peninsula ECONOMY DOES NOT GROW ON WILDERNESS

    The Olympic Peninsula ECONOMY GROWS ON TREES

    The trees that grow in “Wild Olympics’ Wilderness don’t WORK for the ECONOMY

    And, they don’t WORK for Olympic Peninsula WORKING FAMILIES

    ————————————————————————————

    Olympic Peninsula JOBS DON’T GROW IN THE “WILD OLYMPICS WILDERNESS”

    Olympic Peninsula  OUR JOBS GROW ON TREES

    Olympic Peninsula  OUR ECONOMY GROWS ON TREES

    Olympic Peninsula  OUR MONEY GROWS ON TREES

    ————————————————————————————–

    The  WILD OLYMPICS IS A FEDERAL LAND GRAB WILL THAT SHALL CLOSE roads and cut off recreational access to our public lands.  

    Most areas protected as or proposed for WILDERNESS are undeveloped, with few (if any) signs of human activity, such as ROADS and structures

    ———————————————————————–

    Behind My Back | The Roadless Crew Cantwell and Inslee

    The Wilderness  designation prohibits commercial  activities, motorized access, and human infrastructure from wilderness area. The WILDERNESS authority is permanent, with limited access permitted for specific areas, uses, and times, or with the authority to operate and maintain pre-existing infrastructure.

    The potential losses (opportunity costs) for some resources, such as timber harvesting, can be determined with relative accuracy

    ——————————————————————————

    The “CONS” of Wilderness Designations

    Opponents of wilderness generally seek to retain development options for federal lands. The potential use of lands and resources can provide economic opportunities in extracting and developing the resources, especially in the relatively rural communities in and around the federal lands. The principal cost of a wilderness designation is the lost opportunity for economic activity resulting from resource extraction and development.

    While some economic activities, such as grazing ( the Bundy Ranch?) and outfitting, are allowed to continue within wilderness areas, many are prohibited. The potential losses (opportunity costs) for some resources, such as timber harvesting, can be determined with relative accuracy, since the quality and quantity of the resource can be measured.

    ————————————————————-

     IF WE “THE PEOPLE” DON’T WANT CONGRESS TO GRAB MORE PUBLIC LAND.…

    “WE THE PEOPLE” SHOULD MAKE IT AS DIFFICULT AS POSSIBLE…

    “WE THE PEOPLE”  SHOULD MAKE EVERY ATTEMPT TO MAKE MORE WILD OLYMPICS IMPOSSIBLE….

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

    WILDERNESS AREAS ARE WITHDRAWN FROM THE PUBLIC LAND LAWS

     The complete 42 chapters

    U.S. Code: Title 43 – PUBLIC LANDS

    prev | next

    ———————————————————————————————-

    I received this comment on the STOP WILD SIGNS

    ———————————————-

    The 900 million $ land grab sign is not very applicable since the WOC dropped the private property expansion of ONP.  Only an observation on my part

    —————————————————————————————

    My response was…

    Any $$$ amount on the WILD OLYMPICS LAND GRABBING is just a drop in the bucket…

    The cumulative $$$ total of the land grabs that increased the park to nearly a million acres?

    The cumulative $$$ total of the loss of income to the forest industry?

    The cumulative $$$ total of the loss of income mill closures?

    The potential losses (opportunity costs) for some resources, such as timber harvesting, can be determined with relative accuracy

    There is no reference to time frame or origin of the $$$ amount on the signs.

    It is just a nice round number that grabs  attention.

    For all we know?? it could be BILLIONS of dollars???

    Thank you for caring enough to observe and respond.

     


  • 2015 Back to the WAR on Wild

    2015 Back to the WAR on Wild

    SO? WA STATE elected representatives, SENATOR MURRAY AND REPRESENTATIVE KILMER have renewed their push for  “MORE WILD” WILDERNESS” ….

    Jun 4, 2015 Press Release (WASHINGTON, D.C.)—Today, Senator Patty Murray (D-WA) and Representative Derek Kilmer (WA-06) introduced the Wild Olympics Wilderness and Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 2015 to protect environmentally sensitive parts of the Olympic Peninsula, support outdoor recreation opportunities, and preserve and grow jobs on the Olympic Peninsula. 

    ————————————————————————-

    Comments on the liberal 2015 “Wild” Disabling Act

    —————————————————————————————-

    May 17, 2012

    An observation on “WILD” from Pearl Rains Hewett – Pie N …

    pienpolitics.com/?p=9958

    An observation on “WILD” from Pearl Rains Hewett. May 17, 2012WILD OLYMPICS over 300 million are deprived the full use and enjoyment of the public …

    ———————————————————————————–

    AND? ” This MORE Wild Olympics” Wilderness “WORKS” FOR SENATOR MURRAY AND REPRESENTATIVE KILMER?

    ——————————————————————————————-

    AND? How does MORE “Wild Olympics” Wilderness WORK for LOCAL PEOPLE?

    MORE  “Wild Olympics” Wilderness Works for?

    Seasonal tourism jobs

    Poverty level income

    Part time, minimum wage employment

    Seasonal Unemployment

    Seasonal Welfare

    Poverty level income

    Entitlement to food stamps

    Entitlement to free hot lunches

    ——————————————————————

    MORE “Wild Olympics” Wilderness WORKS TO?

    Deprive over 300 million American people of the full use and enjoyment of all National Parks

    Regulate and restrict

    Limit public access

    Restrict Handicap use

    Impose quotas

    Close roads

    Close hiking trails

    Close campgrounds

    Close day use picnic areas

    Lock up Public land

    Gate Public land

    Prohibit motorized recreational vehicles

    Prohibits motorized response to wild fires

    Prohibit motorized boats

    Take more Public Trust Land

    ——————————————————————————

    How  does MORE work for over 300 million Americans?

    IN 2014,  THE WILDING OF AMERICA PUBLIC LAND TOTALED 109,511,966 ACRES IN 44 STATES.

    ALL DESIGNATED AS “WILD”  WILDERNESS NATIONAL PUBLIC PARK LAND

    757 WILDERNESS AREAS OF NATIONAL PUBLIC PARK LAND TO RESTRICT THE USE, BENEFIT AND ENJOYMENT OF   ’WE THE PEOPLE”  

    ALL NATIONAL PARK WILDERNESS LAND DEPRIVES OVER 300 MILLION AMERICAN PEOPLE OF THE FULL USE AND ENJOYMENT OF ALL NATIONAL PARKS

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

    AND IN 2015 MURRAY AND KILMER WANT MORE “WILDNESS”? …. WILD OLYMPICS WILDERNESS AND WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT?

    INITIALLY TAKING? AND CREATING 9.1 MILLION ACRES OF WILD LANDS?

    CONGRESS  has habitually USED their power to “WILD AMERICA’S NATIONAL PUBLIC PARKS PUBLIC LAND” TO TAKE, EXPAND AND EXPEND, USING OUR TAX DOLLARS,

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

    2015 SO? SENATOR MURRAY AND REPRESENTATIVE KILMER HAVE RENEWED THEIR PUSH ON MORE “WILD”….

    The Bills are S 1510 and HR 2665, but the bills have not been made available publicly yet?

    KILMER AND MURRAY  “DON’T WORK” FOR PEOPLE

    THEY DON’T WORK FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO PUBLIC LAND

    THEY “DON’T WORK” FOR THE ECONOMY

    THEY “DON’T WORK” TO SUPPORT OUR LOCAL WORKING FAMILIES, JOBS AND ECONOMY.

    ——————————————————————————————-

    SHALL AMERICAN CITIZENS “WAIT” until they are passed to find out what is in them?

    Absolutely not.. when political push on “WILD” comes to shove?

    Back to The Wild Olympics Scam

    BACK TO THE TRENCHES, Back to the “STOP WILD OLYMPICS” Headquarters at Amanda Park, back to the sign making AND POSTING OF SIGNS ON THE OLYMPIC PENINSULA

    Back to the WAR on Wild (WOW) postings on my website

    THE WILD US government has pushed us around enough

    THE WILD US government has pushed us off enough

    THE WILD US government has pushed on us enough

    ——————————————————————————

    PUT ALL OF THIS  in the window of the STOP WILD OLYMPICS HEADQUARTERS  at Amanda Park It’s right on Hiway 101.

    PUT ALL OF THIS  In very busy business places, both for locals and tourists and right next to the public Bus Stop too, serving Grays Harbor & the Jefferson Shuttle to forks..

    PUT ALL OF THIS up for those waiting for the bus and always scanning the windows.

    PUT ALL OF THIS  up for tourists and travelers taking a road breather and those stopping for supplies that always read it too.

    PUT ALL OF THIS  New input material up where it will do the most good, POST ROADSIDE SIGNS, POST IT IN EVERY BUSINESS IN TOWN,  PLASTER IT UP  EVERYWHERE FOR PUBLIC VIEW.

    POST IT IN EVERY BUSINESS IN TOWN THAT OPPOSES Kilmer and Murray’s 2015 THE WILD OLYMPICS WILDERNESS AND WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT

    PRINT IT OUT, HAND IT OUT, BUMPER STICK IT.. STICK IT ON TELEPHONE POLES…

    Stick it under wiper blades…

    ——————————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | Part 1 (WOW) a War on Wild?

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/01/27/part1-wow-a-war-on-wild/

    Jan 27, 2014 – Now is the time for many of us to speak of a War On Wild and keep our … What has a War on Wild got to with a predictable future of more wild …

    ———————————————————————————————–

    ·         PART (12) WOW Deprived of Our Use

    Posted on by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    PART (12) WOW  Deprived of Our Use

    What happens?  when over 300 million American Citizens are DEPRIVED of the full use and enjoyment of every WILD National Park public land?

    IS THERE A PROBLEM?

    WITH RESTRICTED PUBLIC ACCESS, TO OVER 300 MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS?

    THOSE 300 MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS THAT ARE BEING DEPRIVED OF THE FULL USE, ENJOYMENT AND BENEFIT OF 109,511,966 “WILD” AKA “DESIGNATED WILDERNESS” ACRES OF NATIONAL PARK PUBLIC LAND IN 44 STATES, IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA?

    ——————————————————————

    WHAT’S THE  PROBLEM?

    We the American People have been DEPRIVED OF OUR USE and USED BY THE U.S. CONGRESS.

    CONGRESS HAS ABUSED US, BY DENYING “WE THE PEOPLE” OUR HISTORICALLY DOCUMENTED RIGHT TO THE USE OF PUBLIC LAND.

    CONGRESS HAS EXPANDED, EXPENDED, USED OUR MONEY, SPENT THEIR TIME, ENERGY, EFFORT

    LAYING DOWN FEDERAL LAWS THAT CONFLICT WITH AMERICAN SOVEREIGNTY

    TO FINANCE, GRANT, PROMOTE AND TO FULFILL THE GLOBAL NGO’S, THE UN AGENDA 21 AND TO REWILD AMERICA.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Indeed, the American People have been TAKEN by CONGRESS.

    INITIALLY TAKING? AND CREATING 9.1 MILLION ACRES OF WILD LANDS

    CONGRESS  has habitually USED their power to “WILD AMERICA’S NATIONAL PUBLIC PARKS PUBLIC LAND”

    TO TAKE, EXPAND AND EXPEND, USING OUR TAX DOLLARS,

    TO RESTRICT THE USE, BENEFIT AND ENJOYMENT OF   ’WE THE PEOPLE”  IN  757 WILDERNESS AREAS OF NATIONAL PUBLIC PARK LAND.

    NOW  IN 2014,  THE WILDING OF AMERICA PUBLIC LAND NOW TOTALS 109,511,966 ACRES IN 44 STATES.

    ALL DESIGNATED AS “WILD”  WILDERNESS NATIONAL PUBLIC PARK LAND

    ————————————————————————–

    PROBLEMS WITH WILDERNESS?

    “WE THE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN USED” AND OUR $$$  HAS BEEN USED UP BY CONGRESS

    TAXPAYERS money or an amount of money, time, energy, effort, or some other resource, often UNTIL NONE IS LEFT.

    CONTROLLED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

    ENFORCED BY THE NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

    GRANTED  WITH TAXPAYERS $$$

    NGO’S THAT manipulate (CONGRESS) or exploit somebody (CONGRESS) to exploit or manipulate somebody

    THE U.S. CONGRESS WAS USED as a means to an end.

    THE U.S. CONGRESS USED  OUR $$$ TO FINANCE, GRANT AND PROMOTE,  TO FULFILL THE UN AGENDA 21, THE GLOBAL NGO’S  AND THE REWILDING OF  AMERICA.

    AND, “WE THE AMERICAN PEOPLE” WERE USED

    AS THE DEEP POCKETS TO FINANCE ALL OF IT.

    ———————————————————————————-

    NOW, JUNE 9, 2015 OVER THREE YEARS OLD… HOW WILD IS THAT?

    An observation on “WILD” from Pearl Rains Hewett

    May 17, 2012 Pienpolitics.com/?p=9958 Federal gov & land grabs

    WILD OLYMPICS over 300 million are deprived the full use and enjoyment of the public land

    EVERY AMERICAN CITIZEN ( over 300 million) IS DEPRIVED IN EVERY WILD NATIONAL PARK

    AND ON EVERY WILD AND SCENIC RIVER.

    WILD OLYMPICS vs  OVER 300 MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS DEPRIVED

    OF THE FULL USE AND ENJOYMENT OF OVER ONE MILLION ACRES OF PUBLIC LAND

    IN JUST THE OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK

    POPULATION OF UNITED STATES OF AMERICA  Source: U.S. Census Bureau

    311,591,917 Three hundred eleven million, five hundred ninty one thousand, nine hundred and seventeen

    What was the intent of Congress with regard to the full use and enjoyment of the public land, in the creation of Olympic National Park,  by the American People that own that public land?

    Due process of law when just a single citizen is deprived?

    What happens when over 300 million American Citizens are deprived of the full use and enjoyment of every WILD National Park public land?

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    ———————————————————————————-

    What was the intent of Congress with regard to the full use and enjoyment of the public land, in the creation of all National Park,  Parks created by the American People, of the people and for the people, that own that public land?

    INITIALLY FOR THE USE? AND BENEFIT? OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

    USE by definition, employ something for purpose?

    TO THE BENEFIT OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE?

    BENEFIT by definition, SOMETHING THAT HAS A GOOD EFFECT OR PROMOTES WELL-BEING,  to give somebody or receive help, an advantage, or another benefit.  Put something into action or service for some purpose.

     


  • The ROSS Approach to Puget Sound

    The ROSS Approach to Puget Sound

    OUR WATER AND TIMBER

     THE REGIONAL OPEN SPACE STRATEGY (ROSS)

     http://openspacepugetsound.org/ross-approach

    LOCAL PRIORITIES IN PUGET SOUND

    At the heart of the ROSS are WATERSHED Open Space Strategies, engaging local stakeholders who know the priorities and challenges of their sub-basins intimately.

    ——————————————————————————-

    Local stakeholders who know the priorities and challenges of their sub-basins intimately?  Skagit and Clallam County.

    Behind My Back | High, Dry and Destitute

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

    Feb 1, 2015 – High, Dry and Destitute WA State citizens, private property owners and …

    —————————————————————————–

    REGIONAL ANALYSIS IN PUGET SOUND

    Together, we will analyze and SYNTHESIZE local priorities and regional challenges to plan across traditional jurisdictional and watershed boundary lines for our shared future.

    ——————————————————————–

    THE ROSS APPROACH ON MANAGED  TIMBER  PRODUCTION

     GOT TIMBER?  WANT DNR TO GIVE CLALLAM COUNTY’S TIMBER BACK?

     THE  WASHINGTON  STATE  DEPARTMENT  OF  NATURAL  RESOURCES  HAS  GIS  SPATIAL  DATA  SETS  ABOUT  FOREST  PRACTICES  WHERE  THE  TIMBER  HARVEST  AREAS  CAN  BE  SEEN  IN  POLYGONS.

     BETTER CHECK IT OUT…

    ———————————————————————-

    I Signed up for the ROSS Newsletter!

    I will receive monthly project updates and opportunities to get engaged in the Regional Open Space Strategy.

    ————————————————————————————-

    Informing Conservation Decisions Based on Ecosystem Services

    Managed  timber  production PAGE 9

    In  the  context  of the  ROSS,  we  ATTEMPTED  to  use  the  MODEL  to  assess  general  habitat  rarity  and  quality  within  our  focus  area.

    All  types  of  land  covers  that  were  open  space habitat.

    THREATS  CONSIDERED  IN  THE  MODEL  WERE  ROADS,  HIGHWAY,  TRAILS,  AND  DEVELOPED  LAND.  The  relative  sensitivities  of  land  cover  to  these  THREATS  used  in  the  model  WERE  PLACEHOLDERS  SINCE  CONCLUSIVE  DATA  FOR  THESE  VALUES  COULD  NOT  BE  FOUND.

    Ultimately, we  could  not  run  the  model, even  as  a  trial,  because  of  technical  issues.  The  InVEST software  displayed  an  error  that  the  GIS  data  used  did  not  cover  the  same  geographic  space.

    While  this  was  not  the  case,  our  team  did  not  resolve  the  issue in  time  for  this  report.  Managed  timber  production  model  The  InVEST  timber  model  has  been  developed  to  measure  the  amount  and  volume  of  the  timber  produced  over  a  time  period  and  to  calculate  the  net  present  value  of  that.

    The  amount  of  timber  harvests  from  both  natural  forests  and  managed  plantations  can  be  estimated  by  using  this  model.    The  model  requires vector  GIS  data,  information  about  harvest  levels,  frequency  of  harvest,  costs  of  harvesting  and  management  practices for  each  timber  harvest  parcel.  The  model  can  make  two  types  of  calculations  in  terms  of  the  selected  time  period:  the  timber  parcel  map  can  be  related  either  to  a  current  map  or  to  a  future  scenario  map.

    The  TIMBER  MODEL  can  be  especially  useful  for  ONE  OF  THE ROSS’  KEY  AREAS: “Rural  and  Resource  Lands”.    Since  the  model  gives  as  output  the  amount  and  volume  of  the  timber  produced  over  a  period  of  time  and  that  harvest’s  net  present  value,  it  can  be  beneficial  in  terms  of  calculating the  OPPORTUNITY  costs  of  preserving  a  forestland  or  opening  it  up  for  development.  

    THE  WASHINGTON  STATE  DEPARTMENT  OF  NATURAL  RESOURCES  HAS  GIS  SPATIAL  DATA  SETS  ABOUT  FOREST  PRACTICES  WHERE  THE  TIMBER  HARVEST  AREAS  CAN  BE  SEEN  IN  POLYGONS.  The  information  about  the  volume  of  timber  produced  is  available  too.

    HOWEVER,  in  order  to  be  able  to  run  the  model  other  data  needs  (such  as  frequency  of  harvesting,  percentage  of harvesting,  maintenance  cost,  and  harvesting  cost)  need  to  be  collected  from  the  timber  parcel  owners.

    While  running  trial  of  this  model  we  discovered  that  in  order to  find  the  necessary  data  mentioned  above  to  run  the  model  we  would  need  to  conduct  a  field  study  and  collect  the  information  from  each  parcel  owner.  As  our  time  to  complete  the  study  was  limited, we  could  not  conduct  a  field  study.  It  may  be  POSSIBLE  in  the  future  to use  sustainable  forest  practices  information  to  estimate  for  example  the  frequency  of  timber  harvesting  in  Pierce  County.

    HOWEVER,  we learned  that the  definition  of  sustainable  forest  practices  may  vary  from  one  landowner  to  another  and  that  we  cannot  generalize  one  model  for  each  timber  harvest.

    THUS,  as  a  result  we  could  not  run  the  model.  Figure  6  provides  an  example  for how  the  model  output  can  be  used  in  VISUALIZATION  of  different  scenarios.

    The  last  column  in  the  figure  entitled  “MARKET  VALUE  OF  COMMODITY  PRODUCTION”  includes  the  value  of  the  timber  produced  in  that  area.  The  greenest  color  represents  the  highest  production  of  ecosystem  services  and  the  pinkest  color  represents  the  lowest  value  of  them.  For  example, in  the  conservation  scenario  it  can  be  seen  that  the  market  value  of  the  commodity  produced is  lowest  whereas  carbon  sequestration  has  the  highest  value  in  that  scenario……

    ———————————————————————————-

    OUR WATER And OUR TIMBER, WHO COULD ASK FOR ANYTHING MORE?

    Ask a Silly Question?

    The Butterfly has landed?
    What does the expansion of a military base  have to do with designating 150 acres of Clallam County property to a WA State conservancy group as OPEN SPACE FOR AN ENDANGERED BUTTERFLY?

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

    THE REGIONAL OPEN SPACE STRATEGY (ROSS)

    DRAFT Committee Structure & Organizational Framework

    Regional Open Space Strategy (ROSS)

    DRAFT

    Committee Structure & Organizational Framework

    Executive Committee

    Role: Project Guidance & Endorsement of ROSS

    Lead: Ron Sims (PSP Leadership Council)

    Oct 12, 2011 – … Executive Ron Sims to the Puget Sound Partnership Leadership Council.

    Members: PSRC; Decision-Makers in King, Kitsap,

    Pierce, & Snohomish; Land & Resource Conservation

    Agency & Association Directors; MAJOR AGRICULTURE &

    FORESTRY INTERESTS, Large Community Organizations;

    and Supporting Financial Institutions

    ———————————————-

    ROSS Project Team

    Role: Staffing & Coordination

    Lead: Green Futures Lab

    Members: NCLC, National Park

    Service RTCA Program, & The

    Bullitt Foundation.

    ————————————————-

    Steering Committee

    Role: Oversight, Integrated ROSS Development

    Lead: TBD Members:

    Land Trusts; Key National, State, PSRC,

    County, City, Tribe, & Port Staff; Environmental

    Management Orgs.; Advocacy & Community Interests;

    Economic/Workforce Interests; Design & Planning

    Professionals, and Research Institutions

    ———————————————————

    Technical Advisory Committees

    Role: Work Sessions & Issue Paper

    Lead: Bob Feurstenberg

    & TBD Members:, USFS, NPS, TPL, TNC,

    Earth Economics, PSP, Forterra

    PSRC, Research Institutes, etc

    ——————————————————

    Recreation & Trails Advisory Committee

    Role: Work Sessions & Issue Paper

    Lead: Amy Shumann (PHSKC) & Jennifer Knauer(PSP)

    Members:  WSDOT, BAW, CBC, NPS, TPL, SPF, Parks/Recreation &

    Health Depts., Greenways, etc

    —————————————————————–

    Rural & Resource Lands Advisory Committee

    Role: Work Sessions & Issue Paper

    Lead: Lauren Smith (King County) & Skip Swenson (Forterra)

    Members: TPL, TNC, Land Trusts, Farm/Forestry Orgs., Labor, Property Rights, Cons.

    Dists., etc.

    —————————————————–

    Urban & Community Plan Advisory Committee

     Role: Work Sessions & Issue Paper

    Lead: Joe Tovar (Inova) & Ben Bakkenta( PSRC)

    Members: Forterra, ULI, Impact Capital, Great City,

    Tilth, SPF, Groundswell NW, Greenways, etc

    —————————————————————————–

    WATERSHED OPEN SPACE TASKFORCES

    Role: Watershed Open Space Studies.

    Leads:  Associated Watershed Councils & Conservation Districts

    ————————————————————–

    Regional Open Space Strategy (ROSS)

    INCLUDING, BUT NOT LIMITED TO ALL OF THE ATTACHMENTS BELOW

    It’s an extensive partnership of governments and non-profits.

    Implementation of the strategy will require buy-in $$$$$$ And, the power

    They have begun mapping the priority areas to consider for acquisition

    Conservation Decisions Based on Ecosystem Services

    Prepared for the Regional Open Space Strategy of Central Puget Sound

    Regional Open Space Strategy (ROSS)

    http://openspacepugetsound.org/ross-approach

    The ROSS approach brings together decision makers, planners, businesses, and individuals with the power to make smart, regional-based, and coordinated decisions to support open space and our future quality of life in the Puget Sound Region. This collaborative effort is stewarded by the University of Washington’s award-winning Green Futures Lab.

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

    I found above plan/strategy in the MRSC publication.  This has to be a part of the desired ARL sweep.  The article says they have begun mapping the priority areas to consider for acquisition (haven’t found them yet).  Implementation of the strategy will require buy-in from an informed citizenry and the support of the regions leaders from both public and private sectors.

    IT’S AN EXTENSIVE PARTNERSHIP OF GOVERNMENTS AND NON-PROFITS.

    http://openspacepugetsound.org/ross-approach

    DRAFT Committee Structure & Organizational Framework

    Introduction to the Regional Open Space Strategy (ROSS)

    A Collective Vision

    PRELIMINARY COMPREHENSIVE STRATEGY

    Researching and Analyzing Governance Models for UW Green Futures Research + Design Lab

    Informing Conservation Decisions Based on Ecosystem Services

    ————————————————————————————————–

    THIS  EXTENSIVE PARTNERSHIP OF GOVERNMENTS AND NON-PROFITS, HAS BECOME AN ALL TOO FREQUENT PATTERN IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    ——————————————————————————————

    This is part of  my comment on the Clallam County New SMP Matrix

    THE NGO, NOTHING TO LOSERS, PILING ONE NGO NON-TAXPAYING  SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPIES COMMENTS,  on top of another NGO non-taxpaying  special interest group comment, all in collusion with, in cahoots with, in partnership,affiliated with, paid for by and with grants and with our tax dollars, from  local, county, state and federal government agencies.

    AND, WITH ALL OF OUR FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL  ELECTED, APPOINTED AND PAID EMPLOYEES IN ALL AGENCIES, IN PARTNERSHIP WITH, IN COLLUSION WITH, IN CAHOOTS WITH, AFFILIATED WITH AND COORDINATING WITH THE GLOBAL, OUT OF TOWNERS, NGO, NOTHING TO LOSERS NON-TAXPAYING  OPPORTUNISTIC SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS.

    Sound familiar?

    —————————————————————————————-

    Indeed, THIS  EXTENSIVE PARTNERSHIP OF GOVERNMENTS AND NON-PROFITS, HAS BECOME AN ALL TOO FREQUENT PATTERN IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

    “WE’RE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THE MORE THAN 600 PARTNERS TOGETHER”

    A quote from Gerry O’Keefe, executive director of the Puget Sound Partnership.

    The Washington State legislature created the Puget Sound Partnership a state agency dedicated to identifying, prioritizing, and coordinating efforts to protect and RESTORE PUGET SOUND.

    Since its founding in 2007, the partnership has collaborated with state and federal agencies, local governments, tribes, businesses, and citizen groups to achieve specific cleanup and restoration goals for Puget Sound.

    Who knew about this? Who knew about ROSS?

    (PSNERP) PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT
    A 373 PAGE REPORT ON THE RESTORATION OF PUGET SOUND.

    THIS IS NOT A CASUAL REPORT OF RESTORATION FOR THE SMP UPDATE

    The PSNERP GI study area includes the entire portion of Puget Sound, and the Straits of Juan deFuca and southern Strait of Georgia that occur within the borders of the United States;

     DATA IS ALSO ACQUIRED FOR WATER SHED DRAINAGE AREAS of Puget Sound rivers that extend into Canada.

    “WE’RE RESPONSIBLE FOR BRINGING THE MORE THAN 600 PARTNERS TOGETHER”

    A quote from Gerry O’Keefe, executive director of the Puget Sound Partnership.

    ——————————————————————————–

    Behind My Back | The “RESTORATION” Shell Game

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/06/09/the-restorationshellgame/

    Jun 9, 2014 – A highly convoluted “GAME OF RESTORATION” that is involving the … MANY NUTS CAN YOU GET UNDER ONE RESTORATION SHELL?

     


  • SB 5916 A New “FEE” for All

    SB  5916 A New WA State Legislated “FEE” for All PRIVATE BUSINESSES

    Senate Bill 5916: Enacting the tourism marketing act
    Substitute offered in the Senate on April 2, 2015, replaces the North American Industry Classification System codes with specific descriptions of the businesses that comprise the tourism sectors that will be assessed annual fees.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=168233

    THIS IS A ISSUE OF STATEWIDE CONCERN.

    IF YOU HAVE, OWN OR  RUN A PRIVATE BUSINESS IN WA STATE? 

    —————————————————————————-

    The program, SENATE WAYS & MEANS for purposes of this subsection,

    “TAXABLE AMOUNT” MEANS THE GROSS INCOME OF THE BUSINESS as defined in  RCW 82.04.080 and GROSS INCOME as defined in RCW 82.16.010

    REMEMBER THIS NEW WA STATE  “FEE” FOR ALL BUSINESS’S IS NOT A TAX

    It’s just another RUSE  by WA State Legislators to take more local money from our local business’s, remove more money from our local economy  and give it to the WE’S WHO WANT

    THE FEES AND CHARGES IMPOSED IN THIS CHAPTER

    WILL BRING DIRECT BENEFITS TO THOSE PAYING THE FEES AND CHARGES?

     BY BRINGING MORE TOURISTS INTO THE STATE WHO WILL PATRONIZE THE PARTICIPATING BUSINESSES.

    —————————————————————–

    LOCAL BUSINESSES SUBJECT TO THE FEES? GET A PROMISE OF MORE TOURIST INCOME?

     ———————————————————-

    WHAT WA STATE LEGISLATION SB 5916  REALLY DOES WITH THE INCOME FROM THE LOCAL BUSINESS FEES $$$?

    THE WE’S WHO WANT MUST-SHALL GET THEIR SHARE  OF ALL INCOME RECEIVED.

     Please take the time to read the entire SB 5916.

    What WA state does with the $$$ is way down at the bottom. (it is an outrage)

     WITH WA STATE GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE?  ( A LEGISLATED ACT SB 5916) IN COLLECTING THESE FUNDS

     BY ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES SENATE BILL 5916: ENACTING THE TOURISM MARKETING ACT

    BY THE “AUTHORITY” MEANS THE “NEW”WASHINGTON TOURISM MARKETING AUTHORITY

     ALL INCOME RECEIVED from investment of the treasurer’s trust fund must be set aside in an account IN THE TREASURY TRUST FUND TO BE KNOWN AS THE INVESTMENT INCOME ACCOUNT.

    THE FOLLOWING ACCOUNTS AND FUNDS “MUST RECEIVE” THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF EARNINGS BASED UPON EACH ACCOUNT’S OR FUND’S.

    THE WE’S WHO WANT MUST-SHALL GET THEIR SHARE  OF ALL INCOME RECEIVED.

    ————————————————————————————–

    SPECIFIC DESCRIPTIONS OF THE BUSINESSES THAT COMPRISE THE TOURISM SECTORS THAT WILL BE ASSESSED ANNUAL FEES. based on their  “TAXABLE AMOUNT” MEANS THE GROSS INCOME OF THE BUSINESS

    “ASSESSED SECTORS” MEANS BUSINESSES IN ANY OF THE FOLLOWING INDUSTRY SECTORS:

    (a)LODGING;

     (b) FOOD SERVICE, ATTRACTIONS AND ENTERTAINMENT, RETAIL, TRANSPORTATION.

     “Attractions and entertainment” means businesses whose primary business activity in this state is

    (a)Producing LIVE PRESENTATIONS INVOLVING THE PERFORMANCE OF ACTORS, ACTRESSES, SINGERS, DANCERS, MUSICAL GROUPS, OR OTHER PERFORMING ARTISTS;

    (b) Operating a professional or SEMIPROFESSIONAL TEAM OR CLUB PRIMARILY ENGAGED IN PARTICIPATING IN LIVE SPORTING EVENTS before a paying audience;

    (c)  Operating any kind of RACETRACK or the presenting or promoting of RACING EVENTS HELD AT A RACETRACK;

    (d) Organizing, promoting, or managing PERFORMING ARTS PRODUCTIONS; SPORTING EVENTS; and similar events, such as FAIRS, CONCERTS, AND FESTIVALS;

    (e) Representing or managing creative and PERFORMING ARTISTS, ATHLETES, ENTERTAINERS, or other public figures;

    (f) The preservation and EXHIBITION OF OBJECTS of historical, cultural, or educational value

     (g) The preservation and EXHIBITION OF SITES, BUILDINGS, FORTS, or communities that describe events or persons of particular historical Interest;

     (h)The preservation and EXHIBITION OF live plant or animal life displays;

     (i)The preservation and EXHIBITION OF natural areas or settings;

     (j)Operating an AMUSEMENT PARK, THEME PARK, WATER PARK, or similar facility;

     (k) Operating an AMUSEMENT ARCADE OR PARLOR, INCLUDING A BILLIARDS PARLOR;

     (l) Operating A GOLF COURSE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC;

     (m)Operating a DRIVING RANGE OR MINIATURE GOLF FACILITY;

     (n)Operating a DOWNHILL OR CROSS-COUNTRY SKIING AREA, INCLUDING OPERATING EQUIPMENT SUCH AS SKI LIFTS AND TOWS;

     (o) Acting as A TRAVEL AGENT OR TOUR OPERATOR taxable under RCW 82.04.260(5);

     (p) Engaging in the business of OPERATING CONTESTS OF CHANCE taxable under RCW 82.04.285;

     (q) OPERATING A “MARINA,” WHICH MEANS PROVIDING DOCKING OR STORAGE FACILITIES PRIMARILY OR EXCLUSIVELY FOR PLEASURE CRAFT OWNERS, WITH OR WITHOUT ANY RELATED ACTIVITIES, SUCH AS RETAILING FUEL AND MARINE SUPPLIES, AND REPAIRING, MAINTAINING, OR RENTING PLEASURE CRAFT.

    ————————————————————————————–

    THE PURPOSE OF THIS NEW WA STATE  “FEE” FOR ALL ON BUSINESS’S?

    THE PURPOSE OF THIS ACT IS TO ESTABLISH THE FRAMEWORK AND FUNDING FOR A STATEWIDE TOURISM MARKETING PROGRAM. 2SSB 5916 to have a structure that includes significant, stable, LONG-TERM FUNDING, and it should be implemented and managed by the tourism industry.

    THE SOURCE OF FUNDS SHOULD BE FROM MAJOR SECTORS OF THE TOURISM INDUSTRY WITH GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE IN COLLECTING THESE FUNDS IMPLEMENTED IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER BY TOURISM PROFESSIONALS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

    —————————————————————————————-

    SENATE BILL 5916 FUNDING FOR A STATEWIDE TOURISM MARKETING PROGRAM?

     

    BASED ON THE “MYTH” OF CLALLAM COUNTY INCREASED TOURISM?

    IS A widely held but MISTAKEN belief,
    IT IS Something that is fictitious or NONEXISTENT, but whose existence is widely believed in.
    IT IS A set of idealized or glamorized ideas and stories surrounding a particular phenomenon or CONCEPT.

    Behind My Back | Clallam County $$$ Prospectus

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/05/19/clallam-county-prospectus/

    May 19, 2013 – THE “MYTH” OF CLALLAM COUNTY INCREASED TOURISM When GAS and FERRY cost is OVER $100.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    Senate Bill 5916: Enacting the tourism marketing act
    Substitute offered in the Senate on April 2, 2015, replaces the North American Industry Classification System codes with specific descriptions of the businesses that comprise the tourism sectors that will be assessed annual fees.
    http://www.washingtonvotes.org/Legislation.aspx?ID=168233

    AN ACT Relating to tourism marketing; reenacting and amending RCW 43.79A.040; adding a new section to chapter 82.04 RCW; adding a new section to chapter 44.28 RCW; adding a new chapter to Title 43 RCW; adding a new chapter to Title 82 RCW; providing an effective date; providing an expiration date; and declaring an emergency.

    —————————————————————————————

    IT’S COMPLICATED, YOU HAVE TO READ IT TO BELIEVE IT.

    ————————————————————————–

    BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON:

    NEW SECTION.

    Sec. 1. FINDINGS

    PURPOSE. (1)The legislature finds that the tourism industry is the fourth largest economic sector in the state of Washington. Since 2011 there have been no general funds committed to statewide tourism marketing and Washington is the only state without a state tourism office. Before 2011, the amount of funds appropriated to statewide tourism marketing were not significant and in fact, Washington ranked forty-eighth in state tourism funding. Washington has significant attractions and activities for tourists, including many natural outdoor assets that draw visitors to mountains, waterways, parks, and open spaces. THERE SHOULD BE A PROGRAM TO PUBLICIZE THESE ASSETS AND ACTIVITIES THAT IS IMPLEMENTED IN AN EXPEDITIOUS MANNER BY TOURISM PROFESSIONALS IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.

    (2) The purpose of this act is to establish the framework and FUNDING FOR A STATEWIDE TOURISM MARKETING PROGRAM. The program needs S-2906.2

    SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5916

    State of Washington

    64th Legislature

    2015 Regular Session

    By Senate Ways & Means (originally sponsored by Senators Brown,

    Chase, Angel, Kohl-Welles, Hatfield, Benton, and McAuliffe)

    READ FIRST TIME 04/02/15.

    p. 1 2SSB 5916 to have a structure that includes significant, stable, long-term funding, and it should be implemented and managed by the tourism industry.

    The source of funds should be from major sectors of the tourism industry WITH GOVERNMENT ASSISTANCE IN COLLECTING THESE FUNDS and providing accountability for their expenditure.

    THE FEES AND CHARGES IMPOSED IN THIS CHAPTER WILL BRING DIRECT BENEFITS TO THOSE PAYING THE FEES AND CHARGES BY BRINGING MORE TOURISTS INTO THE STATE WHO WILL PATRONIZE THE PARTICIPATING BUSINESSES.

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

    The bottom line

    REMEMBER THIS NEW WA STATE  “FEE” FOR ALL PRIVATE BUSINESS’S IS NOT A TAX

    It’s just another RUSE  by WA State Legislators to take more local money from our local business’s, remove more money from our local economy  and GIVE IT TO THE WE’S WHO WANT

    ——————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | Fee Fie Foe Fum

    www.behindmyback.org/2013/10/26/fee-fie-foe-fum/

    Oct 26, 2013 – “Fee-fifofum” is the first line of a historical quatrain famous for its use in the classic English fairy … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fee-fie-foe-fum.

    REMEMBER A “FEE” IS NOT A TAX
    AND, A TOLL IS JUST A FEE
    AND, A SERVICE IS JUST ANOTHER FEE
    AND, A CHARGE IS JUST ANOTHER FEE
    AND, A FARE IS JUST ANOTHER FEE

    FEE FEE FIE FIE FOE FOE FUM…..

     


  • New Zealand’s Logging History

    New Zealand’s  History of Logging

    2. Impacts and effectiveness of logging bans in natural …

    HMMM… THIS REVIEW COVERS THE EVOLUTION OF THE COUNTRY’S LOGGING BAN SINCE THE EARLY 1970S, when the Government decided to phase out the last logging operations on State-owned natural forests in the WEST COAST REGION. the role of Government in forestry and the future use of natural forests during the last three decades. THE EVENTS THAT PLAYED MAJOR ROLES IN THE WAY LOGGING RESTRICTIONS HAVE BEEN IMPLEMENTED.

    AFTER FORESTS WITHIN CATCHMENT PROTECTION AREAS, NATIONAL PARKS, AND OTHER KEY RESERVE AREAS ARE REMOVED FROM THE AVAILABLE HARVEST AREA, AN ESTIMATED 930 000 HA OF LOGGED AND UNLOGGED FORESTS ON STATE LANDS REMAIN DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE LOGGING BAN.

    snippet Social implications

    The impacts on employment and income generation from logging restrictions have been felt most in the smaller milling-dependant communities. The pre-1987 restrictions especially affected people living in communities in the central North Island, South Island West Coast, and Southland, which served older mills cutting natural timber. Some smaller isolated towns, notably those serving larger mills, lost substantial populations or closed completely. Some regional communities also supported farming and other activities, or alternative employment was available in the planted forest operations.

    DOES THIS SOUND VAGUELY FAMILIAR? OR ALL TO FAMILIAR?

     OH, YES, BUT, THAT’S  NOT ABOUT THE U.S. GOVERNMENT

     THAT’S ABOUT NEW ZEALAND

    Indeed, there is a difference.

    NEW ZEALAND DIDN’T HAVE THE ENDANGERED SPOTTED OWL

    AND NEW ZEALAND BANNED THE EXPORT OF TIMBER.

    Of course, in the United States of America, IT’S JUST THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL

    IN NEW ZEALAND IT IS THE FEDERAL STATE LAW.

    PLEASE TAKE THE TIME TO READ THE

    2. Impacts and effectiveness of logging bans in natural …

    ——————————————————————————

    If the U.S. congress is first allowed to legislate “WILD” and “VOTE”  to make all public trust and National Park land “WILD FIRST “?  Shall THE U.S. FEDERAL  GOVERNMENT, by due process, automatically  remove the legal entitlement of income we the people have from The Enabling Act?

      Behind My Back | The ENABLING ACT February 22, 1889

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/03/…/the-enablingact-february-22-1889/

    Mar 9, 2014 – Way back then, the Federal Government and the elected representative gave to and enabled American citizens, they made donations of public …

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

    NEW ZEALAND’S  HISTORY OF LOGGING

    https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=2.nEW+ZELAND+Impacts+and+effectiveness+of+logging+bans+in+natural+…

    2. Impacts and effectiveness of logging bans in natural …

    www.fao.org/docrep/…/x6967e05.ht…

    Food and Agriculture Organization

    New Zealand’s natural forests have been the subject of protracted public and … which eventually became the main source of timber in New Zealand. Another was the reorganization of the Government natural resources … However, much of the natural forests in all ownerships cover steep land and other protection areas. New Zealand’s renewable plantation forests.

    http://www.fao.org/docrep/003/x6967e/x6967e05.htm

    2. IMPACTS AND EFFECTIVENESS OF LOGGING BANS IN NATURAL FORESTS: NEW ZEALAND

     ALAN REID

    INTRODUCTION

    New Zealand’s natural forests have been the subject of protracted public and political debate regarding the role of Government in forestry and the future use of natural forests during the last three decades. THIS REVIEW COVERS THE EVOLUTION OF THE COUNTRY’S LOGGING BAN SINCE THE EARLY 1970S, when public interest and disquiet over natural forest management became prominent, through late 1999 when the Government decided to phase out the last logging operations on State-owned natural forests in the West Coast region.

    Some events played major roles in the way logging restrictions have been implemented. One was the development of planted forests of introduced species, which eventually became the main source of timber in New Zealand. Another was the reorganization of the Government natural resources administration in the mid-1980s, which resulted in the separation of commercial planted forests and natural forests.

    Prior to these events, large areas of natural forests covering New Zealand’s rugged and erosion-prone terrain were also set aside for water and soil protection. Such reservation became a feature of forest management when the first Government policy on natural forest management and timber sales was formulated.

    The exclusion of timber harvests from other natural forests, as a matter of national policy for conservation reasons, is a relatively recent development in New Zealand. Logging restrictions followed growing public interest in natural forest management in the 1970s, and subsequent political changes affecting forestry administration. The Government reorganized the natural forest administration in 1987. Maturing planted forests provide alternative raw material in many parts of the country, cushioning the effect of these changes in the forest industry.

    After 1987, new policies and legislation focused on private forests. Timber harvests have not been banned in these forests. Commercial timber harvests are, however, restricted by export, sawmilling, and sustainable forest management constraints.

    NATURAL FOREST AREAS AFFECTED BY LOGGING BANS

    Logging restrictions eventually will apply to about 5.1 million ha of New Zealand’s State-owned natural forests. An additional 142 000 ha of State-owned natural forests and about 1.3 million ha of private forests are subject to restrictions that limit commercial timber harvest according to sustainable forest management guidelines. However, much of the natural forests in all ownerships cover steep land and other protection areas. AFTER FORESTS WITHIN CATCHMENT PROTECTION AREAS, NATIONAL PARKS, AND OTHER KEY RESERVE AREAS ARE REMOVED FROM THE AVAILABLE HARVEST AREA, AN ESTIMATED 930 000 HA OF LOGGED AND UNLOGGED FORESTS ON STATE LANDS REMAIN DIRECTLY AFFECTED BY THE LOGGING BAN. Similarly, about 670 000 ha of private forests are potentially available for commercial management, although only about 124 000 ha of this area are currently of commercial interest.

    snippet, Social implications

    The impacts on employment and income generation from logging restrictions have been felt most in the smaller milling-dependant communities. The pre-1987 restrictions especially affected people living in communities in the central North Island, South Island West Coast, and Southland, which served older mills cutting natural timber. Some smaller isolated towns, notably those serving larger mills, lost substantial populations or closed completely. Some regional communities also supported farming and other activities, or alternative employment was available in the planted forest operations.

    ————————————————————————————-

    The Outrage of WA DNR Logging? I posted it on my website.

    As usual, one thing led to another, connecting the dots.

    THE IGNORANCE OF THE UNIFORMED PUBLIC ON LOGGING AND HARVESTING? Federal Public Trust Land, WA State Public Trust Land  and  the entire private forest land industry has a very serious impact on the economy of the of Washington State.

    As usual, one thing led to another, dot to dot.

    (instant visual identification of a tree farm, for the tourists)

     PHOTOS OF TREE FARMS IN NEW ZEALAND

    George C. Rains Sr. my Dad, as a private property owner of 3000 acres of timberland in Clallam County WA.  made a trip to New Zealand.  I have his photo album of that New Zealand trip. He took pictures of tree farms. They were beautiful, they looked exactly like a farm, the trees were lined up like corn rows, evenly spaced,  no under growth, and easily identifiable from a distance as a  renewable tree farm.

     RESEARCHING THE  FOLLOWING WAS WHY GEORGE C. RAINS SR.  FLEW TO NEW ZEALAND

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

    WHAT CAN AMERICAN CITIZENS  LEARN FROM  NEW ZEALAND’S LOGGING  HISTORY?

    LOOKING BACK AND MOVING FORWARD?

    —————————————————————–

    NEW ZEALAND’S RENEWABLE PLANTATION FORESTS.

    Jenkin’s range of timber products are made from radiata pine grown in NEW ZEALAND’S RENEWABLE PLANTATION FORESTS.

    http://jenkin.co.nz/why-wood

    Why Wood | Jenkin Timber Ltd

    jenkin.co.nz/why-wood

    Wood is also a most renewable and sustainable building material. The cycle of planting and … For further information on finger-jointing visit www.nzwood.co.nz.

    Wood has long been a popular choice for building. It is an attractive natural product that offers design flexibility, durability, and thermal, acoustic, and fire performance. Wood is also a most renewable and sustainable building material. The cycle of planting and harvesting of plantation forests results in the removal and storage of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. This helps make timber an environmentally friendly choice for anyone concerned about their carbon footprint.

    Jenkin’s range of timber products are made from radiata pine grown in New Zealand’s renewable plantation forests.

    AS A RESULT OF DECADES OF INVESTMENT IN FORESTRY RESEARCH, New Zealand’s radiata pine forests produce timber of uniform density and colour. This timber is finger-jointed which improves on the original physical and structural characteristics of radiata pine by over 400%.

    Jenkin exclusively uses timber produced in New Zealand’s radiata pine plantation forests. The timber from these forests meets the standards set by the international Forest Stewardship Council® (FSC) for environmentally responsible, socially beneficial, and economically viable forest management. This means Jenkin can supply product that carries the prized FSC® certification.

    When you choose a New Zealand manufactured pine product made from timber sourced from one of our sustainably managed forests you are making a responsible choice.

    ——————————————————————–

    New Zealand

    www.fao.org/…/003/…/Y1720E19.H…

    Food and Agriculture Organization

    (Note: New Zealand’s domestic market for forest products is estimated at … Annual new plantation development in 2000 was 37 440 ha plus around 30 000 ha …. Many New Zealand exporters use the themes of environmental friendly, renewable … Employment statistics: The New Zealand forest industry employs around 25 …

    —————————————————–

    r6Killerby.doc – unece

    www.unece.org/…/tim

    United Nations Economic Commission for Europe

    The New Zealand timber industry has responded with User Guides and Design … The country currently has 1.8 million hectares of commercial plantation forest, with … New Zealand producers tend to often emphasise the versatile, reliable, renewable ….. OWNERS ASSOCIATION 2002a: Forestry Facts and Figures 2002/03.