+menu-


  • Category Archives Waste Not Want Not
  • Catastrophic Wildfires Matter

    Catastrophic Wildfires Matter
    page 2 “Things That Matter”
    TRUTH-POLITICS AND CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES
    American Citizens need to stand-up to the current stupidity and form a united front against the idiots who think they know what’s best for everyone else, our natural resources, our schools and our local counties.
    BURNING UP THE WEST: FEDS, GREENS CAUSE CATASTROPHIC FIRES
    Albert Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is; doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results…
    September 8, 2014 over a year ago….
    AS Capt. William E. Simpson – USMM WROTE THIS, AND AS A RESULT OF YET ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTALIST INTERVENTION,
    NUMEROUS PERFECTLY GOOD WEST COAST DAMS ARE BEING EYED FOR REMOVAL!
    OF COURSE THIS MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO THESE UPSIDE-DOWN THINKING PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE WEST COAST IS SERIOUSLY SHORT ON WATER AS IT IS, AND NEEDS MORE DAMS, NOT LESS!
    ————————————————————————————-
    HISTORY TRUTH AND POLITICS
    FEBRUARY 26, 2013, THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION HELD A HEARING PRESIDED OVER BY NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN DOC HASTINGS (R-WASH.) that turns out to have been very relevant to the current burning issue of our national forest management. The subcommittee heard from a number of witnesses who testified concerning the superiority of state-managed forest lands versus the federally managed forests.
    TRUTH ON FEBRUARY 26, 2013 REP. HASTINGS noted that the much smaller forests managed by Washington State “generate an average of $168 million annually, support construction of public elementary, middle school and high schools statewide, facilities at the state’s universities, and other state facilities and institutions.
    TRUTH ON FEBRUARY 26, 2013 In comparison, THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MANAGING OVER 9 MILLION ACRES OF FOREST LAND contained within seven different national forests in the State of Washington, yet harvests just 2 percent of the new growth, yielding a four-year average of only $589,000 in revenue.”
    TRUTH ON FEBRUARY 26, 2013 CHAIRMAN HASTINGS noted further:
    Rather than offering all-too-familiar rhetoric of how complying with one federal law or another “costs too much,” IT’S TIME FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO ADJUST HOW IT DOES BUSINESS, and honor its own STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES TO MANAGE THE FORESTS, INCLUDING ALLOWING SUFFICIENT TIMBER HARVESTS, THAT BENEFIT FORESTED COUNTIES AND THEIR SCHOOLS, AS WELL AS IMPROVE DECLINING FOREST HEALTH
    AND, REDUCE THE THREAT AND SOARING COSTS OF CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRE.
    ————————————————————————————–
    AUG 24, 2013 HISTORY TRUTH AND POLITICS ON CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    BURNING UP THE WEST: FEDS, GREENS CAUSE CATASTROPHIC FIRES …
    Burning Up the West: Feds, Greens Cause Catastrophic Fires
    www.thenewamerican.com/…/environment/…/16396-burning-up-the-we…
    AUG 24, 2013 – Burning Up the West: Feds, Greens Cause Catastrophic Fires … radical environmentalists that have thwarted all reasonable attempts at proper forest …. HASTINGS pointed out that the federal Northwest Forest Plan for California, …
    ————————————————————————————
    Sept. 8, 2014 HISTORY TRUTH AND POLITICS ON CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN’ ENVIRONMENTALIST
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN …
    www.survivalbased.com › Blog › Homesteading
    Sep 8, 2014 – The EPA, BLM, U.S. Forestry and their environmentalist (‘Green’) support base claim that they want to preserve habitat and save endangered .
    ——————————————————————————-
    TRUTH AND POLITICS SEPT 29, 2015
    DEADLY CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES HAVE KILLED 9 PEOPLE
    UPDATED: MONDAY, 28, SEPTEMBER 2015 WASHINGTON – OREGON – CALIFORNIA
    ———————————————————————————
    Northwest Large Fire Information Summary – NWCC :: Home
    gacc.nifc.gov/nwcc/…/fire_info.aspx
    National Interagency Fire Center
    (102 KB); 2014 MEDIA WILDFIRE COVERAGE GUIDELINES FOR OREGON AND WASHINGTON • Adobe Acrobat … UPDATED: MONDAY, 28TH SEPTEMBER 2015 at 07:19:57 AM …
    —————————————————————————-
    TRUTH AND POLITICS CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    California wildfires burn hundreds of homes – CNN.com
    www.cnn.com/2015/09/14/us/california-wildfires/
    Sep 14, 2015 – Northern California’s Valley Fire — one of several in the state — has killed 1 and … California wildfires rage, threatening lives and homes. By Greg Botelho and Dan Simon, CNN. Updated 1:51 AM ET, Tue September 15, 2015 ….. Already, hundreds of homes have been destroyed, and some 9,000 more are …
    ——————————————————————————–
    2015 TRUTH AND POLITICS – CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    Northwest wildfires break records for cost, size this summer
    www.kgw.com/story/news/local/2015/06/…wildfire…/71264920/
    Sep 21, 2015 – Here’s a look at the latest Pacific Northwest wildfire information, updated daily. … Chelan Fires; First Creek Fire, Okanogan-Wenatchee NF, WA, 2015 Kari Greer/USFS …. wildfires. It started in mid-August and had burned 110,422 acres by … This wildfire destroyed at least 26 homes and prompted extended …
    ———————————————————————————–
    The comment below on catastrophic wildfires fires was posted on September 8, 2014
    I AM POSTING THIS DEADLY CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES – TRUTH AND POLITICS COMMENT , AGAIN ON SEPT 29, 2015,
    IN PART, BECAUSE…. NINE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN KILLED IN OUT OF CONTROL WILDFIRES IN 2015
    Three firefighters killed in Washington’s Twisp Fire – CNN.com
    www.cnn.com/2015/08/20/us/wildfires-western-states/
    Aug 20, 2015 – Three firefighters have died in a wildfire in north-central Washington, the state’s governor said on his website. Four firefighters were injured, …
    ———————————————————————————–
    Wildfires In Northern California Kill 6 People, Destroy Nearly …
    www.huffingtonpost.com/…/california-wildfire_55ff…
    Ten active wildfires in Northern California continue to threaten a thousand more homes. AP. Posted: 09/21/2015 06:42 AM EDT … Those fires killed five people, and on Sunday authorities announced that a body was found in the ashes of a …
    —————————————————————————–
    Bottom line snippets
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN’ ENVIRONMENTALIST
    Posted on September 8, 2014
    THINKING AMERICANS NEED TO STAND-UP TO THE CURRENT STUPIDITY AND FORM A UNITED FRONT AGAINST THE IDIOTS WHO THINK THEY KNOW WHAT’S BEST FOR EVERYONE ELSE, OUR NATURAL RESOURCES, OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR LOCAL COUNTIES.
    WHILE THE GOOD PEOPLE OF SISKIYOU, JACKSON, JOSEPHINE AND KLAMATH COUNTIES ARE SUFFERING FROM RECORD HIGH UN-EMPLOYMENT AS THEY WATCH HELPLESSLY AS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TIMBER IS TURNED TO ASH EACH YEAR.
    September 8, 2014
    AS I WRITE THIS, AND AS A RESULT OF YET ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTALIST INTERVENTION,
    NUMEROUS PERFECTLY GOOD WEST COAST DAMS ARE BEING EYED FOR REMOVAL!
    OF COURSE THIS MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO THESE UPSIDE-DOWN THINKING PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE WEST COAST IS SERIOUSLY SHORT ON WATER AS IT IS, AND NEEDS MORE DAMS, NOT LESS!
    —————————————————————————————-
    An unedited comment
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN’ ENVIRONMENTALIST
    Posted on September 8, 2014 by Capt. William E. Simpson

    As I write this I am vexed by the fact that nearly 100,000 thousand acres of pristine forests are burning and nearly one-million acres of forest (public forests) have burned to the ground in and around the Pacific Northwest so far this year alone. The vast majority of these forests are publically owned and managed by Federal agencies under the overview of the EPA (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2014/07/northwest_wildfires_more_than.html).
    As a result of the flames, heat and smoke, thousands of forest animals have died and many others are suffering with severe injuries and their habitat is now long-gone. Wildfires are indiscriminate killers of endangered species, as well as numerous other species of birds and many other forest animals. It’s impossible to put an economic value on a forest full of life; but having said that; and simply from a renewable resource point of view, just the trees that have been lost had an economic (timber) value in excess of a billion dollars!
    The EPA, BLM, U.S. Forestry and their environmentalist (‘Green’) support base claim that they want to preserve habitat and save endangered species, but by way of their own actions, policies and regulations, more habitat and species have been lost over the past decades under their management policies than were lost ever before, and are being lost, every year, year after year at an alarming rate!
    Albert Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is; doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results…
    So the question is why are we losing so much forest? And the answer is very simple… the forests are being mismanaged through the continued bungling-intervention of the EPA, the ‘environmentalists’ and the ‘green’ movement into the arena of forestry.
    I know something about the subject of forests and forest management since I grew-up living, working, hunting and fishing in the area of the forests that are being consumed by these incredibly massive fires, which have become a recurring annual theme over the past two and a half decades since the intervention of the ‘environmentalist’ into the area for forest management practices. But who are these ‘environmentalists’ anyway.
    Generally speaking (and there are exceptions), the ‘environmentalists’ who have taken an interest in controlling how our public forests are used don’t live in the forests, and they view the human race (you, me our families and friends) as less valuable and relevant than a frog, fish, or a tree. They are people who seem to lack an understanding of the principals of renewable manageable resources, and who have become activists against those who would use the public forests responsibly, having had relatively little (if any) time and relevant experience living in or working in our forests themselves. Many of them are aligned with the concepts and principals of the ‘progressive’ socialist movement. If you debate them, many of these same people will quickly remind you of their ‘degrees’, etc… In other words, they are telling you that they ‘know it all’, and certainly more than you. However, anyone who has successfully managed a forest knows (as is seen in privately owned and managed forests) that reading some books in college and going on a few field trips just doesn’t cut it; a piece of paper hanging on the wall is no substitute for actual experience that is gained over many generations of successful forest management. No more so than someone trying to be a farmer with the same token experience… it just doesn’t work.
    And coincidentally, many of the books that some universities are using in their forestry programs are authored by some of the same ‘green’ environmentalist forest managers who have had a hand in developing the current failed forest management polices as applied over the past two decades; just look what’s happening! Books and lectures simply cannot teach common sense or instill the on-the-ground experience that loggers and foresters develop over the span of their lives, and through generation after generation of families working in the woods. There’s just no debating when it comes to the contrast between the current recurring disaster management model, and the past successes in forest management with sustainable and renewable timber harvests, combined with abundant wildlife habitat; without the mammoth annual fires we are experiencing today.
    Here (the link just below) is an important (precedent example) of how proper forest management, which includes selective logging and other proper management practices, saved a forest and stopped a major wildfire: http://cronkitenewsonline.com/2011/12/experts-decades-of-logging-treatments-helped-stop-wallow-fire-at-reservation/
    In the early 1970’s I worked in the woods logging and then later worked as a millwright for Southern Oregon Plywood. My brothers were also loggers as were many of my friends and countless others who lived in Southern Oregon. Like farmers who tended to their fields and cared for them year after year, and who depended upon those fields and the resulting crop production, loggers cared for the forests; they had to; forests were the lifeline for their family’s financial security.
    Loggers and their families also spent a lot of time in the woods even when they weren’t working; they hunted and fished in the forests for generations. And through that continual close contact with the forest and the wildlife, loggers gained more knowledge about the forests and the animals that lived there than many of the scientists, giving them a unique understanding of the intricate and complex interactions of the biodiversity that exists in the forests.
    As just one example of the many successful practices of loggers; dead and dying trees and underbrush (fuel for fires) were removed and eliminated during selective harvesting of the forests, and in the process of harvests, small access roads were made, which served as fire breaks and access for firefighters in the event of a fire. During that time and preceding decades, back when loggers were allowed to log public forests, fires that burned hundreds of thousands and millions of acres of timber were very rare, almost non-existent. And that was because the forests were healthy and the density of the forest and the underbrush were kept to a minimum as a result of proper management and continued annual harvests. Forests were managed as a sustainable and renewable resource, which in turn benefited the wildlife with sustainable reliable habitat and in the process, also provided recreational opportunities for the people. That former relationship between loggers and the forest was truly symbiotic.
    I can still recall the spotted owl debacle, where loggers, who for all intents and purposes were the caretakers of the forests were completely closed-out of the public forests in wholesale fashion as a result of the ‘green’ movement and environmentalists! All logging came to a complete halt as well as the associated management practices. This resulted in the shutdown of numerous West Coast lumber mills and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs in and related to the timber industry which was thereafter decimated.
    During the lobby by the ‘green movement’ and environmentalists, they argued that the rate of logging prior to the 1990’s would eliminate the old growth forests… here is a quote:
    “Environmentalists admit that saving the owls’ habitat could cost jobs. But, they argue, these jobs will vanish no matter what. For if cutting continues at its current rate of 125,000 acres a year, the old-growth forests will be gone within thirty years and the mills forced to close anyhow.” (taken from this article: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v4n1/ ).
    However, as we have all witnessed, since the transition to the ‘green movement’s’ ban on logging in public forests, we are in fact actually losing many hundreds of thousands of acres of forest annually! It’s a travesty of monumental proportions… when people like these try to play God, the results are usually tragic and harm both humanity and the wildlife.
    Through the use of politics combined with bad science the ‘green movement’ and environmentalists led the way to the implementation of seriously flawed policies (regulations) and practices. The EPA and the BLM along with Federal forestry agencies and their environmentalist support base had in the early 1990’s effected a major management policy change in order to supposedly save forest habitat for a species of owl (spotted owl) that was ‘allegedly’ endangered (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930114&slug=1679945)
    Result: In the early 1990’s Federal forests became off-limits to loggers.
    Of course under the ‘new management’ practices of the environmentalist-led EPA, BLM and Federal Forestry Departments, the forests became (and are) very seriously overgrown leading to unhealthy stands of trees (with dead and dying trees) that were vulnerable to disease, insects and of course fire, as did the underbrush.
    Forests became so dense that if a fire started (regardless of reason)… the fire would burn extremely hot and spread very fast; it’s so simple a child can understand the concept… more fuel, more forest fire.
    And at the end of the day, many years later after Feds and the ‘green’ environmentalists kicked the loggers out of the forests and took-over, placing ‘their’ policies, regulations and management practices into place, the spotted owl population has continued to drop! This is irrefutable evidence that their interventions, policies and regulations have utterly failed to affect the owls, and in that failure, the public interest has lost even more animals and habitat to fire! Through their own actions, we now have even more animals heading towards potential extinction! What a contradiction to the claims of these people!
    Under the ‘green environmental’ forest management polices/practices (‘hands off, no logging’), forests have become so dense that when lightning starts a fire, instead of just burning-off a relatively small area before the fire is brought under control, as it was in the days of managed logging, fires today now burn entire tracks of forests amounting to hundreds of thousands of acres annually, all of which is burned to the bare ground!
    LET’S KEEP IN THE MIND THAT THIS IS NOW THE NEW ‘NORM’, and since it takes many decades for the trees to be re-established, the net result is that we are losing more and more forest annually, instead of gaining more forest area and wildlife habitat; just the opposite of what the environmentalists and the EPA preach to the public. So what’s the point?
    You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure this one out…. Just look at the annual total acres that are burned to the ground… It’s truly shocking that this is even allowed to continue as it has, year after year.
    So much for the ‘habitat’ of the spotted owl! And of course the habitats for dozens of other species were (are) lost as well. As of this writing, I am down in the area of the fires interviewing local people, and hundreds of thousands of acres of ‘critical habitat’ (old growth and other trees) has been converted to the ash that is falling from the sky; it’s like a nuclear winter without the radiation. Ash from the burned forests is covering entire cities!
    It’s a fact that under the continued management of the public’s forest lands by the same idiotic policies, we now have annual forest fires that devastate huge areas of forest, and in the process destroy all of the trees, as opposed to having some of the trees harvested resulting in a healthy forest as had existed in the past; forests which then were also more fire-resistant. Some may try to argue that the fires are a result of the drought. Of course that’s a ruse to deflect blame from the implementation of a seriously flawed management policy. In the prior era of managed forest harvests, we also had periods of severe drought, without the results we are seeing today. Added to which, forests which are selectively logged and managed are far more fire resistant, drought or not, and that fact is undeniable.
    So which method makes more sense? Sustainable logging as it was successfully practiced for nearly a century; or…. The current ‘green environmentalist’ methods where no logging is allowed in public forests resulting in hundreds of thousands of acres of forests regularly burning to the ground leaving nothing but ash and bare ground that is devoid of plant life and subject to severe erosion?
    The erosion of the scorched earth in-turn leads to excessive silt run-off into the streams and rivers, which covers the critical gravel beds in the streams and rivers that are required for the fish eggs of spawning fish such as Salmon. Of course the recent decline in Salmon and Steelhead runs are certainly associated to this situation. Additionally, the loss of forests results in the loss of critical shade trees in and around watersheds, which results in the warming of stream and river water temperatures; this also adversely affects the fish populations.
    The late Summer and Fall storms of the Pacific Northwest which spawn the lightning that ignite the forests also provide the downpours that wash the silt into the streams and rivers that resulted from the aftermath of the massive forest fires. And this silting of the waterways comes at the worst possible time… just as the Salmon are moving upriver to spawn in the gravel beds of the rivers and streams. However, with the overburden of silt that has washed-down off the now barren mountain sides, the gravel beds are covered in silt and are no longer viable for the spawning Salmon. This is not an optimal situation for the spawning Salmon; in fact, it can cause entire runs of Salmon to fail in their efforts to reproduce! As a fisherman myself, this situation is beyond frustrating.
    As anyone can easily see, the relative newcomer green environmentalist-scientists have it all wrong, and every year since the implementation of their fatally flawed concepts and polices we watch as more and more forests are consumed by massive fires such as those that are burning as I write this.
    If these forests were properly managed and logged as they were just 30 years ago in the Pacific Northwest, we would have trees still standing and abundant animal habitat in areas that are now burned to the dirt, and we would have renewable forest harvests as in the past providing full-time jobs for thousands of people. And as it was in the past, healthy standing forests shading the watersheds and minimized erosion, providing optimal water temperatures and low water turbidity in the streams and rivers resulting in abundant runs of fish, something that local Indian tribes greatly desire.
    Instead, thanks to the intervention of the EPA, the ‘green movement’ and environmentalists, we have less and less forest, which leads to less and less water, and less fish,
    WHILE THE GOOD PEOPLE OF SISKIYOU, JACKSON, JOSEPHINE AND KLAMATH COUNTIES ARE SUFFERING FROM RECORD HIGH UN-EMPLOYMENT AS THEY WATCH HELPLESSLY AS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TIMBER IS TURNED TO ASH EACH YEAR.
    And in the end, with the forests burned to the ground, if a few spotted owls survive the blaze, the spotted owl has no trees and no habitat. So what was the point?
    It just doesn’t get any dumber than this. We have the blind leading the blind.
    THINKING AMERICANS NEED TO STAND-UP TO THE CURRENT STUPIDITY AND FORM A UNITED FRONT AGAINST THE IDIOTS WHO THINK THEY KNOW WHAT’S BEST FOR EVERYONE ELSE, OUR NATURAL RESOURCES, OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR LOCAL COUNTIES.
    Some readers might be thinking; why should I care? Or, how does this affect me since I live across the U.S. from these wildfires. We all need to care and take action because this kind of mismanagement can happen anywhere environmentalists stick their noses into areas where they have less than adequate experience.
    AS I WRITE THIS, AND AS A RESULT OF YET ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTALIST INTERVENTION, NUMEROUS PERFECTLY GOOD WEST COAST DAMS ARE BEING EYED FOR REMOVAL! OF COURSE THIS MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO THESE UPSIDE-DOWN THINKING PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE WEST COAST IS SERIOUSLY SHORT ON WATER AS IT IS, AND NEEDS MORE DAMS, NOT LESS!
    Are we going to wait until these clowns let it all burn?
    Cheers! Bill
    Capt. William E. Simpson – USMM
    http://www.WilliameSimpson.com
    Twitter: https://twitter.com/NauticalPrepper
    This entry was posted in A History of WA State Wildfires, A Question of “WHAT ELSE?”, Accountable Government, FACTS are troublesome things, Kicking the Can Down the Road, Nature made Crisis Man Made Disaster, Wildfires Truth and Politics.

    CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES – TRUTH AND POLITICS
    American Citizens need to stand-up to the current stupidity and form a united front against the idiots who think they know what’s best for everyone else, our natural resources, our schools and our local counties.
    Albert Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is; doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results…
    ————————————————————————————-
    HISTORY TRUTH AND POLITICS
    FEBRUARY 26, 2013, THE HOUSE SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND ENVIRONMENTAL REGULATION HELD A HEARING PRESIDED OVER BY NATURAL RESOURCES COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN DOC HASTINGS (R-WASH.) that turns out to have been very relevant to the current burning issue of our national forest management. The subcommittee heard from a number of witnesses who testified concerning the superiority of state-managed forest lands versus the federally managed forests.
    TRUTH ON FEBRUARY 26, 2013 REP. HASTINGS noted that the much smaller forests managed by Washington State “generate an average of $168 million annually, support construction of public elementary, middle school and high schools statewide, facilities at the state’s universities, and other state facilities and institutions.
    TRUTH ON FEBRUARY 26, 2013 In comparison, THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE IS RESPONSIBLE FOR MANAGING OVER 9 MILLION ACRES OF FOREST LAND contained within seven different national forests in the State of Washington, yet harvests just 2 percent of the new growth, yielding a four-year average of only $589,000 in revenue.”
    TRUTH ON FEBRUARY 26, 2013 CHAIRMAN HASTINGS noted further:
    Rather than offering all-too-familiar rhetoric of how complying with one federal law or another “costs too much,” IT’S TIME FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO ADJUST HOW IT DOES BUSINESS, and honor its own STATUTORY RESPONSIBILITIES TO MANAGE THE FORESTS, INCLUDING ALLOWING SUFFICIENT TIMBER HARVESTS, THAT BENEFIT FORESTED COUNTIES AND THEIR SCHOOLS, AS WELL AS IMPROVE DECLINING FOREST HEALTH
    AND, REDUCE THE THREAT AND SOARING COSTS OF CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRE.
    ————————————————————————————–
    AUG 24, 2013 HISTORY TRUTH AND POLITICS- CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    BURNING UP THE WEST: FEDS, GREENS CAUSE CATASTROPHIC FIRES …
    Burning Up the West: Feds, Greens Cause Catastrophic Fires
    www.thenewamerican.com/…/environment/…/16396-burning-up-the-we…
    AUG 24, 2013 – Burning Up the West: Feds, Greens Cause Catastrophic Fires … radical environmentalists that have thwarted all reasonable attempts at proper forest …. HASTINGS pointed out that the federal Northwest Forest Plan for California, …
    ————————————————————————————
    Sep 8, 2014 HISTORY TRUTH AND POLITICS CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN’ ENVIRONMENTALIST
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN …
    www.survivalbased.com › Blog › Homesteading
    Sep 8, 2014 – The EPA, BLM, U.S. Forestry and their environmentalist (‘Green’) support base claim that they want to preserve habitat and save endangered .
    ———————————————————————————————-
    DEADLY CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES HAVE KILLED 9 PEOPLE
    TRUTH AND POLITICS SEPT 28 2015
    UPDATED: MONDAY, 28,SEPTEMBER 2015 WASHINGTON – OREGON – CALIFORNIA
    ———————————————————————————
    Northwest Large Fire Information Summary – NWCC :: Home
    gacc.nifc.gov/nwcc/…/fire_info.aspx
    National Interagency Fire Center
    (102 KB); 2014 MEDIA WILDFIRE COVERAGE GUIDELINES FOR OREGON AND WASHINGTON • Adobe Acrobat … UPDATED: MONDAY, 28TH SEPTEMBER 2015 at 07:19:57 AM …
    ———————————————————————————————
    TRUTH AND POLITICS CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    California wildfires burn hundreds of homes – CNN.com
    www.cnn.com/2015/09/14/us/california-wildfires/
    Sep 14, 2015 – Northern California’s Valley Fire — one of several in the state — has killed 1 and … California wildfires rage, threatening lives and homes. By Greg Botelho and Dan Simon, CNN. Updated 1:51 AM ET, Tue September 15, 2015 ….. Already, hundreds of homes have been destroyed, and some 9,000 more are …
    ———————————————————————————————-
    2015 TRUTH AND POLITICS – CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES
    Northwest wildfires break records for cost, size this summer
    www.kgw.com/story/news/local/2015/06/…wildfire…/71264920/
    Sep 21, 2015 – Here’s a look at the latest Pacific Northwest wildfire information, updated daily. … Chelan Fires; First Creek Fire, Okanogan-Wenatchee NF, WA, 2015 Kari Greer/USFS …. wildfires. It started in mid-August and had burned 110,422 acres by … This wildfire destroyed at least 26 homes and prompted extended …
    ———————————————————————————–
    The comment below on catastrophic wildfires fires was posted on September 8, 2014
    I AM POSTING THIS DEADLY CATASTROPHIC WILDFIRES FIRES – TRUTH AND POLITICS COMMENT , AGAIN ON SEPT 28, 2015,
    BECAUSE…. NINE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN KILLED IN OUT OF CONTROL WILDFIRES IN 2015
    Three firefighters killed in Washington’s Twisp Fire – CNN.com
    www.cnn.com/2015/08/20/us/wildfires-western-states/
    Aug 20, 2015 – Three firefighters have died in a wildfire in north-central Washington, the state’s governor said on his website. Four firefighters were injured, …
    —————————————————————————————————
    Wildfires In Northern California Kill 6 People, Destroy Nearly …
    www.huffingtonpost.com/…/california-wildfire_55ff…
    Ten active wildfires in Northern California continue to threaten a thousand more homes. AP. Posted: 09/21/2015 06:42 AM EDT … Those fires killed five people, and on Sunday authorities announced that a body was found in the ashes of a …
    —————————————————————————–
    Bottom line snippets
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN’ ENVIRONMENTALIST
    THINKING AMERICANS NEED TO STAND-UP TO THE CURRENT STUPIDITY AND FORM A UNITED FRONT AGAINST THE IDIOTS WHO THINK THEY KNOW WHAT’S BEST FOR EVERYONE ELSE, OUR NATURAL RESOURCES, OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR LOCAL COUNTIES.
    WHILE THE GOOD PEOPLE OF SISKIYOU, JACKSON, JOSEPHINE AND KLAMATH COUNTIES ARE SUFFERING FROM RECORD HIGH UN-EMPLOYMENT AS THEY WATCH HELPLESSLY AS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TIMBER IS TURNED TO ASH EACH YEAR.
    AS I WRITE THIS, AND AS A RESULT OF YET ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTALIST INTERVENTION, NUMEROUS PERFECTLY GOOD WEST COAST DAMS ARE BEING EYED FOR REMOVAL! OF COURSE THIS MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO THESE UPSIDE-DOWN THINKING PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE WEST COAST IS SERIOUSLY SHORT ON WATER AS IT IS, AND NEEDS MORE DAMS, NOT LESS!
    —————————————————————————————-
    NORTHWEST WILDFIRES AND THE ‘GREEN’ ENVIRONMENTALIST (full text)
    Posted on September 8, 2014 by Capt. William E. Simpson
    As I write this I am vexed by the fact that nearly 100,000 thousand acres of pristine forests are burning and nearly one-million acres of forest (public forests) have burned to the ground in and around the Pacific Northwest so far this year alone. The vast majority of these forests are publically owned and managed by Federal agencies under the overview of the EPA (http://www.oregonlive.com/pacific-northwest-news/index.ssf/2014/07/northwest_wildfires_more_than.html).
    As a result of the flames, heat and smoke, thousands of forest animals have died and many others are suffering with severe injuries and their habitat is now long-gone. Wildfires are indiscriminate killers of endangered species, as well as numerous other species of birds and many other forest animals. It’s impossible to put an economic value on a forest full of life; but having said that; and simply from a renewable resource point of view, just the trees that have been lost had an economic (timber) value in excess of a billion dollars!
    The EPA, BLM, U.S. Forestry and their environmentalist (‘Green’) support base claim that they want to preserve habitat and save endangered species, but by way of their own actions, policies and regulations, more habitat and species have been lost over the past decades under their management policies than were lost ever before, and are being lost, every year, year after year at an alarming rate!
    Albert Einstein once said that the definition of insanity is; doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results…
    So the question is why are we losing so much forest? And the answer is very simple… the forests are being mismanaged through the continued bungling-intervention of the EPA, the ‘environmentalists’ and the ‘green’ movement into the arena of forestry.
    I know something about the subject of forests and forest management since I grew-up living, working, hunting and fishing in the area of the forests that are being consumed by these incredibly massive fires, which have become a recurring annual theme over the past two and a half decades since the intervention of the ‘environmentalist’ into the area for forest management practices. But who are these ‘environmentalists’ anyway.
    Generally speaking (and there are exceptions), the ‘environmentalists’ who have taken an interest in controlling how our public forests are used don’t live in the forests, and they view the human race (you, me our families and friends) as less valuable and relevant than a frog, fish, or a tree. They are people who seem to lack an understanding of the principals of renewable manageable resources, and who have become activists against those who would use the public forests responsibly, having had relatively little (if any) time and relevant experience living in or working in our forests themselves. Many of them are aligned with the concepts and principals of the ‘progressive’ socialist movement. If you debate them, many of these same people will quickly remind you of their ‘degrees’, etc… In other words, they are telling you that they ‘know it all’, and certainly more than you. However, anyone who has successfully managed a forest knows (as is seen in privately owned and managed forests) that reading some books in college and going on a few field trips just doesn’t cut it; a piece of paper hanging on the wall is no substitute for actual experience that is gained over many generations of successful forest management. No more so than someone trying to be a farmer with the same token experience… it just doesn’t work.
    And coincidentally, many of the books that some universities are using in their forestry programs are authored by some of the same ‘green’ environmentalist forest managers who have had a hand in developing the current failed forest management polices as applied over the past two decades; just look what’s happening! Books and lectures simply cannot teach common sense or instill the on-the-ground experience that loggers and foresters develop over the span of their lives, and through generation after generation of families working in the woods. There’s just no debating when it comes to the contrast between the current recurring disaster management model, and the past successes in forest management with sustainable and renewable timber harvests, combined with abundant wildlife habitat; without the mammoth annual fires we are experiencing today.
    Here (the link just below) is an important (precedent example) of how proper forest management, which includes selective logging and other proper management practices, saved a forest and stopped a major wildfire: http://cronkitenewsonline.com/2011/12/experts-decades-of-logging-treatments-helped-stop-wallow-fire-at-reservation/
    In the early 1970’s I worked in the woods logging and then later worked as a millwright for Southern Oregon Plywood. My brothers were also loggers as were many of my friends and countless others who lived in Southern Oregon. Like farmers who tended to their fields and cared for them year after year, and who depended upon those fields and the resulting crop production, loggers cared for the forests; they had to; forests were the lifeline for their family’s financial security.
    Loggers and their families also spent a lot of time in the woods even when they weren’t working; they hunted and fished in the forests for generations. And through that continual close contact with the forest and the wildlife, loggers gained more knowledge about the forests and the animals that lived there than many of the scientists, giving them a unique understanding of the intricate and complex interactions of the biodiversity that exists in the forests.
    As just one example of the many successful practices of loggers; dead and dying trees and underbrush (fuel for fires) were removed and eliminated during selective harvesting of the forests, and in the process of harvests, small access roads were made, which served as fire breaks and access for firefighters in the event of a fire. During that time and preceding decades, back when loggers were allowed to log public forests, fires that burned hundreds of thousands and millions of acres of timber were very rare, almost non-existent. And that was because the forests were healthy and the density of the forest and the underbrush were kept to a minimum as a result of proper management and continued annual harvests. Forests were managed as a sustainable and renewable resource, which in turn benefited the wildlife with sustainable reliable habitat and in the process, also provided recreational opportunities for the people. That former relationship between loggers and the forest was truly symbiotic.
    I can still recall the spotted owl debacle, where loggers, who for all intents and purposes were the caretakers of the forests were completely closed-out of the public forests in wholesale fashion as a result of the ‘green’ movement and environmentalists! All logging came to a complete halt as well as the associated management practices. This resulted in the shutdown of numerous West Coast lumber mills and the loss of tens of thousands of jobs in and related to the timber industry which was thereafter decimated.
    During the lobby by the ‘green movement’ and environmentalists, they argued that the rate of logging prior to the 1990’s would eliminate the old growth forests… here is a quote:
    “Environmentalists admit that saving the owls’ habitat could cost jobs. But, they argue, these jobs will vanish no matter what. For if cutting continues at its current rate of 125,000 acres a year, the old-growth forests will be gone within thirty years and the mills forced to close anyhow.” (taken from this article: http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publications/iie/v4n1/ ).
    However, as we have all witnessed, since the transition to the ‘green movement’s’ ban on logging in public forests, we are in fact actually losing many hundreds of thousands of acres of forest annually! It’s a travesty of monumental proportions… when people like these try to play God, the results are usually tragic and harm both humanity and the wildlife.
    Through the use of politics combined with bad science the ‘green movement’ and environmentalists led the way to the implementation of seriously flawed policies (regulations) and practices. The EPA and the BLM along with Federal forestry agencies and their environmentalist support base had in the early 1990’s effected a major management policy change in order to supposedly save forest habitat for a species of owl (spotted owl) that was ‘allegedly’ endangered (http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=19930114&slug=1679945)
    Result: In the early 1990’s Federal forests became off-limits to loggers.
    Of course under the ‘new management’ practices of the environmentalist-led EPA, BLM and Federal Forestry Departments, the forests became (and are) very seriously overgrown leading to unhealthy stands of trees (with dead and dying trees) that were vulnerable to disease, insects and of course fire, as did the underbrush.
    Forests became so dense that if a fire started (regardless of reason)… the fire would burn extremely hot and spread very fast; it’s so simple a child can understand the concept… more fuel, more forest fire.
    And at the end of the day, many years later after Feds and the ‘green’ environmentalists kicked the loggers out of the forests and took-over, placing ‘their’ policies, regulations and management practices into place, the spotted owl population has continued to drop! This is irrefutable evidence that their interventions, policies and regulations have utterly failed to affect the owls, and in that failure, the public interest has lost even more animals and habitat to fire! Through their own actions, we now have even more animals heading towards potential extinction! What a contradiction to the claims of these people!
    Under the ‘green environmental’ forest management polices/practices (‘hands off, no logging’), forests have become so dense that when lightning starts a fire, instead of just burning-off a relatively small area before the fire is brought under control, as it was in the days of managed logging, fires today now burn entire tracks of forests amounting to hundreds of thousands of acres annually, all of which is burned to the bare ground!
    LET’S KEEP IN THE MIND THAT THIS IS NOW THE NEW ‘NORM’, and since it takes many decades for the trees to be re-established, the net result is that we are losing more and more forest annually, instead of gaining more forest area and wildlife habitat; just the opposite of what the environmentalists and the EPA preach to the public. So what’s the point?
    You don’t need to be a rocket scientist to figure this one out…. Just look at the annual total acres that are burned to the ground… It’s truly shocking that this is even allowed to continue as it has, year after year.
    So much for the ‘habitat’ of the spotted owl! And of course the habitats for dozens of other species were (are) lost as well. As of this writing, I am down in the area of the fires interviewing local people, and hundreds of thousands of acres of ‘critical habitat’ (old growth and other trees) has been converted to the ash that is falling from the sky; it’s like a nuclear winter without the radiation. Ash from the burned forests is covering entire cities!
    It’s a fact that under the continued management of the public’s forest lands by the same idiotic policies, we now have annual forest fires that devastate huge areas of forest, and in the process destroy all of the trees, as opposed to having some of the trees harvested resulting in a healthy forest as had existed in the past; forests which then were also more fire-resistant. Some may try to argue that the fires are a result of the drought. Of course that’s a ruse to deflect blame from the implementation of a seriously flawed management policy. In the prior era of managed forest harvests, we also had periods of severe drought, without the results we are seeing today. Added to which, forests which are selectively logged and managed are far more fire resistant, drought or not, and that fact is undeniable.
    So which method makes more sense? Sustainable logging as it was successfully practiced for nearly a century; or…. The current ‘green environmentalist’ methods where no logging is allowed in public forests resulting in hundreds of thousands of acres of forests regularly burning to the ground leaving nothing but ash and bare ground that is devoid of plant life and subject to severe erosion?
    The erosion of the scorched earth in-turn leads to excessive silt run-off into the streams and rivers, which covers the critical gravel beds in the streams and rivers that are required for the fish eggs of spawning fish such as Salmon. Of course the recent decline in Salmon and Steelhead runs are certainly associated to this situation. Additionally, the loss of forests results in the loss of critical shade trees in and around watersheds, which results in the warming of stream and river water temperatures; this also adversely affects the fish populations.
    The late Summer and Fall storms of the Pacific Northwest which spawn the lightning that ignite the forests also provide the downpours that wash the silt into the streams and rivers that resulted from the aftermath of the massive forest fires. And this silting of the waterways comes at the worst possible time… just as the Salmon are moving upriver to spawn in the gravel beds of the rivers and streams. However, with the overburden of silt that has washed-down off the now barren mountain sides, the gravel beds are covered in silt and are no longer viable for the spawning Salmon. This is not an optimal situation for the spawning Salmon; in fact, it can cause entire runs of Salmon to fail in their efforts to reproduce! As a fisherman myself, this situation is beyond frustrating.
    As anyone can easily see, the relative newcomer green environmentalist-scientists have it all wrong, and every year since the implementation of their fatally flawed concepts and polices we watch as more and more forests are consumed by massive fires such as those that are burning as I write this.
    If these forests were properly managed and logged as they were just 30 years ago in the Pacific Northwest, we would have trees still standing and abundant animal habitat in areas that are now burned to the dirt, and we would have renewable forest harvests as in the past providing full-time jobs for thousands of people. And as it was in the past, healthy standing forests shading the watersheds and minimized erosion, providing optimal water temperatures and low water turbidity in the streams and rivers resulting in abundant runs of fish, something that local Indian tribes greatly desire.
    Instead, thanks to the intervention of the EPA, the ‘green movement’ and environmentalists, we have less and less forest, which leads to less and less water, and less fish, WHILE THE GOOD PEOPLE OF SISKIYOU, JACKSON, JOSEPHINE AND KLAMATH COUNTIES ARE SUFFERING FROM RECORD HIGH UN-EMPLOYMENT AS THEY WATCH HELPLESSLY AS BILLIONS OF DOLLARS OF TIMBER IS TURNED TO ASH EACH YEAR.
    And in the end, with the forests burned to the ground, if a few spotted owls survive the blaze, the spotted owl has no trees and no habitat. So what was the point?
    It just doesn’t get any dumber than this. We have the blind leading the blind.
    THINKING AMERICANS NEED TO STAND-UP TO THE CURRENT STUPIDITY AND FORM A UNITED FRONT AGAINST THE IDIOTS WHO THINK THEY KNOW WHAT’S BEST FOR EVERYONE ELSE, OUR NATURAL RESOURCES, OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR LOCAL COUNTIES.
    Some readers might be thinking; why should I care? Or, how does this affect me since I live across the U.S. from these wildfires. We all need to care and take action because this kind of mismanagement can happen anywhere environmentalists stick their noses into areas where they have less than adequate experience. AS I WRITE THIS, AND AS A RESULT OF YET ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTALIST INTERVENTION, NUMEROUS PERFECTLY GOOD WEST COAST DAMS ARE BEING EYED FOR REMOVAL! OF COURSE THIS MAKES PERFECT SENSE TO THESE UPSIDE-DOWN THINKING PEOPLE, ESPECIALLY GIVEN THAT THE WEST COAST IS SERIOUSLY SHORT ON WATER AS IT IS, AND NEEDS MORE DAMS, NOT LESS!
    Are we going to wait until these clowns let it all burn?
    Cheers! Bill
    Capt. William E. Simpson – USMM
    http://www.WilliameSimpson.com
    Twitter: https://twitter.com/NauticalPrepper


  • Port Angeles Sky Turns Yellow?

    Port Angeles Sky Turns Yellow?

    WHAT’S THE LATEST? START HERE…

    B.C. wildfire smoke hangs over the Northwest

    KING5.com‎ – 7 hours ago

    Susan Wyatt, KING 5 News 8:35 a.m. PDT July 6, 2015

    YELLOW SKY  INTERVIEWS WITH PA LOCAL PEOPLE

    HUNDREDS OF CALLS TO 911 TIE UP EMERGENCY LINES

    PORT ANGELES IS NOT IN THE PATH OF A FOREST  FIRE.

    HOWEVER, BE WARNED, THE PATH OF SMOKE IS SO INTENSE IN CERTAIN AREAS, IT’S CONSIDERED A  HEALTH RISK.

    Picture of the big orange sun on our grey sky

    —————————————————————-

    SMOKE FROM CANADA WILDFIRES STREAMING OVER PORT ANGELES

    By Associated Press Published: Jul 5, 2015 at 4:04 PM PDT Last Updated: Jul 5, 2015 at 9:50 PM PDT

    »Play Video

    PORT ANGELES, Wash. (AP) – Fire officials in Washington state say smoke from wildfires in Canada, not Washington, is casting a haze over the Port Angeles area.

    Meteorologist Mike McFarland with the National Weather Service in Seattle winds are blowing smoke from wildfires burning on Vancouver Island southward, over British Columbia and into the Port Angeles area.  He says the HAZE? could hang over the area through Sunday evening.

    ————————————————————————————

    MY FIRST COMMENT

    If you want to be misinformed…. read the LOCAL Peninsula Daily News

    The PDN said the Olympics, near Queets on Friday  and also Brinnon, as of Saturday..

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

     

    My email

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To:

    Sent: Sunday, July 05, 2015 2:36 PM

    Subject: Smoke from ONP? Canadian wildfires ?

    Our sky is yellowish pinkish gray..

    It burns your nose when you go outside, where is it coming from?

    ONP? Canada??

    Air quality now? moderate???

    ——————————————————————————-

    CLIMATE CHANGED BY WILDFIRE POLICY?

     CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSED BY CANADA’S WILDFIRE POLICY?

     According to the Environment Ministry, fires near communities get the highest priority, but the ministry DOESN’T EXTINGUISH THEM UNTIL THEY’RE WITHIN 20 KILOMETRES.

     —————————————————————————-

    CLIMATE CHANGE CAUSED BY OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK WILDFIRE POLICY

    PARADISE WILDFIRE LET IT SMOKE, SMOLDER AND BURN  UNTIL OCTOBER?

    ———————————————————————————-

    Sask. government’s 20 km firefighting policy criticized … – CBC

    www.cbc.ca/…/canada/…/sask-government-s-20km-firefighting-pol

    CBC.ca

    4 days ago – With wildfires threatening towns and villages across northern … CBC News Canada … Sask. government’s 20 km firefighting policy criticized … people to leave their homes due to heavy smoke and the proximity of the fires.

    There have been more than 520 forest fires so far this year, about three times as many the same time last year.

    They have forced more 5,000 people to leave their homes due to heavy smoke and the proximity of the fires.

    The communities themselves haven’t burned, although THE SMOKE IS SO INTENSE IN CERTAIN AREAS, IT’S CONSIDERED A MAJOR HEALTH RISK.

    Meanwhile, La Loche Mayor Georgina Jolibois says a long-running government policy is putting the communities at risk.

    ACCORDING TO THE ENVIRONMENT MINISTRY, FIRES NEAR COMMUNITIES GET THE HIGHEST PRIORITY, BUT THE MINISTRY DOESN’T EXTINGUISH THEM UNTIL THEY’RE WITHIN 20 KILOMETRES.

    ————————————————————————

    Thousands more evacuated as wildfires spread in Western …

    www.ctvnews.ca/canada/thousands-more-evacuated-as-wildfires-…

    CTV News

    Thousands more evacuated as wildfires spread in Western Canada. CTVNews.ca Staff Published Saturday, July 4, 2015 4:31PM EDT Last Updated Saturday …

    CBC News Posted: Jun 28, 2015 5:25 PM MT Last Updated: Jun 28, 2015 5:25 PM MT. Firefighters … WHILE THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE FIRES ARE CAUSED BY LIGHTNING…

    ———————————————————————————–

    OLYMPIC NATIONAL PARK POLICY
    Officials handling the Paradise Fire, which has been burning in a remote part of the Olympic National Park, say local 911 dispatchers in the area have been swamped with calls. They say there is no increased danger from that blaze, which has been burning for several weeks.

    Some of the smoke is traveling down the west side of the Olympic Peninsula.

    ____________________________________________________

    Satellite image of fires in B.C., courtesy of NASA

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

    You want to see something amazing.  Here is a picture from Scott Sistek’s (KOMO TV!) father’s home in Port Angeles today.  THE WORLD HAS TURNED YELLOW.  Surreal.

     

    Cliff Mass Weather Blog

    cliffmass.blogspot.com/

    8 hours ago – And a very dense area of smoke over Vancouver Island. … father’s home in Port Angeles today. THE WORLD HAS TURNED YELLOW. …. (differences from a 30-year normal) for Washington through May 2015. …. The signs in the sky are subtle, but if you can read the clouds they … And now the really serious news.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    CLIMATE CHANGED BY WILDFIRE POLICY?

    WA STATE DEPT. OF NATURAL RESOURCE POLICY ON WILDFIRES?

    LIGHTENING CAUSED the Carlton Complex wildfire.

    LIGHTENING CAUSED The largest wildfire in WA State history.

    Images for carlton complex wildfire caused by lightning …

    More images for carlton complex wildfire caused by lightning strikes

    Carlton Complex | Wildfire Today

    wildfiretoday.com/tag/carltoncomplex/

    Dec 12, 2014 – Washington DNR demotes their Resource Protection Manager … Following the CARLTON COMPLEX OF FIRES THAT BURNED 300 HOMES AND 256,108 ACRES IN NORTH-CENTRAL WASHINGTON this summer, there have been calls …. Carlton Complex as seen from the Incident Base, July 17, 2014. …. Click here for the rules.

    ——————————————————————-

    Property owners file claims against state for losses in …

    methowvalleynews.com/2014/…/property-owners-f…

    Methow Valley News

    Oct 23, 2014 – … indicated the intention to file a claim but have not returned their forms to him yet. … DNR has not completed its standard after-incident review for the fire, which will … They include a map of the Carlton Complex Fire to show the location of … related to the Carlton Complex Fire (as of Oct. 27, 2014) (PDF file).

    Photo: Rick Sistek


  • The Cupcake Rebellion?

    The Cupcake Rebellion?

    EDMONDS, WA SCHOOL RULES BAN ON CUPCAKES, COOKIES, AND BIRTHDAY CAKES FOR STUDENTS’ BIRTHDAYS.

    —————————————————————–

    OH, THE JOY  OF AN AMERICAN CHILDHOOD?

    AS SEEN THROUGH THE EYES OF A CLASSROOM OF CHILDREN?

    Your birthday is nothing to celebrate, there is nothing special about the day you were born.

    HAPPY BIRTHDAY..HERE’S A PENCIL

    ———————————————————

    SEEN THROUGH THE EYES OF THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER?

    The Healthy, Hungry-free Kids Act of 2010, which REQUIRED?

    And MANDATED FEDERAL POLICY?  And NATION WIDE COMPLIANCE?

    PUBLIC SCHOOLS to follow new nutritional guidelines this academic year TO RECEIVE EXTRA FEDERAL LUNCH AID, has created a NATIONWIDE VERSION of the age-old parental challenge: PERSUADING? children to eat what is good for them.

    And, forcing their parents and American taxpayers  to pay for it!

    ———————————————————————————————–

    THE REALITY OF THIS NEW FEDERAL WELLNESS, SCHOOL HEALTHY LUNCH PROGRAM

    WE THE AMERICAN TAXPAYERS ARE MANDATED BY FEDERAL POLICY, REQUIRING TAXPAYER MONEY TO  SUBSIDIZE NATIONAL HEALTH SCHOOL LUNCH/BREAKFAST PROGRAMS , FORCED INTO NATION WIDE $11 BILLION A YEAR TAXATION COMPLIANCE.

    PLUS REQUIRING TAXPAYER TO  PAY FOR, the nation’s FOOD STAMPS PROGRAM COST A RECORD $78.4 BILLION in the 2012 …

     ——————————————————————

    WASHINGTON DC — The House Appropriations Committee on Thursday passed an agriculture budget bill THAT INCLUDED NEARLY $21 BILLION FOR CHILD NUTRITION that would allow schools to opt out of White House nutritional guidelines passed in 2012. The vote was 31 to 18.

    The rules are the first changes in 15 years to the $11 BILLION school lunch program.

    —————————————————————-

    WHAT CAUSED THE 2014 BANNING OF THE BIRTHDAY CUPCAKE IN EDMONDS WA?

    The Healthy, Hungry-free Kids Act of 2010

    AFTER A NEW FEDERAL WELLNESS POLICY, BASED ON? SCHOOL HEALTHY LUNCH BASED ON? MICHELLE OBAMA’S EXECUTIVE (SCHOOL FOOD) ORDER?

    The Healthy, Hungry-free Kids Act of 2010 TOOK EFFECT REQUIRING SCHOOL SUPERINTENDENTS TO MONITOR THE NUTRITIONAL STANDARDS OF STUDENTS NATION WIDE, THE EDMONDS SCHOOL DISTRICT IN EDMONDS, WA VOTED TO BAN CUPCAKES, COOKIES, AND BIRTHDAY CAKES FOR STUDENTS’ BIRTHDAYS. 

    —————————————————————————–

    SO? HOW’S THIS NEW FEDERAL WELLNESS, FEDERALLY MANDATED? FEDERAL POLICY? REQUIRING? NATION WIDE COMPLIANCE?  WORKING OUT IN SCHOOL CAFETERIAS  ACROSS AMERICA?

    ——————————————————————-

    AN ALL AMERICAN FOOD FIGHT!

    The report found that 321 DISTRICTS LEFT THE NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM ALTOGETHER, many of which cited the new standards as a factor. The decline was “influenced by changes MADE TO COMPLY WITH THE NEW LUNCH CONTENT AND NUTRITION STANDARDS,” state and local officials said.

    NEW  LASH BACK ON FEDERAL WELLNESS POLICY

    First lady Michelle Obama’s healthy-eating initiative has hit a roadblock as students and parents in one rural Kentucky school district are lashing back at the MANDATED menu plans.

    “THEY SAY IT TASTES LIKE VOMIT,” said Harlan County Public Schools board member Myra Mosley during a charged board meeting in which she described students’ reactions to the healthy-eating plan.

     

    YOU CAN LEAD SCHOOL KIDS TO THE SCHOOL CAFETERIA,

     BUT, YOU CAN’T MAKE THEM EAT IT.

    —————————————————————————-

    AND, PARENT’S AND STUDENT’S WON’T BUY IT!

    THE NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM saw a sharp decline in participation once the healthy standards went into effect during the 2012-2013 school year. A TOTAL OF 1,086,000 STUDENTS STOPPED BUYING SCHOOL LUNCH.

    The key words here? STOPPED BUYING (stopped eating)

    THE NATIONAL SCHOOL HEALTHY LUNCHES.

     

    —————————————————————–

    House Panel Advances Bill on School Lunch Options

    By RON NIXON MAY 29, 2014

    WASHINGTON — The House Appropriations Committee on Thursday passed an agriculture budget bill that included NEARLY $21 BILLION for child nutrition that would allow schools to opt out of White House nutritional guidelines passed in 2012. The vote was 31 to 18.

    The rules are the first changes in 15 years to the $11 BILLION school lunch program.

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

    OPT OUT?

    2010 A House committee voted to temporarily allow schools to opt out of the nutrition standards passed back in 2010.

    May 29, 2014 – A bill includes a provision for a waiver process for local school districts … would allow SCHOOLS TO OPT OUT OF WHITE HOUSE NUTRITIONAL GUIDELINES passed in 2012. … food BECAUSE CHILDREN WERE NOT EATING THE HEALTHIER ALTERNATIVES.

    ————————————————————————————————-

    “WE CAN’T FORCE STUDENTS TO EAT SOMETHING THEY DON’T WANT,” a food service director in New Mexico said, per the School Nutrition Association which has teamed with food companies TO OUST THE POLICY. “And with sky-high produce costs, we simply cannot afford to feed our trash cans.”

    ——————————————————————-

    WILL SCHOOL KIDS? EAT THE HEALTHY LUNCH? IF IT IS FREE?

     Nicole Anthony, the cafeteria manager at one Los Angeles school, Nimitz Middle School in Huntington Park, estimated that out of the 1,800 STUDENTS, ALMOST ALL OF WHOM QUALIFY FOR A FREE OR REDUCED-PRICE LUNCH, ONLY 1,200, “ON A GOOD DAY,” NOW EAT THE CAFETERIA’S OFFERINGS.

    ———————————————————–

     School officials say kids across the country are actually throwing away the healthy food offered to them in place of less-healthy options with critics describing trash cans spilling over with fruits and vegetables.

    “We simply cannot afford to feed our trash cans.” apparently what’s happening.

    The group said the rules had also led to TONS OF WASTED FOOD because children were not eating the healthier alternatives.

    read more at:http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/30/us/politics/house-committee-votes-to-allow-schools-to-opt-out-of-nutritional-program.html?_r=0

    Students in L.A. throw out at least $100,000 worth of food a day

    —————————————————————————————-

    THE NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM, THE SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM, THE SPECIAL MILK PROGRAM

    The percentage of a school’s students participating in the federal free- and reduced-price lunch program?

    SCHOOLS IN WHICH 60 PERCENT OR MORE OF THE SECOND PRECEDING SCHOOL YEAR LUNCHES  WERE SERVED FREE OR REDUCED PRICE receive an additional $.02 reimbursement …

    The School Breakfast Program (SBP) which operates in more than 72,000 schools and institutions, serving a daily average of some 8.4 million children.

    —————————————————————————–

     

     

     

     


  • Part (1) Man-Made Disasters Calif. Drought

    McCarthy: No More ‘Fish Before Families’

    Rep. Kevin McCarthy, a Republican from Bakersfield who is House majority whip, defended the bill and issued his own blast after Brown’s statement:

    “This bill H.R. 3964, The Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act: ends the madness of putting fish before families and creates a solution to ensure consistent water deliveries for our communities when Mother Nature blesses us with precipitation,” McCarthy said in an emailed statement to the Associated Press Monday. “Any other proposed idea to ameliorate the effects of today’s drought would not be felt for over a dozen years. Our communities cannot wait.”

    The battle over water legislation comes as the state continues to suffer through one of the worst droughts in its history. That was underlined Friday when the California Department of Water Resources announced that State Water Project customers — agencies that serve about 25 million people statewide and irrigate about 750,000 of farmland —will get no water this year

    ————————————————————————————————

    Goggle http://naturalresources.house.gov/media/?VideoID=TjEAB9cMCew

    Watch Doc Hastings video on

    The Man-Made California Drought

     California’s San Joaquin Valley is the salad bowl of the world, providing the majority of fruits and vegetables for the entire nation. But, with another man-made drought looming, the San Joaquin Valley is in danger of becoming a dust bowl unless immediate action is taken to change policies that put the needs of fish above the livelihood of people.

    House Republicans have a bipartisan comprehensive solution to end future man-made droughts, bring job and water supply certainty to the Sacramento and San Joaquin Valleys in California and decrease reliance on foreign food sources.

    Get the Facts:

    California’s water storage and transportation system designed by federal and state governments includes 1,200 miles of canals and nearly 50 reservoirs that provide water to about 22 million people and irrigate about four million acres of land throughout the state. In May 2007, a Federal District Court Judge ruled that increased amounts of water had to be re-allocated towards protecting the Delta smelt – a three-inch fish on the Endangered Species List.

    Because of this ruling, in 2009 and 2010 more than 300 billion gallons (or 1 million acre-feet) of water were diverted away from farmers in the Central Valley and into the San Francisco Bay – eventually going out into the Pacific Ocean.

    This man-made drought cost thousands of farm workers their jobs, inflicted up to 40 percent unemployment in certain communities, and fallowed hundreds of thousands of acres of fertile farmland.

    Unemployment remains at a regional average of 17%. With current precipitation at near-record lows, the same regulations will be imposed pushing unemployment even higher.

    The Pelosi-led Congress did nothing to reverse the plight of the San Joaquin Valley and even obstructed repeated Republican actions to reverse the situation. The Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act reflects Republican promises to avoid another man-made drought.

    H.R. 3964, The Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act:

    H.R. 3964 is a comprehensive solution that would restore some water deliveries, ensure a reliable water supply for people and fish, and save taxpayer money by ending unnecessary and dubious government projects.

    Last Congress, the House passed bipartisan legislation, The Sacramento-San Joaquin Valley Water Reliability Act, to restore the flow of water. The Democratic-controlled Senate did not act on that bill or any California water legislation. The situation in California is now dire because of inaction by the Senate.

    Highlights of the bill:

    Restores water deliveries to communities by codifying the historic, bipartisan State/Federal agreement known as the “Bay-Delta Accord.”

    Reforms punitive federal laws, like the Central Valley Project Improvement Act and the San Joaquin River Restoration Settlement Act, in order to provide fairness to ratepayers, promote transparency and accountability, and save taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars.

    Allows water users to pay off federal debt early, which will bring early revenue to the U.S. Treasury.

    Protects and secures private property and senior water rights.

    Related Videos:

    The Senate must act on emergency drought legislation Video Release (February 7, 2014)


  • Part (9) WOW New Deal

    THERE ARE “OLD” NEW DEALS AND THERE ARE “NEW” NEW DEALS. THE “FIRST NEW DEAL” (1933–34) and the “SECOND NEW DEAL “(1935-1938)

    THE THIRD NEW DEAL 2013

    SENATOR MURRAY AND REP.  KILMER PROPOSED A NEW DEAL.Under the proposed HB  Wild Olympics Wilderness & Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 2014 (S. 1949; H.R. 3922) an additional 126,000 more acres of National Forest land would be taken out of planned harvestable Natural Resource  timber production.

    It would  limit and restrict Public use and access to PUBLIC LAND, close roads and bar entry with locked gates, Creating 126,000 wild acres of no man’s reasonable economic resource use of PRIVATE and Public Land.

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

    THE “FIRST NEW DEAL”

    WHAT HISTORIANS CALL THE “3 RS”: RELIEF, RECOVERY, AND REFORM. THAT IS RELIEF FOR THE UNEMPLOYED AND POOR; RECOVERY OF THE ECONOMY TO NORMAL LEVELS; AND REFORM OF THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM TO PREVENT A REPEAT DEPRESSION (Do the “3 RS” sound familiar)?

    ————————————————————————————-

    The bottom Line

    WHO COULD ASK FOR ANYTHING MORE THEN THE  “3 RS”  IN 2014?

    A NATION’S NATURAL RESOURCES; AND THE CONTINUED NEED FOR A CAREFULLY PLANNED, COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

    THE CONSTRUCTION OF CAMPGROUNDS, BUILDINGS, AND OTHER FACILITIES ON NATIONAL FORESTS, NATIONAL PARKS, AND RANGE LANDS, AS WELL AS INSTALLATION OF EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS AND FIRE SUPPRESSION.

    A WORK PROGRAM STIMULUS TO THE PLANTING OF TREES AND

     PROVIDING  WORK FOR  MILLIONS OF  PEOPLE AND DEVELOPED FACILITIES ON PUBLIC LANDS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

    EMPLOYING MILLIONS OF UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE (MOSTLY UNSKILLED MEN) TO CARRY OUT PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS,  INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND ROADS.

    And, a Federal Government that understood that JOBS WERE MUCH BETTER FOR EVERYONE THAN CASH HANDOUTS

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

    THE “FIRST NEW DEAL”

    Almost every community in the United States had a new park, bridge or school constructed by the agency. THE WPA’S INITIAL APPROPRIATION IN 1935 WAS FOR $4.9 BILLION (ABOUT 6.7 PERCENT OF THE 1935 GDP), AND IN TOTAL IT SPENT $13.4 BILLION.[2]

    The “SECOND NEW DEAL “(1935-1938)

    DURING THE TIME OF THE CIVILIAN CONSERVATION CORPS (CCC)

    THE NATION’S NATURAL RESOURCES; AND THE CONTINUED NEED FOR A CAREFULLY PLANNED, COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.[4]

    DURING THE TIME OF THE CCC, VOLUNTEERS PLANTED NEARLY 3 BILLION TREES TO HELP REFOREST AMERICA,

     CONSTRUCTED MORE THAN 800 PARKS NATIONWIDE

     AND UPGRADED MOST STATE PARKS, UPDATED FOREST FIRE FIGHTING METHODS,

    AND BUILT A NETWORK OF SERVICE BUILDINGS AND PUBLIC ROADWAYS IN REMOTE AREAS.

    AND UPGRADED MOST STATE PARKS, UPDATED FOREST FIRE FIGHTING METHODS.

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

    DURING THE TIME OF THE CIVILIAN CONSERVATION CORPS (CCC)

    The American public made the CCC the most popular of all the New Deal programs.[2] Principal benefits of an individual’s enrollment in the CCC included improved physical condition, heightened morale, AND INCREASED EMPLOYABILITY.[3] Implicitly, the CCC also led to a greater public awareness and appreciation of the outdoors AND

    THE NATION’S NATURAL RESOURCES; AND THE CONTINUED NEED FOR A CAREFULLY PLANNED, COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

    ———————————————————————————————-

    THE “FIRST NEW DEAL” Repeated for emphasis

    WHAT HISTORIANS CALL THE “3 RS”: RELIEF, RECOVERY, AND REFORM. THAT IS RELIEF FOR THE UNEMPLOYED AND POOR; RECOVERY OF THE ECONOMY TO NORMAL LEVELS; AND REFORM OF THE FINANCIAL SYSTEM TO PREVENT A REPEAT DEPRESSION.

    At its peak in 1938, it provided paid JOBS FOR THREE MILLION UNEMPLOYED MEN AND WOMEN, AS WELL AS YOUTH in a separate division, the National Youth Administration . Headed by Harry Hopkins  the WPA provided jobs and income to the unemployed during the great depression in the United states

     BETWEEN 1935 AND 1943, THE WPA PROVIDED ALMOST EIGHT MILLION JOBS. FULL EMPLOYMENT, WHICH EMERGED AS A NATIONAL GOAL AROUND 1944, WAS NOT THE WPA GOAL. IT TRIED TO PROVIDE ONE PAID JOB FOR ALL FAMILIES IN WHICH THE BREADWINNER  SUFFERED LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT.

    Repeated for emphasis

    The American public made the CCC the most popular of all the New Deal programs.[2] Principal benefits of an individual’s enrollment in the CCC included improved physical condition, heightened morale, AND INCREASED EMPLOYABILITY.[3] Implicitly, the CCC also led to a greater public awareness and appreciation of the outdoors AND THE NATION’S NATURAL RESOURCES; AND THE CONTINUED NEED FOR A CAREFULLY PLANNED, COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.[4]

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

    Almost every community in the United States had a new park, bridge or school constructed by the agency. The WPA’s initial appropriation in 1935 was for $4.9 billion (about 6.7 percent of the 1935 GDP), and in total it spent $13.4 billion.[2]

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

    The New Deal was a series of domestic programs enacted in the United States between 1933 and 1938. They involved laws passed by Congress as well as presidential executive orders during the first term of President Franklin D. Roosevelt  . The programs were in response to the Great depression, and focused on

    Many historians distinguish between a “First New Deal” (1933–34) and a “Second New Deal” (1935–38), with the second one more liberal and more controversial.

    THE “FIRST NEW DEAL” (1933–34)

    DEALT WITH DIVERSE GROUPS, FROM BANKING AND RAILROADS TO INDUSTRY AND FARMING, ALL OF WHICH DEMANDED HELP FOR ECONOMIC SURVIVAL.

    “SECOND NEW DEAL” (1935–38),

    The Works Progress Administration (renamed in 1939 as the Work Projects Administration; WPA) was the largest and most ambitious New Deal agency   employing MILLIONS OF UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE (MOSTLY UNSKILLED MEN) TO CARRY OUT PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS,[1] INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND ROADS. IN MUCH SMALLER BUT MORE FAMOUS PROJECTS THE WPA EMPLOYED MUSICIANS, ARTISTS, WRITERS, ACTORS AND DIRECTORS IN LARGE ARTS, DRAMA, MEDIA, AND LITERACY PROJECTS.[1]

    BETWEEN 1935 AND 1943, THE WPA PROVIDED ALMOST EIGHT MILLION JOBS. FULL EMPLOYMENT, WHICH EMERGED AS A NATIONAL GOAL AROUND 1944, WAS NOT THE WPA GOAL. IT TRIED TO PROVIDE ONE PAID JOB FOR ALL FAMILIES IN WHICH THE BREADWINNERS  SUFFERED LONG-TERM UNEMPLOYMENT.

    Almost every community in the United States had a new park, bridge or school constructed by the agency. The WPA’s initial appropriation in 1935 was for $4.9 billion (about 6.7 percent of the 1935 GDP), and in total it spent $13.4 billion.[2]

    —————————————————————————————–

    Civilian Conservation Corps

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    The Civilian Conservation Corps (CCC) was a public work relief program   that operated from 1933 TO 1942 IN THE UNITED STATES FOR UNEMPLOYED, UNMARRIED MEN FROM RELIEF FAMILIES, AGES 18–25 as part of Roosevelt’s New Deal. Robert Fechner was the head of the agency. A part of the New Deal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who provided UNSKILLED MANUAL LABOR JOBS related to the conservation and DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES IN RURAL LANDS OWNED BY FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

    The CCC was designed to provide jobs for young men, to relieve families who had difficulty finding jobs during theGreat Depression in the United States   while AT THE SAME TIME IMPLEMENTING A GENERAL NATURAL RESOURCE CONSERVATION PROGRAM IN EVERY STATE AND TERRITORY.

    MAXIMUM ENROLLMENT AT ANY ONE TIME WAS 300,000

     IN NINE YEARS 3 MILLION YOUNG MEN PARTICIPATED IN THE CCC, WHICH PROVIDED THEM WITH SHELTER, CLOTHING, AND FOOD, TOGETHER

    WITH A SMALL WAGE OF $30 A MONTH ($25 OF WHICH HAD TO BE SENT HOME TO THEIR FAMILIES).[1]

    The American public made the CCC the most popular of all the New Deal programs.[2] Principal benefits of an individual’s enrollment in the CCC included improved physical condition, heightened morale, AND INCREASED EMPLOYABILITY.   Implicitly, the CCC also led to a greater public awareness and appreciation of the outdoors AND THE NATION’S NATURAL RESOURCES; AND THE CONTINUED NEED FOR A CAREFULLY PLANNED, COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

    The CCC operated separate programs for veterans and Native Americans.

    Despite its popular support, the CCC was never a permanent agency. It depended on emergency and temporary Congressional legislation for its existence. By 1942, with World War II and the draft in operation, need for work relief declined and Congress voted to close the program.[

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

    THE WPA WAS A NATIONAL PROGRAM THAT OPERATED ITS OWN PROJECTS IN COOPERATION WITH STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, WHICH PROVIDED 10%-30% OF THE COSTS. WPA sometimes took over state and local relief programs that had originated in the Reconstruction Finance Corporation  (RFC) or Federal Emergency Relief Administration   (FERA) programs.

    LIQUIDATED ON JUNE 30, 1943, AS A RESULT OF LOW UNEMPLOYMENT due to the worker shortage of World War II, the WPA provided millions of Americans with jobs for 8 years. Most people who needed a job were eligible for at least some of its positions. Hourly wages were typically set to the prevailing wages in each area. But, workers could not be paid for more than 30 hours a week. Before 1940, to meet the objections of the labor unions,

    ———————————————————————————————

    Back to the detailed history

    The Federal Emergency Relief Administration  for instance, provided $500 million for relief operations by states and cities, while the short-lived CWA (Civil Works Administration) gave localities money to operate make-work projects in 1933-34.

    The “Second New Deal” in 1935–38 included the Wagner Act  to promote labor unions, the works Progress Administration  (WPA) relief program (which made the federal government by far the largest single employer in the nation), the Social Security Act t, and new programs to aid tenant farmers and migrant workers. The final major items of New Deal legislation were the creation of the United States federal Housig authority y and Farm Security Administration  , both in 1937, and the Fair Labor and Standards Act  of 1938  which set maximum hours and minimum wages for most categories of workers.

    Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA) was the new name given by the Roosevelt Administration to the Emergency Relief Administration (ERA) which President Herbert Hoover had created in 1932. FERA was established as a result of the Federal Emergency Relief Act and was replaced in 1935 by the Works Progress Administration  (WPA).

    FERA under Hoover gave loans to the states to operate relief programs. One of these, the New York state program TERA (Temporary Emergency Relief Administration), was set up in 1931 and headed by Harry Hopkins, a close adviser to Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt  Roosevelt asked Congress to set up FERA—which gave grants to the states for the same purpose—in May 1933, and appointed Hopkins to head it. Along with the Civilian Conservation Corp  (CCC) it was the first relief operation under the New Deal  . Basically, it gave grants and loans to states.

    FERA’s main goal was alleviating household unemployment by creating new unskilled jobs in local and state government. Jobs were more expensive than direct cash payments (called “the dole”), but were psychologically more beneficial to the unemployed, who wanted any sort of job, for self-esteem, to play the role of male breadwinner. FROM MAY 1933 UNTIL IT CLOSED IN DECEMBER, 1935, FERA GAVE STATES AND LOCALITIES $3.1 BILLION. FERA PROVIDED WORK FOR OVER 20 MILLION PEOPLE AND DEVELOPED FACILITIES ON PUBLIC LANDS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

    Faced with continued high unemployment and concerns for public welfare during the coming winter of 1933-34, FERA INSTITUTED THE Civil Works Administration (CWA) AS A $400 MILLION SHORT-TERM MEASURE TO GET PEOPLE TO WORK. The Federal Emergency Relief Administration was terminated in 1935 and its work taken over by two entirely new federal agencies, the Works Progress Administration   and the Social Security Administration.

    The Civil Works Administration (CWA) was a short-lived U.S.job creation program  established by the New deal New deal  during the Great Depression TO RAPIDLY CREATE MANUAL LABOR JOBS FOR MILLIONS OF UNEMPLOYED WORKERS. The jobs were merely temporary, for the duration of the hard winter of 1933–34. President Franklin D. Roosevelt  unveiled the CWA on November 8, 1933 and put Harry L. Hopkins in charge of the short-term agency.

    ROOSEVELT WAS CONVINCED THAT JOBS WERE MUCH BETTER FOR EVERYONE THAN CASH HANDOUTS.

    The CWA was a project created under the Federal Emergency Relief Administration (FERA). The CWA created construction jobs, mainly improving or constructing buildings and bridges. IT ENDED ON MARCH 31, 1934, AFTER SPENDING $200 MILLION A MONTH AND GIVING JOBS TO 4 MILLION PEOPLE.

    Accomplishments

    The CWA’s workers laid 12 million feet of sewer pipe and built or improved 255,000 miles of roads, 40,000 schools, 3,700 playgrounds, and nearly 1,000 airports (not to mention building 250,000 outhouses still badly needed in rural America).

     Representative of the work are one county’s accomplishments in less than five months, from November 1933 to March 1934. Grand Forks County South Dakota  put 2,392 unemployed workers on its payroll at a cost of about $250,000. When the CWA began in eastern Connecticut, it could hire only 480 workers out of 1,500 who registered for jobs. Projects undertaken included work on city utility systems  , public buildings, parks, and roads.

    RURAL AREAS PROFITED, WITH MOST LABOR BEING DIRECTED TO ROADS AND COMMUNITY SCHOOLS. CWA officials gave preference to veterans with dependents, but considerable political favoritism determined which North Dakotan s got jobs.

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

    Although the CWA provided much employment, there were many taxpayers who saw leaves being raked but nothing of permanent value. Roosevelt told his cabinet that this criticism moved him to end the program and replace it with the WPA which would have long-term value for the society, in addition to short-term benefits for the unemployed.

    THE WORKS PROGRESS ADMINISTRATION (RENAMED IN 1939 AS THE WORK PROJECTS ADMINISTRATION; WPA) WAS THE LARGEST AND MOST AMBITIOUS NEW DEAL AGENCY  , EMPLOYING MILLIONS OF UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE (MOSTLY UNSKILLED MEN) TO CARRY OUT PULIC WORKS PROJECTS  INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND ROADS. In much smaller but more famous projects the WPA employed musicians, artists, writers, actors and directors in large arts, drama, media, and literacy projects.

    Almost every community in the United States had a new park, bridge or school constructed by the agency. The WPA’s initial appropriation in 1935 was for $4.9 billion (about 6.7 percent of the 1935 GDP), and in total it spent $13.4 billion.[2]

    At its peak in 1938, it provided paid jobs for three million unemployed men and women, as well as youth in a separate division, the National Youth Administration . Headed by Harry Hopkins  the WPA provided jobs and income to the unemployed during the Great depression in the United States . Between 1935 and 1943, the WPA provided almost eight million jobs. Full employment, which emerged as a national goal around 1944, was not the WPA goal. It tried to provide one paid job for all families in which the breadwinner  long-term unemployment.

    The WPA was a national program that operated its own projects in cooperation with state and local governments, which provided 10%-30% of the costs. WPA sometimes took over state and local relief programs that had originated in the Reconstruction Finance Corporation   (RFC) or Federal Emergency Relief administration  (FERA) programs

    LIQUIDATED ON JUNE 30, 1943, AS A RESULT OF LOW UNEMPLOYMENT due to the worker shortage of World War II, THE WPA PROVIDED MILLIONS OF AMERICANS WITH JOBS FOR 8 YEARS.[6] MOST PEOPLE WHO NEEDED A JOB WERE ELIGIBLE FOR AT LEAST SOME OF ITS POSITIONS.[7] HOURLY WAGES WERE TYPICALLY SET TO THE PREVAILING WAGES IN EACH AREA.[8] But, workers could not be paid for more than 30 hours a week. Before 1940, to meet the objections of the labor unions,

    ———————————————————————————————-

    Alphabet agencies

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

      (Redirected from New Deal agency)

    The alphabet agencies (also New Deal agencies) were the U.S. federal government agencies  created as part of the New Deal of President Franklin D. Roosevelt

    THE EARLIEST AGENCIES WERE CREATED TO COMBAT THE GREAT DEPRESSION IN THE UNITED STATES AND WERE ESTABLISHED DURING ROOSEVELT’S FIRST 100 DAYS IN OFFICE IN 1933

     many were created throughout the 1930s, such the United States Housing Authority  and the Federal Loan Agency .

    In total, at least 100 offices were created during Roosevelt’s terms of office as part of the New Deal, and “even the Comptroller-General of the United States, who audits the government’s accounts, declared he had never heard of some of them.”[1]

    While previously all monetary appropriations had been separately passed by Act of Congress, as part of their POWER IF THE PURSE ; THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RECOVERY ACT   ALLOWED ROOSEVELT TO ALLOCATE $3.3 BILLION WITHOUT CONGRESS (AS MUCH AS HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY SPENT BY GOVERNMENT IN TEN YEARS TIME), THROUGH EXECUTIVE ORDERS AND OTHER MEANS.

    These powers were used to create many of the alphabet agencies. Other laws were passed allowing the new bureaus to pass their own directives within a wide sphere of authority. After THE NATIONAL INDUSTRIAL RECOVERY ACT  was found to be unconstitutional, many of the agencies created under it remained.

    Some alphabet agencies were established by Congress, such as the Tennessee Valley Authority  Others were established through Roosevelt executive orders, such as the Works Progress Administration  and  the Office of censorship or were part of larger programs such as the many that belonged to the Works Progress Administration The agencies were sometimes referred to as alphabet soup. Some of the agencies still exist today, while others have merged with other departments and agencies or were abolished, or found unconstitutional.

    Partial list of Alphabet Agencies

    Initialism

    Year

    Agency

    AAA

    1933

    Agricultural Adjustment Act

    CAA

    1933

    Civil Aeronautics Authority (now Federal Aviation Administration)

    CCC

    1933

    Civilian Conservation Corps

    CCC

    1933

    Commodity Credit Corporation

    CWA

    1933

    Civil Works Administration

    DRS

    1935

    Drought Relief Service

    DSH

    1933

    Subsistence Homesteads Division

    EBA

    1933

    Emergency Banking Act

    FAP

    1935

    Federal Art Project (part of WPA)

    FCA

    1933

    Farm Credit Administration

    FCC

    1934

    Federal Communications Commission

    FDIC

    1933

    Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

    FERA

    1933

    Federal Emergency Relief Administration

    FHA

    1934

    Federal Housing Administration

    FLSA

    1938

    Fair Labor Standards Act

    FMP

    1935

    Federal Music Project (part of WPA)

    FSA

    1935

    Farm Security Administration

    FSRC

    1933

    Federal Surplus Relief Corporation

    FTP

    1935

    Federal Theatre Project (part of WPA)

    FWA

    1939

    Federal Works Agency

    FWP

    1935

    Federal Writers’ Project (part of WPA)

    HOLC

    1933

    Home Owners’ Loan Corporation

    NIRA

    1933

    National Industrial Recovery Act

    NLRA

    1935

    National Labor Relations Act

    NLRB

    1934

    National Labor Relations Board/The Wagner Act

    NRA

    1933

    National Recovery Administration

    NSA

    1952

    National Security Agency

    NYA

    1935

    National Youth Administration

    PRRA

    1933

    Puerto Rico Reconstruction Administration

    PWA

    1933

    Public Works Administration

    RA

    1935

    Resettlement Administration

    REA

    1935

    Rural Electrification Administration (now Rural Utilities Service)

    SEC

    1934

    Securities and Exchange Commission

    SSA

    1935

    Social Security Administration

    SSB

    1935

    Social Security Board (now Social Security Administration)

    TVA

    1933

    Tennessee Valley Authority

    USHA

    1937

    United States Housing Authority

    USMC

    1936

    United States Maritime Commission

    WPA

    1935

    Works Progress Administration

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

    The bottom Line

    WHO COULD ASK FOR ANYTHING MORE THEN THE  “3 RS”  IN 2014?

    A NATION’S NATURAL RESOURCES; AND THE CONTINUED NEED FOR A CAREFULLY PLANNED, COMPREHENSIVE NATIONAL PROGRAM FOR THE PROTECTION AND DEVELOPMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES.

    THE CONSTRUCTION OF CAMPGROUNDS, BUILDINGS, AND OTHER FACILITIES ON NATIONAL FORESTS, NATIONAL PARKS, AND RANGE LANDS, AS WELL AS INSTALLATION OF EROSION CONTROL PROJECTS AND FIRE SUPPRESSION.

     PROVIDING  WORK FOR  MILLIONS OF  PEOPLE AND DEVELOPED FACILITIES ON PUBLIC LANDS ACROSS THE COUNTRY.

    A WORK PROGRAM STIMULUS TO THE PLANTING OF TREES AND

    EMPLOYING MILLIONS OF UNEMPLOYED PEOPLE (MOSTLY UNSKILLED MEN) TO CARRY OUT PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS,  INCLUDING THE CONSTRUCTION OF PUBLIC BUILDINGS AND ROADS.

    And, a Federal Government that understood that JOBS WERE MUCH BETTER FOR EVERYONE THAN CASH HANDOUTS


  • Part 8 (WOW) USFS Legislation

    This List of legislation governing THE UNITED STATES FOREST SERVICE, compels me to ask questions.

    Is the United States Forest Service under control?  OR IS IT TOTALLY OUT OF CONTROL WITH OVERLAPPING  CONGRESSIONAL ECONOMIC ACTS OF OPPRESSION?

    RESULTING IN AN EMERGENCY ECONOMIC STABILIZATION ACT ?

    (Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008). The legislation provides financial assistance to rural counties AFFECTED BY THE DECLINE IN REVENUE FROM THE TIMBER HARVESTS IN FEDERAL FOREST LANDS

    DECLINING TIMBER HARVESTS REVENUE INDEED,

    TIMBER HARVESTING NOW OCCURS ANNUALLY ON LESS THAN ONE PERCENT OF THE AREA IDENTIFIED AS SUITABLE FOR TIMBER PRODUCTION IN EXISTING NATIONAL FOREST PLANS.

    ———————————————————————————

    Today is Feb. 19, 2014 This page was last modified on 8 May 2012

    A number of federal statutes govern the United States Forest Service.

    FOREST SERVICE ORGANIC ADMINISTRATIVE ACT (Act of June 4, 1897) (16 U.S.C. §§ 473-478, 479-482 and 551, June 4, 1897, as amended 1905, 1911, 1925, 1962, 1964, 1968, and 1976). This act is the original organic act governing the administration of national forest lands. The act specified the purposes for which forest reserves might be established and provided for their protection and management. Today, this act is one of several Federal laws under which the Forest Service operates. While the Organic Administration Act remains significant, it must be read in conjunction with the later acts, which expand the purpose and uses of the national forests.

    MULTIPLE USE – SUSTAINED YIELD ACT  OF 1960 (Act of June 12, 1960) (P.L. 86-517; 16 U.S.C. §§ 528-531). This act declares that the purposes of the national forests include outdoor recreation, range, timber, watershed, and fish and wildlife. The act directs the Secretary of Agriculture to administer national forest renewable surface resources for multiple use and sustained yield. The act does not affect the jurisdiction or responsibilities of the States, the use or administration of the mineral resources of national forest lands, or the use or administration of Federal lands not within the national forests.

     NATIONAL FOREST MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1976 (Act of October 22, 1976) (P.L. 94-588; 16 U.S.C. §§ 1600-1614, August 17, 1974, as amended 1976, 1978, 1980, 1981, 1983, 1985, 1988 and 1990). This act reorganized, expanded, and otherwise amended the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, which called for the management of renewable resources on national forest lands. The National Forest Management Act requires the Secretary of Agriculture to assess forest lands, develop a management program based on multiple-use, sustained-yield principles, and implement a resource management plan for each unit of the National Forest System. It is the primary statute governing the administration of national forests.

    COOPERATIVE FORESTRY ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1978 (Act of July 1, 1978) (P.L. 95-313; 16 U.S.C. §§ 2101-2111, July 1, 1978, as amended 1990, 1991, 1992, 1996 and 2008). This act, as amended, authorizes the State and private forestry activities of the Forest Service—including fire, forest management, forest health, wood utilization, urban and community forestry, forest land easements, and organizational management assistance—to State forestry agencies.

     FOREST AND RANGELAND RENEWABLE RESOURCES RESEARCH ACT OF 1978(Act of June 30, 1978) (P.L. 95-307, as amended by P.L. 100-521, Forest Ecosystems and Atmospheric Pollution Research Act of 1988, Section 3 (c), and as amended by P.L. 101-624, Food Agriculture, Conservation, and Trade Act of 1990 (Farm Bill), Title XII, Subtitle B; 16 U.S.C. §§ 1641-1648). The act provides an updated and expanded authority for research by the Forest Service, including allowing competitive grants, performing research studies, recycling wood fiber, conducting tests, and establishing a forestry student grant program for minority and female students.

     FOOD, CONSERVATION AND ENERGY ACT OF 2008(Farm Bill) (P.L. 110-234) The Farm Bill is passed every several years and deals with both agriculture and all other affairs under the purview of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The most recent act, P.L. 110-234, contains new authorities for the Forest Service:

    Title VIII: Forestry

    Subtitle A: AMENDMENT TO THE COOPERATIVE FORESTRY ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1978. Establishes national priorities for private forest conservation, a community forest and open space conservation program, and a Secretary level Forest Resources Coordinating Committee.

    Subtitle B: Cultural and Heritage Cooperation Authority. Authorizes the reburial of Indian tribal human remains and cultural items found on national forest lands and TEMPORARY CLOSURE OF NATIONAL FOREST LANDS FOR CULTURAL PURPOSES.

    Subtitle C. AMENDMENTS TO OTHER FORESTRY RELATED LAWS. AMENDS THE LACEY ACT to include the illegal taking of plants, establishes an Emergency Forest Restoration Program, and renews authority and funding for the Healthy Forest Reserve Program.

    Title IX: Energy Establishes FOREST BIOMASS FOR ENERGY AND COMMUNITY WOOD ENERGY grant programs.

     FOREIGN OPERATIONS APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1978 (Act of November 5, 1990) (P.L. 101-513, 104 Stat. 2070; 16 §§ U.S.C. 4501 note, 4501, 4502, 4503, 4503a to 4503d, 4504, 4505, 1641, 1643, 2101, 2109). Title VI of this act provides authority for international forestry activities of the Forest Service.

    NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF (ACT OF JANUARY 1, 1970) (P.L. 91-190; 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321-4347). This act requires Federal agencies to integrate environmental values into their decision making processes by considering the environmental impacts of their proposed actions and reasonable alternatives to those actions. To meet this requirement, Federal agencies must analyze the environmental effects of proposed actions, such as through an environmental impact statement or other method, as specified in applicable rules. The act also established the President’s Council on Environmental Quality.

    ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT (ACT OF DECEMBER 28, 1973) (16 USC 1531-36, 1538-40). This act governs the process of identifying threatened and endangered species, provides protections for such species, and governs Federal actions that could affect such species or their habitat.

    The following are additional laws with significant influence on the mission of the Forest Service:

     FOREST AND RANGELAND RENEWAL RESOURCE PLANNING ACT  OF 1974 (ACT OF AUGUST 17, 1974) (P.L. 93-348, 88 Stat. 476, AS AMENDED; 16 U.S.C §§ 1600(note), 1600-1614). This act requires preparation of a strategic plan for all Forest Service activities every 5 years based on an assessment of renewable natural resources on all land ownerships every 10 years.

     CLEAN WATER ACT (FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION CONTROL ACT) (ACT OF JUNE 30, 1948) (P.L. 80-845; 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251-1387, October 18, 1972, as amended 1973-1983, 1987, 1988, 1990-1992, 1994, 1995, and 1996). This act is a comprehensive statute aimed at restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s waters.

    CLEAN AIR ACT (ACT OF JULY 14, 1955) (P.L. 84-159; 42 U.S.C. §§ 7401-7602). This act was the first Federal legislation involving air pollution. This act provided funds for Federal research in air pollution. Major amendments were made to this act by P.L. 88-206 and P.L. 95-95 to help control air pollution and increase the authority and responsibility of the Federal Government to help provide clean air.

    WILDERNESS ACT (ACT OF SEPTEMBER 3, 1964) (P.L. 88-577, 78 Stat. 890 as amended; 16 U.S.C §§ 1131 (note), 1131-1136). This act established the National Wilderness Preservation System and designated the initial components of that system. These lands are to be administered for the use and enjoyment of the American people and for the preservation of their wilderness character.

    LAND AND WATER CONSERVATION FUND ACT OF 1965 (Act of September 3, 1964) (P.L. 88-578, 78 Stat. 897 as amended; 16 U.S.C. §§ 460l-4 through 6a, 460l-7 through 460l-10, 460l-10a-d, 460l-11). This act provides money to Federal, State, and local governments to purchase land, water, and wetlands. Land is bought from landowners at fair-market value, unless donated.

     WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS ACT (ACT OF OCTOBER 2, 1968) (P.L. 90-542, 82 Stat. 906, as amended; 16 U.S.C. §§ 1271(note), 1271-1287). This act established a National Wild and Scenic Rivers System to include rivers possessing “outstandingly remarkable” values to be preserved in free-flowing condition. The act designated the initial components of this system and prescribed how future additions to the system would be evaluated.

    FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT (ACT OF OCTOBER 6, 1972) (P.L. 92-463; 5 U.S.C. §§ Appendix 2). The act governs the behavior of approximately 1,000 Federal advisory committees. In particular, the act restricts the formation of such committees to only those that are deemed essential and limits their powers to provision of advice to officers and agencies in the executive branch of the Federal Government. The act requires that administrative procedures and hearings be public knowledge.

     FEDERAL LAND AND POLICY MANAGEMENT ACT (ACT OF OCTOBER 21, 1976) (43 USC 1701-2, 1711-23, 1732-37, 1740-42, 1744, 1746-48, 1751-53, 1761-71, 1781-82). This statute provides the basic policies for Federal land management and governs actions such as acquisitions, sales, exchanges, withdrawals, and rights of way.

    FOREST RESERVE ACT OF 1891 (ACT OF MARCH 3, 1891) (Section 24 of the General Land Law Revision Act of 1891, also known as the Creative Act; 26 Stat. 1103; 16 U.S.C. §§ 471, REPEALED 1976 BY P.L. 94-579, FLPMA). This act gave the President authority to establish forest reserves from public domain lands. The forest reserves, then comprising 63 million acres (250,000 km2), formed the foundation of the National Forest System. In February 1905, CONGRESS TRANSFERRED THE FOREST RESERVES FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR TO THE DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. IN JULY 1905, THE BUREAU OF FORESTRY WAS RENAMED THE FOREST SERVICE.

    TRANSFER ACT OF 1905 (ACT OF FEBRUARY 1, 1905) (P.L. 58-33, Ch. 288, 33 Stat. 628; 16 §§ U.S.C. 472, 554). This act transferred administration of the forest reserves from the Department of the Interior to the Department of Agriculture.

    WEEKS LAW (ACT OF MARCH 1, 1911) (P.L. 61-435, CH. 186, 36 Stat. 961, as amended; 16 U.S.C. §§ 480, 500, 515, 516, 517, 517a, 518, 519, 521, 552, 563). This act authorized the Secretary of Agriculture to examine, locate, and purchase forested, cutover, or denuded lands within the watersheds of navigable streams necessary to regulate the flow of navigable streams or for timber production.

    SECURE RURAL SCHOOLS AND COMMUNITY SELF-DETERMINATION ACT OF 20000Section 601, Division C, of P.L. 110-343 (Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008). The legislation provides financial assistance to rural counties affected by the decline in revenue from timber harvests in Federal lands. Funds are used for schools and roads, as well as to create employment opportunities, to maintain current infrastructure, and to improve the health of watersheds and ecosystems. More than $2.1 billion will be distributed to eligible States and counties over a 4-year period (FY 2008-2011).

     

    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This page was last modified on 8 May 2012 at 07:18.

     


  • Part 7 (WOW) National Forest Land

    TIMBER HARVESTING NOW OCCURS ANNUALLY ON LESS THAN ONE PERCENT OF THE AREA IDENTIFIED AS SUITABLE FOR TIMBER PRODUCTION IN EXISTING NATIONAL FOREST PLANS.

    ——————————————–

    SINCE 1985, THE AREA OF NATIONAL FOREST LANDS AVAILABLE FOR PLANNED TIMBER HARVEST HAS DROPPED FROM ABOUT 72 TO 49 MILLION ACRES.

    ——————————————-

    Under the proposed HB  Wild Olympics Wilderness & Wild and Scenic Rivers Act of 2014 (S. 1949; H.R. 3922) an additional 126,000 more acres of National Forest land would be taken out of planned harvestable Natural Resource  timber production.

    —————————————————

    WILD National Forest Land does not work for American working Families

    ——————————————————-

    NATIONAL FOREST TIMBER SALES IN THE PACIFIC COAST STATES OF OREGON, WASHINGTON, AND CALIFORNIA WHICH HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE SPOTTED OWL ISSUE HAVE SEEN THE MOST DRAMATIC DECLINES,

    DROPPING BY 89 PERCENT BETWEEN 1987 AND 1995, from 6.86 to 0.78 billion board feet.
    ————————————————————————————
    THE DOCUMENTED HISTORY AND UNFATHOMABLE  STATISTICS


    The Forest Reserve Act of 1891
    The Forest Reserve Act of 1891 is a law that allowed the President of the United States to set aside forest reserves from the land in the public domain. Passed by the United States Congress under Benjamin Harrison’s administration. Harrison put 13 MILLION ACRES (53,000 km2) of land into National Forests; Grover Cleveland put in 25 MILLION ACRES (100,000 km2) and William McKinley put in 7 MILLION ACRES (28,000 km2).

    In the United States there are 155 NATIONAL FORESTS CONTAINING ALMOST 190 MILLION ACRES (297,000 mi²/769 000 km²) of land.

    THESE LANDS COMPRISE 8.5 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL LAND AREA OF THE UNITED STATES,
    an area about the size of Texas.

    SOME 87 PERCENT OF NATIONAL FOREST LAND LIES WEST OF THE Mississippi River; Alaska alone accounts for 12 percent of all National Forest land.
    ————————————————————————————————
    And lest we forget
    THE NATIONAL PARK SYSTEM COMPRISES 401 AREAS
    COVERING MORE THAN 84 MILLION ACRES
    in every state, the District of Columbia, American Samoa, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.
    ——————————————————————————————————–

    Today, 42.8 MILLION ACRES, OR 23 PERCENT OF THE 191 MILLION-ACRE NATIONAL FOREST SYSTEM IS STATUTORILY SET-ASIDE IN VARIOUS CONGRESSIONAL DESIGNATIONS. These include

    34.6-MILLION-ACRE NATIONAL WILDERNESS PRESERVATION SYSTEM,
    3.4 MILLION ACRES OF NATIONAL MONUMENTS,
    2.7 MILLION ACRES OF NATIONAL RECREATION AREAS,
    1.2 MILLION ACRES OF NATIONAL GAME REFUGES AND WILDLIFE PRESERVES,
    0.9 MILLION ACRES OF WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS, SCENIC, AND PRIMITIVE AREAS.

    AND IN ADDITION TO STATUTORY SET-ASIDES, LARGE AREAS OF NATIONAL FOREST AND OTHER FEDERAL LANDS HAVE BEEN MADE ADMINISTRATIVELY OFF-LIMITS TO COMMODITY PRODUCTION.

    CURRENT FOREST PLANS PROVIDE FOR TIMBER HARVESTING AS ONE OF THE RESOURCE OBJECTIVES ON ABOUT 26 PERCENT OF THE TOTAL AREA, 35 PERCENT OF FORESTED LAND, AND 48 PERCENT OF PRODUCTIVE FOREST LAND IN THE NATIONAL FORESTS.

     

    Reduction of land available for timber production has been particularly significant on the Pacific Coast.

    Of 24.5 million acres of federal lands within the range of the northern spotted owl,

    the Pacific Northwest Forest Plan provides that only 15 percent, or 3.7 million acres, is available for timber production as one of the possible uses.

     

    National forest lands comprise 19.4 million acres, or 79 percent, of all federal lands in the plan, while most of the rest are BLM lands.

    ——————————————————-

    Shifts in Timber Sales and Practices

    THE LEVEL OF NATIONAL FOREST TIMBER SALES HAS DECLINED even more dramatically than available land base, DROPPING BY 70 PERCENT from an average of 10 to 12 billion board feet during the 1960s, 1970s and 1980s, to 3 to 4 billion board feet today.

    NATIONAL FOREST TIMBER SALES IN THE PACIFIC COAST STATES OF OREGON, WASHINGTON, AND CALIFORNIA WHICH HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE SPOTTED OWL ISSUE HAVE SEEN THE MOST DRAMATIC DECLINES, DROPPING BY 89 PERCENT BETWEEN 1987 AND 1995, from 6.86 to 0.78 billion board feet.

    National forest timber sales IN OTHER STATES DECLINED BY 53 PERCENT, from 4.46 to 2.10 billion board feet, during the same period.

    Between 1989 and 1995, the area of national forest lands on which timber harvesting occurs annually declined by 44 percent, from 838,000 to 473,000 acres.

    TIMBER HARVESTING NOW OCCURS ANNUALLY ON LESS THAN ONE PERCENT OF THE AREA IDENTIFIED AS SUITABLE FOR TIMBER PRODUCTION IN EXISTING NATIONAL FOREST PLANS.

     

    Between 1988 and 1996, the area harvested by clearcutting dropped by 80 percent, from 283,000 to 57,000 acres. As a percentage of the total area cut, clearcutting declined by over two thirds, from 39 to 12 percent.
    In addition to the reduced use of clearcutting, the proportion of small sized and salvage timber has increased substantially. Between 1990 and 1996, sawlog-sized material dropped from 77 to 56 percent of total national forest harvest volume and salvage increased from 26 to 47 percent.

    ——————————————————————————————————————-
    HISTORY AND MORE

    National Forest is a classification of federal lands in the United States.
    National Forests are largely forest and woodland areas owned by the federal government and managed by the United States Forest Service, part of the United States Department of Agriculture. Land management of these areas focuses on conservation,
    timber harvesting, livestock grazing, watershed protection, wildlife, and recreation. Unlike national parks and other federal lands managed by the National Park Service, extraction of natural resources from national forests is permitted, and in many cases encouraged. National Forests are categorized by the World Commission on Protected Areas as IUCN Category VI (Managed Resource Protected Area).


    The National Forest System was created by the Land Revision Act of 1891. It was the result of concerted action by Los Angeles-area businessmen and property owners who were concerned by the harm being done to the watershed of the San Gabriel Mountains by ranchers and miners. Abbot Kinney and forester Theodore Lukens were key spokesmen for the effort.


    There are conflicts between timber companies and environmentalists over the use of National Forest land. These conflicts center on endangered species protection, logging of old-growth forests, intensive logging, undervalued stumpage fees, mining laws and road-building in National Forests. Additional conflicts arise from concerns that the grasslands, shrub lands, and forest understory are grazed by sheep, cattle, and, more recently, rising numbers of elk.


    In the United States there are 155 National Forests containing almost 190 million acres (297,000 mi²/769 000 km²) of land. These lands comprise 8.5 percent of the total land area of the United States, an area about the size of Texas. Some 87 percent of National Forest land lies west of the Mississippi River; Alaska alone accounts for 12 percent of all National Forest land.


    There are two distinctly different types of National Forests. Those east of the Great Plains are primarily re-acquired or replanted forests; that is, the land had long been in the private domain but was purchased by the United States government in order to create new National Forests. In these cases, the areas of National Forest noted on most maps do not actually represent the extent of the National Forest, but only the extent of the authorized purchase zone. The actual amount of land acquired in most cases is much smaller.


    Those national forests west of the Great Plains are originally-owned forests. These are mostly lands reserved in the public domain by the U.S. government, and with the exception of inholdings and donated land, were never in private hands. In these cases, the areas of National Forests noted on maps are generally the true areas of the forest.

    The National Forest Management Act (NFMA) of 1976 (P.L. 94-588) is a United States federal law that is the primary statute governing the administration of national forests and was an amendment to the Forest and Rangeland Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974, which called for the management of renewable resources on national forest lands. The law was seen as necessary, because a lawsuit (commonly known as the Monongahela decision) had invalidated many timber practices in the national forests.


    NFMA changed forest planning by obliging the Forest Service to use a systematic and interdisciplinary approach TO RESOURCE MANAGEMENT. It also provided for public involvement in preparing and revising forest plans. Also, NFMA established and expanded several Forest Service trust funds and special accounts (?). It expanded upon the land and resource management plans (L/RMPs) outlined in the Forest and Rangeland

    Renewable Resources Planning Act of 1974 (RPA),and started by requiring the Forest Service to do an inventory of all its lands, followed by a zoning process to see what uses land was best suited for
    – dubbed the “suitability determination.

    “[1] THESE PLANS REQUIRED ALTERNATIVE LAND MANAGEMENT OPTIONS TO BE PRESENTED, EACH OF WHICH HAVE POTENTIAL RESOURCE OUTPUTS (TIMBER, RANGE, MINING, RECREATION) AS WELL AS SOCIO-ECONOMIC EFFECTS ON LOCAL COMMUNITIES.


    The Forest Service, in cooperation with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), contributed considerable resources to the creation of  FORPLAN (a linear programming model USED TO ESTIMATE THE LAND MANAGEMENT RESOURCE OUTPUTS) and IMPLAN TO ESTIMATE THE ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF THESE OUTPUTS ON LOCAL COMMUNITIES.[2]
    ————————————————————————
    At the time NFMA was written there were conflicting interests in regards to proper forest management. The MAJOR PLAYER OF NATIONAL FOREST MANAGEMENT AT THE TIME WAS THE TIMBER INDUSTRY. In a post World War II economy, the demand for timber skyrocketed with the housing boom and people were recreating on public lands more than ever before. Visitors to national parks rose from 50 million in 1950 to 72 million in 1960. The Sierra Club and other conservation groups were also fighting for preservation of natural landscapes.


    The Multiple-Use Sustained-Yield Act of 1960 made it clear that the Forest Service had to manage for non-timber values, like recreation, range, watershed, wildlife and fishery purposes, but it wasn’t until NFMA that these uses were embodied by the forest planning process. [3]

     NFMA has spawned lawsuits regarding the degree of involvement required by both the forest service and the public.
    Ohio Forestry Association v. Sierra Club
    The Sierra Club claimed that the logging practices allowed in the Wayne National Forest in Southeast Ohio were unlawful under NFMA because the Act requires ongoing input and management from the Forest Service. THE COURT REJECTED THE CLAIMS OF THE SIERRA CLUB AND STATED THE FOREST SERVICE IS NOT AN AGENCY REQUIRED TO PERFORM ONGOING ACTION OR INVOLVEMENT IN THE FOREST PLANS.


    Sierra Club v. Marita, 1995
    The Forest Service issued two land and resource management plans for national forests in Wisconsin that both involved ltimber harvest. To monitor ecosystem health, the Forest Service chose a handful of management indicator species as proxies, but the Sierra Club argued that a mosaic-like logging of the national forests would not provide the wildlife corridor necessary to ensure appropriate biodiversity of those species or any others. The Sierra Club attacked the Forest Service’s science behind their L/RMP, calling it “junk science”. ULTIMATELY, THE COURT RULED IN FAVOR OF AGENCY DISCRETION DESPITE FINDING THAT THE FOREST SERVICE USED QUESTIONABLE SCIENCE, THOUGH NOT TO THE DEGREE THAT THEIR DECISION COULD BE CONSIDERED ARBITRARY AND CAPRICIOUS UNDER THE Administrative Procedure Act (APA).[5]

     

    THE CATASTROPHIC 1910 IDAHO/MONTANA FIRES IN WHICH ALMOST EIGHTY FOREST SERVICE FIREFIGHTERS PERISHED WAS A TRAUMATIC EVENT IN THE FORMATIVE YEARS OF THE AGENCY.

     

    THIS EVENT SET THE TONE FOR AN AGGRESSIVE FIRE CONTROL EFFORT. WILDFIRE PREVENTION AND SUPPRESSION BECAME THE FOCUS OF HIGHLY SUCCESSFUL COOPERATIVE EFFORTS AMONG FEDERAL AGENCIES AND STATE AND PRIVATE LANDOWNERS.

     The work programs of the Great Depression WERE A STIMULUS TO THE PLANTING OF TREES and the construction of campgrounds, buildings, and other facilities on national forests, national parks, and range lands, as well as installation of erosion control projects and fire suppression.


    While authorized in 1911 BY THE WEEKS ACT, acquisition of NATIONAL FOREST LAND IN THE EASTERN U.S. EXPANDED GREATLY DURING THE DEPRESSION YEARS.
    By 1945, when land acquisition substantially slowed, over 20 million acres of depleted farmsteads and cutover and burned-over woodlands had been incorporated into the eastern national forests.
    ________________________________________
    Increased Demands after World War II
    The period after World War II ushered in a substantial expansion in the demands placed on federal lands for a variety of products and uses. After the war, as millions of service men and women returned home and started families, demand for timber for housing rose dramatically.

    THE NATION INCREASINGLY LOOKED TO THE NATIONAL FORESTS AND BLM LANDS IN THE WEST TO MEET THAT DEMAND. ROAD ACCESS TO NATIONAL FORESTS AND BLM LANDS HAD IMPROVED BY THE LATE 1940S and many of the more accessible private lands had been logged to provide timber for the war effort.
    National forest and BLM timber sale levels increased from 2 to 4 billion board feet in the late 1940s to 11 to 14 billion board feet in the 1960s and beyond.
    BY THE 1960S, FEDERAL FORESTS WERE MEETING ALMOST 20 PERCENT OF THE NATION’S TOTAL CONSUMPTION OF WOOD VOLUME, AND OVER 28 PERCENT OF ITS CONSUMPTION OF SOFTWOOD SAWTIMBER, THE PRIMARY SOURCE OF LUMBER AND PLYWOOD FOR HOUSING.
    This substantial increase in federal timber harvest not only served to meet a critical national need for timber, it also had the effect of taking pressure off of private forest lands, many of which had been heavily impacted to meet the war effort.
    The 1950s also witnessed a substantial increase in demand for other uses, outputs, and values from the federal lands. An increasingly mobile and affluent population began to look to these lands for outdoor recreation. National forest recreation visitation increased from about 5 million in the early 1920s to 18 million in 1946, 93 million in 1960, and 233 million in 1975. National park visitation increased from 50 million in 1950 to 72 million by 1960, and BLM visitation went from a few million just after WW II to 50 million by 1980. Visitation at state, county, and municipal parks rose even more rapidly than that on federal lands.
    The increased demands on the federal lands began to be reflected legislatively in the 1960s.


    THE MULTIPLE-USE SUSTAINED-YIELD ACT OF 1960 PROVIDED THAT NATIONAL FORESTS BE MANAGED FOR A VARIETY OF USES AND VALUES, INCLUDING OUTDOOR RECREATION, WILDLIFE, TIMBER, RANGELAND GRAZING, AND WATERSHED PROTECTION. This law largely reflected the uses and management already occurring on these lands.
    ——————————————————————————————
    In 1968, both the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act and the National Trails System Act were passed. These acts created separate systems within which rivers and trails with outstanding scenic, recreational, geologic, cultural, historic, or other values could be designated into national systems.
    A Land and Water Conservation Fund was established, financed by oil revenues, to help finance the purchase of land in nationally designated areas.
    THE 1960S WERE ALSO A TIME OF GROWING PUBLIC CONTROVERSY OVER TIMBER HARVESTING PRACTICES ON THE FEDERAL LANDS.
    Clear cutting became a particularly controversial practice, with the Bitterroot National Forest in Montana and the Monongahela National Forest in West Virginia, receiving national attention over the issue.
    A growing segment of the public began seeking statutory protection for maintaining federal lands in their “natural” condition.
    The Wilderness Act, which passed in 1964 after much debate, provided for the designation of significant areas of federal land in their natural and “untrammeled” condition.


    MOST COMMODITY USES WERE PROHIBITED FROM THESE AREAS.


    In 1975, legislation was passed to allow DESIGNATING WILDERNESS in the East.


    IN 1974, THE FOREST AND RANGELANDS RENEWABLE RESOURCES PLANNING ACT (RPA) REQUIRED THE FOREST SERVICE TO PERIODICALLY ASSESS THE NATIONAL LONG-TERM DEMAND AND SUPPLY SITUATION FOR ALL RENEWABLE RESOURCES, AND TO PLAN HOW AGENCY PROGRAMS WOULD ADDRESS PROJECTED RESOURCE DEMANDS AND NEEDS.


    In 1976, the National Forest Management Act provided detailed guidelines for the management of national forest lands and
    FOR THE PARTICIPATION OF THE PUBLIC IN NATIONAL FOREST DECISION-MAKING.
    ________________________________________
    The Environmentalists–A New Agenda


    The growing environmental awareness of the 1960s, which had found focus initially on the federal lands, expanded greatly into a general concern over the deterioration of air and water quality and a perceived lack of attention to the environmental and health effects of industrialization. Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring galvanized public concern over pesticide use. Earth Day 1970 was successful in raising public awareness of environmental issues generally.


    CONGRESS RESPONDED TO THESE CONCERNS BY PASSING A VARIETY OF LAWS, INCLUDING THE CLEAN AIR ACT OF 1970; THE CLEAN WATER ACT OF 1972; THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL POLICY ACT OF 1970 (NEPA); amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act; the Toxic Substances Control Act of 1976;


    LAWS AIMED AT PROTECTING WETLANDS; AND THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT OF 1973, TO NAME A FEW.
    One primary focus of the 1970s environmental legislation was to reduce the human health effects of air and water pollution and the use of agricultural pesticides.
    Another focus was on reforming the way federal agencies make decisions affecting the environment. NEPA required federal agencies proposing actions that could have a significant effect on the environment to evaluate a range of alternatives and come to a reasoned choice after providing for public input.
    ALTHOUGH ONLY A PROCEDURAL LAW, PERHAPS NO SINGLE ENVIRONMENTAL LAW HAS HAD SO PROFOUND AN IMPACT ON FEDERAL DECISION-MAKING AS NEPA.


    THE ENDANGERED SPECIES ACT was one of the only laws passed in the 1970s that included a statutory goal for protecting species in jeopardy.


    It became a powerful tool that mandated that primacy in federal decision making be given to ENDANGERED SPECIES PROTECTION, AND, BY EXTENSION, TO BIODIVERSITY.


    MORE THAN ANY OTHER LAW, THE ESA is the genesis of the move to ecosystem management. Protection of species with large home ranges virtually mandates an ecosystem approach involving assessments at the scale of multi-ownerships and jurisdictions.


    THE ESA AND THE OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL LEGISLATION OF THE 1970S HAD A PROFOUND INFLUENCE ON THE USE AND MANAGEMENT OF BOTH FEDERAL AND NON-FEDERAL LANDS.


    The 1960s-70s environmental movement had other, more subtle effects, as well. One of them was to interest young urban people in conservation and natural resources careers. The “Earth Day graduates” have now moved into influential positions in most federal and state land agencies. Another major shift since the 1960s has been a movement of urban people to many rural areas adjacent to national forests. These people have significantly changed the preferences expressed by local people in how these lands should be managed.

    Land Preservation
    A second major thrust of public action was the
    DESIGNATION OF SIGNIFICANT AREAS OF NATIONAL FOREST LAND AS STATUTORY WILDERNESS AND SIMILAR STATUTORY CATEGORIES that emphasize protection of natural values, recreation, and other uses,
    and which limit OR PROHIBIT COMMODITY PRODUCTION.


    BEGINNING WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE WILDERNESS ACT OF 1964,
    this effort gained momentum in the 1970s WITH THE FIRST AND SECOND ROADLESS AREA REVIEW AND EVALUATION programs (RARE I and RARE II),


    as well as passage of legislation providing for designation of NATIONAL RECREATION AREAS, WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS, AND SIMILAR SPECIAL AREAS.


    By the mid-1980s CONGRESS HAD PASSED OMNIBUS STATE-WIDE WILDERNESS ACTS FOR MOST STATES CONTAINING NATIONAL FOREST LANDS.


    http://www.ti.org/2chistory.html

    https://www.google.com/#q=how+many+acres+are+in+US+national+parks

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Forest_Management_Act_of_1976#Legal_Battles

     


  • To Kilmer on Forest Plan

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

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

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

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

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

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

    How was this resolved?

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

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

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

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

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

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

    115 pages of National Forest System Land Management Planning

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

    AND LAST, BUT NOT LEAST

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

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

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

    ————————————————————————————————–

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Features
    Overall Collaboration and Public Involvement Strategy?

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

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

    Thank You,
    Pearl Rains Hewett
    A concerned American Grandmother


  • Kilmer stacked the WO deck

    With the Olympic Peninsula Collaborative
    December 3rd, 2013 – 11:19am
    (PORT ANGELES) Congressman Derek Kilmer announced a new coalition of commercial and ENVIRONMENTAL interests aimed at resolving some age old conflicts that have centered on the use of National Forest timberland.

    Organizations that have JOINED? BEEN INVITED BY KILMER? in the collaborative include:
    groups that are suing
    Audubon and Olympic Forest Coalition v. Dept. of Natural Resources
    ———————————————————————————–
    My comment
    If you are suing the DNR do you get an invitation to collaborate?
    ———————————————————————————-
    (more listed below)
    ——————————————————————————————————-
    New effort forms over Olympic National Forest
    KIRO Seattle ‎- 3 minutes ago
    “We have basically opened the doors to talk,” said Connie Gallant
    with the conservation group OLYMPIC FOREST COALITION.
    “We do not want to see …
    ————————————————————————————————-
    COURT INFORMATION: King County Superior Court, No. 12-2-19053-4SEA.
    Seattle Audubon and OLYMPIC FOREST COALITION v. Dept. of Natural Resources
    ————————————————————————————————————

    Connie Gallant was identified to me as the leader of “THE OUT OF TOWNER’S” that crashed
    THE KILMER SEQUIM TOWN HALL MEETING to glorify the Wild Olympics.
    ————————————————————————-
    Wild Olympics Campaign
    www.wildolympics.org/‎
    CONNIE GALLANT on Hood Canal. Thank you for your interest and we hope to hear from you! Connie’s signature. Connie Gallant Quilcene, WA The Wild Olympics …
    ————————————————————————————————-
    Audubon Society and Olympic Forest Coalition.
    COURT INFORMATION: King County Superior Court, No. 12-2-19053-4SEA.
    SEATTLE AUDUBON AND OLYMPIC FOREST COALITION v. Dept. of Natural …
    wflc.org › Our Work › Docket‎
    Seattle Audubon and Olympic Forest Coalition v. Dept. of Natural Resources
    Document Actions
    COURT INFORMATION: King County Superior Court, No. 12-2-19053-4SEA
    PLAINTIFFS/CLIENTS: Seattle Audubon Society and Olympic Forest Coalition
    DEFENDANT: Washington State Department of Natural Resources

    DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS: American Forest Resource Council and Wahkiakum County

    STATUS: Complaint filed May 29, 2012; on July 11, 2013, King County Superior Court Judge Bruce E. Heller ruled that the Department of Natural Resources violated the State Environmental Policy Act by allowing logging of over 12,000 acres of mature forest in Southwest Washington.
    CASE DETAILS: The lawsuit alleges that the DNR’s adoption of a proposal to clear-cut approximately 12,000 acres of mature forest in Southwest Washington violated the State Environmental Policy Act. The lawsuit asked the Court to require DNR to prepare an environmental impact statement for the proposal and to stop DNR from logging under the proposal until it prepares the EIS.

    COURT INFORMATION: King County Superior Court, No. 12-2-19053-4SEA. PLAINTIFFS/CLIENTS: Seattle
    —————————————————————————————
    About The Wild Olympics Campaign
    www.wildolympics.org/about‎
    The campaign is working with other local citizens and community leaders to … Society; North Olympic Group — SIERRA CLUB; Washington Wild; The Mountaineers …
    —————————————————————————————————–
    NewsDaily: New effort forms over Olympic National Forest
    www.newsdaily.com/…/new-effort-forms-over-olympic-national-forest‎
    38 mins ago – MORE THAN A DOZEN GROUPS are on board, including the
    Olympic Forest Coalition, the Mountaineers and American Forest Resource Council.
    ———————————————————————————————————
    OLYMPIC PARK ASSOCIATES
    Olympic Park Associates push forward UN Agenda 21 in closing off …
    www.citizenreviewonline.org/2010/Jun/olympic_park.html‎

    Organizations that have (BEEN INVITED) joined in the collaborative include:

    1. American Whitewater Cosmo
    American Whitewater – WA State Rivers
    www.americanwhitewater.org/content/River/state-summary/state/WA/‎
    American Whitewater is the primary advocate for the preservation and protection of whitewater rivers throughout the United States and connects the interests of …
    More results for american whitewater washington state
    ———————————————————————————–
    2. The Mountaineers

    • The Mountaineers (club) – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Mountaineers_(club)‎
    The Mountaineers is an outdoor recreation, education, and conservation 501(c)(3) nonprofit based in Seattle, Washington, founded in 1906. The club organizes …
    • The Mountaineers Foundation
    www.mountaineersfoundation.org/‎
    The Mountaineers Foundation purchased 69.7 acres from the Ueland Tree Farm in November 2012 thanks to a generous grant from the Suquamish Tribe and …
    ————————————————————————————–
    3. Olympic Park Associates

    Olympic Park Associates push forward UN Agenda 21 in closing off …
    www.citizenreviewonline.org/2010/Jun/olympic_park.html‎
    Jun 16, 2010 – This opening statement of the Olympic Park Associates’ (OPA’s) newsletter, Voice of the Wild Olympics, reflects the usual rhetoric used by …
    —————————————————————————————–
    4. Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society
    olympicpeninsulaaudubon.org/‎
    The Olympic Peninsula Audubon Society promotes birding, conservation of habitat and biological diversity on the Olympic Peninsula through educational and …
    Seattle Audubon and Olympic Forest Coalition v. Dept. of Natural Resources

    ————————————————————————————–
    5. Washington Wild Washington Wild Things
    www.washingtonwildthings.com/‎
    Official team site including news, schedule, ticket information, and mailing list.
    ‎Game Schedules – ‎Roster – ‎Promotional Schedule – ‎Individual Tickets
    ———————————————————————————————
    6. Olympic Forest Coalition
    Olympic Forest Coalition
    olympicforest.org/‎
    Aug 19, 2013 – The mission of the Olympic Forest Coalition is promoting the protection, conservation and restoration of natural forest ecosystems and their …

    Seattle Audubon and Olympic Forest Coalition v. Dept. of Natural Resources

    ———————————————————————————————
    7. Pew Charitable Trusts
    The Pew Charitable Trusts – Non Profit Organization Serving the Public
    www.pewtrusts.org/‎
    A non profit charitable organization providing grants to improve public policy, inform the public, and support community service through public opinion polls and …
    ———————————————————————
    8. WILD OLYMPICS CAMPAIGN
    www.wildolympics.org/about‎
    The campaign is working with other local citizens and community leaders to … Society; North Olympic Group — SIERRA CLUB; Washington Wild; The Mountaineers …
    ——————————————
    9. Associates of THE SIERRA CLUB
    ——————————————-
    10. Murphy Company?
    —————————————————————————————————–
    AND KILMER INVITED TO (JOIN) TO PROTECT WA STATE, DNR AND OUR US FOREST INTERESTS?

    . American Forest Resource Council
    American Forest Resource Council – Healthy Forests, Communities …
    www.amforest.org/‎
    AFRC’s mission is to enhance the health of our public & private forests through enforcement of sound forestry practices.
    ——————————————————————————————————–
    COURT INFORMATION: King County Superior Court, No. 12-2-19053-4SEA
    PLAINTIFFS/CLIENTS: Seattle Audubon Society and Olympic Forest Coalition
    DEFENDANT: Washington State Department of Natural Resources
    DEFENDANT-INTERVENORS: American Forest Resource Council and Wahkiakum County

    Sierra Pacific Industries:
    Simpson Lumber Company
    Specialty Fibers Green Creek Wood Products
    Interfor
    Merrill & Ring
    ————————————————————————————————————-
    December 3rd, 2013 – 11:19am
    (PORT ANGELES) Congressman Derek Kilmer announced a new coalition of commercial and environmental interests aimed at resolving some age old conflicts that have centered on the use of National Forest timberland.
    During a conference call Tuesday morning, Kilmer announced the formation of the “Olympic Peninsula Collaborative”, which will bring together stakeholders from the timber industry, the environmental community along with federal and local government representatives in hopes of providing the best economic benefits to the Peninsula.
    The collaborative laid out their goals to include:
    • Increasing the amount of acres treated and total harvest volume produced in forest restoration projects under the Northwest Forest Plan and increasing the number and footprint of aquatic and other non-thinning related restoration projects.
    • Creating a framework of agreement on the type and locations of forest restoration treatments that benefit the ecosystem and provide for increased harvest levels under the Northwest Forest Plan.
    • Improving treatment effectiveness and working to reduce the time and cost required to plan and prepare projects through increased efficiencies for the Forest Service.
    • Creating a framework of agreement around innovative forest practices, treatments and techniques that integrate ecological, social, and economic goals, and exploring whether the Adaptive Management Area (AMA) established under the Northwest Forest Plan provides an opportunity to test these alternative approaches.
    • Collaborating on specific projects, as needed, to create an environment that reduces conflict and seeks to achieve a common vision about the future of the Olympic National Forest.
    • Creating a forum for addressing any problems that stand in the way of accomplishing our stated goals with the active involvement of federal elected and agency officials.


  • Waste Not Want Not

    HR1526 FEDERAL FORESTRY MANAGEMENT REFORM BILL
    RATIONAL AMENDMENTS that were PASSES in the house, done in the best interest of the American People, including, federal and local economic stimulus, local employment opportunities, A WASTE NOT WANT NOT approach to the current dysfunctional federal forest management plan.
    ————————————————-
    On Sept 19, 2013 CSPAN (live) I watched Doc Hasting, Jeff Denham, Tom McClintock proposing RATIONAL AMENDMENTS, showing evidence of, clear and sensible thinking and judgment, based on reason rather than emotion or prejudice, to HR1526 Federal Forestry Management Reform Bill ….

    ———————————————————————–
    CSPAN provides the actual house debates of our Federal representatives on National Forest Land HR1526.
    ———————————————————————-
    Introduced: Apr 12, 2013
    Sponsor: Rep. Doc Hastings [R-WA4]
    Status: Passed House
    ———————————————————————–
    WHAT A CONCEPT PUBLIC COMMENT

    AND, H.Amdt.472 PROHIBITING road and trail closures BY THE NATIONAL FOREST SERVICE, ON PUBLIC LAND without public comment and involvement.
    ———————————————————————
    • H.Amdt.472 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: At the end of the bill, add the following new section: SEC. 508. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN ACTIONS REGARDING FOREST SERVICE ROADS AND TRAILS. The Forest Service shall not remove or otherwise eliminate or obliterate any legally created road or trail unless there has been a specific decision, which included adequate and appropriate public involvement, to decommission the specific road or trail in question. The fact that any road or trail is not a Forest System road or trail, or does not appear on a Motor Vehicle Use Map, shall not constitute a decision.
    Continued below
    ——————————————————————–
    INFORM YOUR SELF ON THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR AND ITS HIERARCHY

    The hierarchy of the U.S. Department of the Interior.
    ———————————————————————–

    DEDICATED TO THE POLICY OF THE WILLFUL TAKING AND RESTRICTING OF PUBLIC USE OF PUBLIC LAND.
    ——————————————————————–
    • Assistant Secretary for Policy, Management, and Budget
    o Deputy Assistant Secretary for Public Safety, Resource Protection and Emergency Services (DAS-PRE)
     Office of Law Enforcement and Security (OLES)
     Office of Emergency Management (OEM)
     Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
    • BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS
    • Bureau of Land Management
    • Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, Regulation and Enforcement
    • Bureau of Reclamation
    • Federal Executive Boards
    • Interior Museum
    • NATIONAL PARK SERVICE
    • Office of Insular Affairs
    • Office of Surface Mining
    • United States Fish and Wildlife Service
    • United States Geological Survey
    ———————————————————————
    INFORM YOUR SELF ON THE CALIF OFF ROAD VEHICLE ASSOCIATION http://www.corva.org/news.php

    DEDICATED TO PROTECTING OUR LAND FOR THE PEOPLE NOT FROM THE PEOPLE

    ———————————————————————-
    News for hr 1526 Continued

    1. Rural County Representatives of California Announces US House Adopts Federal Forestry Management Reform Bill …
    Sierra Sun Times ‎- 3 hours ago
    Rural County Representatives of California Announces U.S. House Adopts Federal Forestry Management Reform Bill (H.R. 1526)
    2. ———————————————————————–
    Amendments: H.R. 1526: Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act
    • H.Amdt.474 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: At the end of the bill, add the following new section: SEC. 508. DEFINITION OF FIRE SUPPRESSION TO INCLUDE CERTAIN RELATED ACTIVITIES. ***.
    ————————————————–

    Sponsor: Rep. LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA-1] (Offered 09/19/2013)

    Latest Action: 09/20/13 On agreeing to the LaMalfa amendment (A007) Agreed to by voice vote.
    • H.Amdt.473 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: At the end of the bill, add the following new section: SEC. 508. LIMITATIONS ON TYPES OF DAMAGES THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT MAY SEEK ARISING FROM WILDFIRES. ***.
    ———————————————————–

    Sponsor: Rep. LaMalfa, Doug [R-CA-1] (Offered 09/19/2013)

    Latest Action: 09/20/13 By unanimous consent, the LaMalfa amendment was withdrawn. (consideration: CR H5754)
    • H.Amdt.472 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: At the end of the bill, add the following new section: SEC. 508. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN ACTIONS REGARDING FOREST SERVICE ROADS AND TRAILS. The Forest Service shall not remove or otherwise eliminate or obliterate any legally created road or trail unless there has been a specific decision, which included adequate and appropriate
    public involvement, to decommission the specific road or trail in question. The fact that any road or trail is not a Forest System road or trail, or does not appear on a Motor Vehicle Use Map, shall not constitute a decision.
    ———————————————————

    Sponsor: Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-4] (Offered 09/19/2013)

    Latest Action: 09/20/13 On agreeing to the McClintock amendment (A005) Agreed to by recorded vote: 249 – 166 (Roll no. 481).
    • H.Amdt.471 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: At the end of title II (page 26, after line 22), add the following new section: SEC. 207. MORATORIUM ON USE OF PRESCRIBED FIRE IN MARK TWAIN NATIONAL FOREST, MISSOURI, PENDING REPORT. ***.
    —————————————————————

    Sponsor: Rep. Smith, Jason T. [R-MO-8] (Offered 09/19/2013)

    Latest Action: 09/19/13 On agreeing to the Smith (MO) amendment (A004) Agreed to by voice vote.
    ——————————————————————
    • H.Amdt.470 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: Page 23, line 10, add after the period the following new sentence: “In addition, if the primary purpose of a hazardous fuel reduction project or a forest health project under this title is the salvage of dead, damaged, or down timber resulting from wildfire occurring in 2013, the hazardous fuel reduction project or forest health project, and any decision of the Secretary concerned in connection with the project, shall not be subject to judicial review or to any restraining order or injunction issued by a United States court.”.
    ——————————————————–

    Sponsor: Rep. McClintock, Tom [R-CA-4] (Offered 09/19/2013)

    Latest Action: 09/20/13 On agreeing to the McClintock amendment (A003) Agreed to by recorded vote: 243 – 172 (Roll no. 480).
    • H.Amdt.469 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: At the end of title I, page 17, after line 23, add the following new section: SEC. 106. ANNUAL REPORT. (a) Report Required- Not later than 60 days after the end of each fiscal year, the Secretary shall submit to Congress an annual report specifying the annual volume requirement in effect for that fiscal year for each Forest Reserve Revenue Area, ***.
    ————————————————————

    Sponsor: Rep. Daines, Steve [R-MT-At Large] (Offered 09/19/2013)

    Latest Action: 09/19/13 On agreeing to the Daines amendment (A002) Agreed to by voice vote.
    • H.Amdt.468 — 113th Congress (2013-2014)
    Description: Page 16, line 7, insert before the period the following: “, except that a court of the United States may not issue a restraining order, preliminary injunction, or injunction pending appeal covering a covered forest reserve project in response to an allegation that the Secretary violated any procedural requirement applicable to how the project was selected, planned, or analyzed”.
    ————————————————————

    Sponsor: Rep. Daines, Steve [R-MT-At Large] (Offered 09/19/2013)

    Latest Action: 09/20/13 On agreeing to the Daines amendment (A001) Agreed to by recorded vote: 219 – 196 (Roll no. 479).
    ———————————————————————-
    Rural County Representatives of California Announces U.S. House Adopts Federal Forestry Management Reform Bill (H.R. 1526)
    1. Last Updated on Saturday, 21 September 2013 04:36
    September 20, 2013 – On Friday, the U.S. House of Representatives approved H.R. 1526, the Restoring Healthy Forests for Healthy Communities Act.

    H.R. 1526 attempts to create a mechanism to properly manage federal forests in order to minimize wildfires, increase timber harvests, and provide for economic opportunities in rural communities.

    The bill also extends the Secure Rural School program for an additional year.

    RCRC applauds the House for addressing the important issue of forest management. Federal forest lands are an important thread in the fabric of much of rural California, and RCRC supports many of the provisions in H.R. 1526. While RCRC urged members of the House to move forward with H.R. 1526, several concerns were expressed with how this legislation will impact California counties, primarily the need to have proper time to ensure the successful transition from SRS to the new payment system outlined in H.R. 1526. RCRC’s letter can be accessed here.
    H.R. 1526’s future in the Senate is unlikely as key Senators and the Obama Administration have indicated their disproval with this approach, namely the environmental process changes and the likelihood of increased timber yields in nearly every forest. It is expected that H.R. 1526 will motivate Senator Ron Wyden (D-Oregon) – Chairman of the Senate Committee which oversees forestry reform – to craft a forest reform package which has bi-partisan support, as well as support among key House Republicans. That effort is likely to be unveiled later this year or in early 2014.
    H.R. 1526 was approved 244 to 173 with all but one House Republican voting “aye,” and 17 Democrats giving its support.

    Source: RCRC