+menu-


  • Category Archives What’s Wrong With That?
  • Doing Local Business From WA D.C. Edicts?

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

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

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

    Doing Local Business From WA DC Edicts?

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

    ————————————————————

    JUST TO NAME A FEW

    ————————————————-

    Just saying…. I found this tidbit online…

    NO FEAR Act Questions and Answers?

    NO FEAR ACT MY FOOT!

    FBI — Run, Hide, Fight Video

    —————————————————————–

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

    Behind My Back | A WA State Bathroom Rule

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

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

    1. Obama’s Transgender Bathroom Law?

    Behind My Back | Coerced by Federal Bathroom Laws?

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

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

    ———————————————————————

    Behind My Back | OBAMA’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS

    www.behindmyback.org/category/obamasexecutiveorders/

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

    Behind My Back | Executive Orders Matter

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

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

    ———————————————————-

    Behind My Back | The Hidden Costs of Obamacare

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

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

    —————————————————————

    Behind My Back | Common Core? an American Tragedy

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

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

    ————————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | WOTUS “Water Runs Down Hill”

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

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

    —————————————————–

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

    Behind My Back | The Government From Soup to Nuts

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

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

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

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

    ————————————————————-

    ARE AMERICAN VOTERS STUPID?

    NOPE, THE TRUMP CARD HAS BEEN PLAYED

    MAY 19, 2016 . THE SILENT MAJORITY HAS SPOKEN.

    THE POLITICAL INSIDERS ARE OUT…

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

    ———————————————————–

    THE SOUP?

    Behind My Back | Making Stone Soup

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

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

    ————————————————-

    MAKING STONE SOUP

    THE SHORT FORM OF 1548  PEOPLES COOPERATION

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

     IN SEVEN EASY STEPS

    ————————————————

    MAKING STONE SOUP

    THE LONG FORM OF 2015 GOVERNMENT COORDINATION  POLICY

    Under The bipartisan Healthy Sustainable Food Act

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

    —————————————————————–

    THE NUTS?

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

    Behind My Back | The “RESTORATION” Shell Game

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

    Jun 9, 2014 – The “RESTORATIONShell Game

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

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

    ——————————————————————————-

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

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

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

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

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

    ———————————————————-

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    —– Original Message —–

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    ——————————————————–

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Alan Cook

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

    Subject: Re: List of Permits

    Hi Alan…

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

    Thank you for the list.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Trustee George C. Rains Sr.Estate

    ——————————————

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Alan Cook

    To: phew@wavecable.com

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

    Subject: List of Permits

    Hi Ms. Hewitt:

    Nice talking to you today.

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

    Please let me know if you have additional questions.

    Best,

    Alan

     AGS Marine Net Pen Relocation Project: Port Angeles-East

    Permit List

     

    Permit/Approval Applied For

    Date Submitted

    Agency

    1.  SEPA Threshold Determination /

         SEPA Compliance

    SEPA Checklist submitted with SSDP application

    February 1, 2016

    Clallam County, WA

    SEPA Lead Agency

    2.  Shoreline Substantial Development Permit

         (SSDP)

    February 1, 2016

    Clallam County, WA

    3.  Critical Areas Certificate of Compliance

    February 1, 2016

    Clallam County, WA

    4.  Section 10 Rivers & Harbors Act Permit

    for work in navigable waters of the U.S.

    February 1, 2016

    U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

    (Corps)

    5.  Section 7 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consultation

    Unknown; will be submitted to NMFS by the Corps

    National Marine Fisheries Service

    (NMFS)

    6.  Section 7 Endangered Species Act (ESA) Consultation

    Unknown; will be submitted to USFWS by the Corps

    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

    (USFWS)

    7.  Section 401 Clean Water Act

    Water Quality Certification

    February 1, 2016

    Washington Dept of Ecology

    (Ecology)

    8.  Section 402 Clean Water Act

    NPDES Waste Discharge Permit

    March 1, 2016

    Ecology

    9.  Coastal Zone Management (CZM) Program Consistency Determination

    February 1, 2016

    Ecology

    10.  Aquatic Resources Use Authorization and

    Aquatic Land Lease

    February 1, 2016

    Washington Dept of

    Natural Resources (WDNR)

    11.  Aquatic Farm Registration

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    Washington Dept of

    Fish & Wildlife (WDFW)

    12.  Finfish Aquaculture Permit

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    WDFW

    13.  Finfish Transport Permit

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    WDFW

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

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

    U.S. Coast Guard (USCG)

    Alan Cook

    Vice President Aquaculture

    Icicle Seafoods Inc.

    Phone:  206-384-9017

    Email:  Alanc@icicleseafoods.com

    ————————————————————

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits above

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

    —————————————————————-

    Doing Local Business From WA D. C. Edicts?

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

    Elwha River claims section of road with massive washout …

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

    Nov 22, 2015Peninsula Daily News

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

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

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

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

    ——————————————————

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Behind My Back | Find Your Park Open Doors Remove Barriers

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

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

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits ?

    ——————————————————————–

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Sergio.Mayorga@dot.gov

    To: phew@wavecable.com

    Cc: Scott.Johnson@dot.gov

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

    Subject: Olympic National Park Issue

    Dear Ms. Pearl Rains Hewett,

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

    Thank you,

    Sergio Mayorga

    BLM/FWS/ERFO Program Manager`

    HFL-1

    Room E61-206

    Federal Lands Highway

    FHWA

    U.S. Department of Transportation

    1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

    Washington, DC 20590

    202 366 9491

    ———————————————————-

    —– Original Message —–

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

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

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

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

    The damaged roads and trails were due to natural event.

    Jan 2016 received  recognition of Elwha River disastrous flooding event

    As you requested ONP contact information

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

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

    Brian Winter
    Elwha River Project Manager

    Clallam County Commissioner Bill Peach (360) 417-2238

    ————————————————

    Lisa Turecek, PE Chief of Facilities Management

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

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

    Jan 2016 received  recognition of Elwha River disastrous flooding event

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

    However,  Jan-Feb 2016?

    A damage survey was required for ERFO amount of funding?

    Has the damage survey been completed?

    Has the ERFO amount of funding been submitted and approved?

    Additionally…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Thank you for your assistance

    I am concerned for the economy of our local community.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Inholder Olympic National Park

    What ever it takes to get the job done.

    ————————————————————-

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

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

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

    Behind My Back | Public Access to Public land

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

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

    Timing will be determined by progress on permits

    ——————————————————-

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

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

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

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

    Mr. Winters message…

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    Thank you,

    Brian D. Winter, Ph.D.

    Elwha Project Mgr/Lands Mgr

    Olympic National Park

    600 East Park Avenue

    Port Angeles, WA 98362

    (360) 565-3006

    ——————————————————————-

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

    ———————————————————-

    I also sent the following email to ONP Superintendent Creachbaum

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Sarah Creachbaum

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

    Subject: Inholders property combination for gate access

    Hi Sarah,

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

    Will you call me and provide the combination?

    Thanks

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    ————————————————————————-

    Government business as usual


  • Quadrennial Fire Review

    Quadrennial Fire Review

    The QFR is not reviewed or approved by any government entity.

    Social networking will become the most effective means of informing and educating the public about FIRE, as traditional media and informational techniques continue to decline in popularity.

    It was called the fire community’s “CRYSTAL BALL,” by Tom Harbour, Director of Fire and Aviation Management for the USDA Forest Service.[1]

    —————————————————————————–

    References

    The International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) Donald K. Artley, Contractor  August, 2009 Address by Tom Harbour before the International Association of Fire Chiefs Conference, March 26, 2009 Written by Don Artley, January 2009, in IAFC newsletter, article titled, “Quadrennial Fire Review.”

    —————————————————————————————-

    The 2009 Quadrennial Fire Review (QFR) is a publication that examines the future of wildfire in the United States and provides insight and predictions about potential changes in mission, roles and responsibilities.

    It was called the fire community’s “CRYSTAL BALL,” by Tom Harbour, Director of Fire and Aviation Management for the USDA Forest Service.[1]

    The QFR is not a policy or decision document, nor does it contain specific recommendations. Its purpose is to stimulate thought and discussion within the wildfire community about how the nation can best prepare for future wildfire seasons. According to the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), the QFR “was designed as a strategic evaluative process that develops an internal assessment of capabilities of current programs and resources in comparison to future needs for fire management.” [2]

    The QFR is published every four years. The first QFR was completed in 2005 and the second published in January 2009 by the National Interagency Fire Center in Boise, Idaho; and the National Advanced Fire Research Institute in Tucson, Arizona. It is modeled on the Department of Defense’s Quadrennial Defense Review.

    The 2009 QFR was developed by fire experts from federal, state local and tribal organizations, plus assistance from non-governmental organizations and the research and academic communities. The overall effort was coordinated through the Brookings Institution.

    The QFR is not reviewed or approved by any government entity.

    It is meant to be an independent and objective document, free from political or agency influence. The QFR’s projections of future conditions extend to a 10-to-20 year time frame, while the strategies for how to prepare for those future conditions is defined in a four-to-five-year period.

    The QFR looks at trends and makes forecasts about what will need to change within the fire community to deal with future challenges. Among the notable forecasts in the 2009 QFR are:

    • Climate change will produce longer fire seasons, with the potential of 10–12 million acres (40,000–49,000 km2)
    • BURNING IN THE UNITED STATES BY THE YEAR 2014.
    • Also, wildfire will affect more geographic regions than in the past, specifically the Northeast and Great Lakes areas, which generally have been considered at low-risk. Alaska‘s fire vulnerability will increase, as well, as warmer temperatures dry out vegetation.
    • The current drought cycle might last another 25 years, creating more stress on vegetation and contributing to a higher number of fires and more volatile fire behavior.
    • Growth will slow in populated areas prone to wildfire (often called the “wildland-urban interface” or WUI), but they will still be at high risk from wildfires.
    • Fire agency budgets will be strained by increasing demands, rising costs and falling government revenues.
    • The concept of “protecting all communities at all costs” should transition to “fostering self-reliance and increasing resiliency.” The education focus should shift toward more self-reliance and accountability, producing “fire-adapted communities.”
    • Social networking will become the most effective means of informing and educating the public about fire, as traditional media and informational techniques continue to decline in popularity.

    The 2009 QFR also outlines an integrated fuels management plan that would help ensure that fuels treatment investments are tied more closely to land stewardship objectives. It also suggests that small-scale fuels treatments (prescribed burning, mechanical removal of brush, thinning, chemical treatments, and so forth) are not as effective as larger, landscape-scale treatments in terms of ecosystem health.

    The 2005 QFR was prescient. For example, it predicted a significant increase in the number and costs of wildfires, dramatic changes in weather, accelerated WUI growth, and continued fuel build-ups. All of these forecasts proved correct.

    More than 100 people participated in developing the 2009 version of the QFR. The next QFR is scheduled for publication in 2012. Electronic copies of the QFR are available at the NIFC website,[1]

    References

    Address by Tom Harbour before the International Association of Fire Chiefs Conference, March 26, 2009 Written by Don Artley, January 2009, in IAFC newsletter, article titled, “Quadrennial Fire Review.”

    Categories:

    Wildfires in the United States


  • Keeping Out the Lower Element

    Keeping Out the Lower Element

    $$$$ THE COST OF A DISCOVER PASS WILL HELP KEEP THE LOWER ELEMENT OUT AND OFF OF PUBLIC LAND. WA State Parks Meeting

    Defining the LOWER ELEMENT?

    WORKING CLASS AMERICAN CITIZENS WITH LOWER AND MIDDLE INCOME? FAMILIES WITH KIDS?

    —————————————————————————–

    Behind My Back | (7) WA Parks New Deal and Raw Deals

    www.behindmyback.org/…/7-wa-parks-the-newdeal-and-the-rawdeals/

    Aug 27, 2014 – (7) WA Parks –NEW DEAL AND RAW DEALS  First Posted – In Part, as (9) WOW New Deal – Feb. 21, 2014 snippet, Implicitly, the CCC also led to a …

    —————————————————————————————

    $$$$ THE COST OF PUBLIC ACCESS TO AND ON ALL PUBLIC LAND, FEDERAL, STATE AND COUNTY WILL HELP KEEP THE LOWER ELEMENT OUT AND OFF OF “ALL” PUBLIC LAND.

    —————————————————————————————

    KEEPING THE LOWER ELEMENT OUT AND OFF OF PRIVATE PROPERTY?

    Defining the LOWER ELEMENT?

    TRESPASS,  MALICIOUS MISCHIEF, RECKLESS BURNING.

    AUGUST 10,  2015 CLALLAM COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT. CASE NUMBER 2015-17831

    full text

    Behind My Back | These Crimes Occur Everyday

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/08/11/thesecrimesoccureveryday/

    2 days ago – These Crimes Occur Everyday Trespass ON PRIVATE PROPERTY, THEFT OF POLITICAL SIGNS, malicious mischief, illegal dumping, littering and …

    ——————————-

    GO FIGURE?

    —————————————————————————–

    PUBLIC LAND AT EVERY LEVEL, IS PROTECTED, USING TAXPAYER $$$$, FROM PUBLIC ACCESS BY THE LOWER ELEMENT, FEDERAL, STATE AND COUNTY.

    THE GOVERNMENT HAS ENOUGH LEGISLATED TAXPAYER MONEY TO PAY ARMED GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES/GUARDS, POSTED AT ERECT TOLL BOOTHS, WITH GATES, TO POLICE, WRITE TICKETS, TO  IMPOSE AND ENFORCE, 49 PAGES OF WHAT THE PUBLIC CAN AND CAN NOT DO IN AND ON “JUST” WA STATE PARKS PUBLIC LAND.

    THE US GOVERNMENT, FEDERAL STATE AND LOCAL, HAVE THE POWER TO ARREST, COLLECT ENTRANCE FEES, GIVE PARKING TICKETS, COLLECT, TAXES, FEES, COURT COST, POST SIGNS, CHOP UP ACCESS ROADS, CLOSE ROADS AND TRAILS.

    AND, THE US GOVERNMENT, FEDERAL STATE AND LOCAL, OUR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES HAVE ENACTED MORE TAXPAYER TAXES, AND RAISED THE ENTRANCE FEES FOR PUBLIC ACCESS TO ALL PUBLIC LAND.

    THE DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR DOI, HAS THOUSANDS OF LAWS AND ADMINISTRATIVE RULES TO PROHIBIT, RESTRICT AND DENY  THE PUBLIC FULL USE AND ENJOYMENT OF “ALL OF AMERICA’S PUBLIC LAND”  BY ALL 330 MILLION AMERICAN CITIZENS AND TOURISTS .  

    HOW WILD IT THAT?

    MOSTLY, WILD, WILDERNESS, WILD AND SCENIC RIVERS (period)

    ——————————————————————–

    GO FIGURE?

    US GOVERNMENT DEFINING, KEEPING OUT THE LOWER ELEMENT?

    WORKING CLASS AMERICAN CITIZENS WITH LOWER AND MIDDLE INCOME? FAMILIES WITH KIDS?

    —————————————————————–

    PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER DEFINING, KEEPING OUT THE LOWER ELEMENT?

    TRESPASS,  MALICIOUS MISCHIEF, RECKLESS BURNING.

    AUGUST 10,  2015 CLALLAM COUNTY SHERIFF DEPT. CASE NUMBER 2015-17831

    ————————————————————————————

    JUST, Another Chapter in the Book of Revelations by Pearl Revere

     


  • WOW links to War on Wild

    WOW links to OUR  Citizens War on Wild

    Because, The  www.wildolympicsscam.com

    Highly recommends Pearl Rains Hewett

    BEHIND MY BACK W.O.W. WAR ON WILD

    For easier access, I am providing the WOW links to OUR War on Wild in chronological order

    ———————————–

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

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/01/27/part-1-wow-a-war-on-wild/

    Jan 27, 2014 – Now is the time for many of us to speak of a War On Wild and keep our …. Indeed the War is on and we are the victims. WOW! I commend you.

    ——————————

    Behind My Back | Part 2 (WOW) a War on Wild

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/01/28/part-2-wow-a-war-on-wild/

    Jan 28, 2014 – Part 2 (WOW) a War on Wild … Votes? Or, is all of this activity related to a larger “WILD” agenda? … www.washingtonvotes.org/2014-HB-2386‎.

    ———————————–

    Behind My Back | Part 3 (WOW) Enough is Enough

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/01/30/part3wow-enough-is-enough/

    Jan 30, 2014 – Part 3 (WOW) Enough is Enough … 3. THE U.S. FOREST SERVICE was created within the department … Part 2 (WOW) a War on Wild.

    ———————————————

    Behind My Back | Part 4 (WOW) United We Stand

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/02/01/part-4-wow-united-we-stand/

    Feb 1, 2014 – Part 4 (WOW) United We Stand. Posted on February 1, 2014 …. the permalink. « Part 3 (WOW) Enough is Enough · Part 5 (WOW) Overlapping » …

    ———————————————–

    Behind My Back | Part 5 (WOW) Overlapping

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/02/12/part5-wow-overlapping/

    Feb 12, 2014 – Overlapping Wilderness and Wild and Scenic River Designations … http://www.elawreview.org/elaw/383/overlapping_wilderness_and_wil.html

    ————————————————————

    Behind My Back | Part 6 (WOW) Undisclosed Taking

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/02/14/part6wowundisclosedtaking/

    Feb 14, 2014 – Part 6 (WOW) Undisclosed Taking. Posted on February 14, 2014 11:59 … http://www.wildolympics.org/version/maps. Wild Olympics Wilderness …

    ——————————————

    Behind My Back | Part 7 (WOW) National Forest Land

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/02/19/part7wownationalforestland/

    Feb 19, 2014 – Part 7 (WOW) National Forest Land … WILD National Forest Land does not work for American working ….. http://www.ti.org/2chistory.html.

    ————————————————————–

    Behind My Back | Part 8 (WOW) USFS Legislation

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/02/19/part-8-wow-usfs-legislation/

    Feb 19, 2014 – FOREIGN OPERATIONS APPROPRIATIONS ACT OF 1978 (Act of November 5, 1990) (P.L. 101-513, 104 Stat. 2070; 16 §§ U.S.C. 4501 note, …

    ————————————————————–

    Behind My Back | Part (9) WOW New Deal

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/02/21/part9wownewdeals/

    Feb 21, 2014 – THERE ARE “OLD” NEW DEALS AND THERE ARE “NEW” NEW DEALS. THE “FIRST NEW DEAL” (1933–34) and the “SECOND NEW DEAL …

    ——————————————————————

    Behind My Back | Part 10 (WOW) HR 146 an …

    www.behindmyback.org/…/part-10-wow-hr-146-an-unconscionable-act/

    Feb 24, 2014 – Part 10 (WOW) HR 146 an Unconscionable Act. Posted on ….. Subtitle G—Sabinoso Wilderness, New Mexico. Sec. … Part (9) WOW New Deal.

    ——————————————————————

    Behind My Back | Part 11 (WOW) Protest the ONP Celebration

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/08/26/2679/

    Aug 26, 2014 – Part 11 (WOW) Protest the ONP Celebration WOW? … NOW THE TIME FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 5, 2014 7:00 PM – 9:00 PM … www.wfpa.org/.

    —————————————————

    Behind My Back | PART (12) WOW Deprived of Our Use

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/08/29/part12wowdeprived-of-ouruse/

    Aug 29, 2014 – PART (12) WOW Deprived of Our Use What happens? when over 300 million American Citizens are DEPRIVED of the full use and enjoyment …

    —————————————————–

    Behind My Back | WOW Wild Wilderness Warfare?

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/11/15/wow-wild-wilderness-warfare/

    Nov 15, 2014 – https://cara.ecosystem-management.org/Public//CommentInput?Project= ….. *Part 6*. *No Verification of Navy’s Claim of No Significant Impacts*.

    —————————————————————

    Behind My Back | 2015 Back to the WAR on Wild

    www.behindmyback.org/2015/06/08/2015-back-to-the-war-on-wild/

    Jun 8, 2015 – Back to the WAR on Wild (WOW) postings on my website. THE WILD … www.behindmyback.org/2014/01/27/part-1-wow-a-war-on-wild/. Jan 27 …

    ————————————————————————–

    Formal Introductions on “WILD”

    Posted on July 11, 2015 10:18 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    ————————————–

    WOW links to War on Wild

    ——————————————————

    Coming soon on behindmback.org

    WILD ONP-LET NATURE TAKE IT’S COURSE


  • Citizen Review on Our Drought Forum

    Citizen Review on Our Drought Forum

    This is the full unedited comment.

    Sequim/Dungeness community listens to drought concerns

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

    Sequim, WA – The Water Drought Forum was held in the Guy Cole Center at Carrie Blake Park Thursday, May 21, 2015 to a crowd of approximately 250 people, there to ask questions about their concerns. Instead, according to several people who attended, they were treated to a “dog-and-pony show” for the first two hours of the evening.

    Scott Chitwood, Dungeness River Management (DRMT) Chairman, opened the meeting and announced, Here’s “what we may expect…may happen this summer.” Chitwood was former Natural Resource Director for Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe. He complimented Shawn Hines, Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe representative, for her work on water interests.

    To see photos of the slideshow presentations, click here.

    About half-way through, almost half the crowd had left in disgust and/or boredom, when one slideshow presentation after another was made by various activists and federal agency representatives – many of which repeated the same information, showed the same graphs and charts, and some included photos from eastern Washington. Several speakers reminded the audience that they could go to Google search for the information. A break was not offered, during the two and a half hour meeting.

    The general theme was that we are facing a drought in the Sequim-Dungeness Valley due to an off year of snow. Washington’s “Drought Trigger” was defined as “less than 75% of normal water supply, plus “hardship” = “Drought.” Despite the fact that rainfall has equaled or exceeded previous years, and the aquifer itself has water, the “experts” were telling the crowd that the snowmelt, based on models, was 75% of “normal” and “may” cause a “drought”. (Interestingly, the definition of “drought” in the Miriam-Webster dictionary reads: “a period of dryness especially when prolonged; specifically : one that causes extensive damage to crops or prevents their successful growth.”)

    Mike Gallagher, Department of Ecology (DOE), facilitated the meeting. He showed slides and explained, “what the plans are for water shortage.” He then asked for questions from the audience. Before any answers were given to the questions asked, however, the agency representatives, for the next approximate 1-1/2 hours, presented various slideshows, with explanations about snowfall – much of the information overlapping.

    Several of the unanswered questions included Pearl Rains Hewett, Port Angeles resident, who asked, “what about drought for the Elwha River in Port Angeles?” She declared that 25,000 people are affected from the Elwha River to Morse Creek. “That drought system should be part of this forum” she stated Several people asked about wells, water distribution, and storage. “With no water storage, what will we do?” asked one woman.

    Nobody was asked to give their name or address, while asking questions, so there apparently will not be a record of comments.

    Mary Bell, a longtime Sequim farmer, asked about water availability and irrigation, for animals.

    A woman asked, if they are addressing snow pack at 6500 feet.

    “We have to look ‘ahead of time’ – what will it look like?” said Drought Coordinator Jeff Marti representing the Washington State Department of Ecology (DOE). He told the attendees that from 500 – one million salmon are “expected” to arrive this year, and there are no storage reservoirs. “What will happen?” he said.

    Marti said “drought” was defined by Department of Ecology (DOE) as when a snowpack is less than 75% of normal of water supply plus hardship. He admitted that the precipitation (rainfall) was mostly normal. He said that “experts” from WSAC (Ecology’s Water Supply Availability Committee) including “climate experts” like NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) and others decide whether an area is above or below the 75%. EWEC (Ecology’s Executive Water Emergency Committee (Policy), the Dept. of Agriculture, Fish & Wildlife, Conservation Commission and others at the State determine the “policy” that a “hardship” exists. The recommendation goes to the governor, who then declares a drought.

    The Washington Water Trust (WWT) is buying up water rights on a “temporary” basis for “low value” crops like hay and alfalfa. They are expecting funding from the Legislature to buy up more fairly soon.

    Marti said that even from March, there will be “pretty extreme conditions.” The Olympic Peninsula, along with Walla Walla, Wenatchee and others are expecting a “hardship”, especially since there is no water storage available. The result of “hardship” caused a shutdown of irrigation in Yakima as of May.

    Marti discussed WRIA (Water Resource Inventory Area), “as insiders call it,” he said. He mentioned 3 to 5 percent, in the Olympics, as a ‘dreadful state’.
    Olympic Peninsula fisheries and impacts on small communities, without any storage, is a concern. He stated that 48-62 percent of watersheds in the state are affected. That is 85 percent of the state, determined Marti.

    He said there is an interactive map online and said that the WRIA (map) shows the Dungeness basin. He stated that snow melt was at 4000 feet.

    Others who promoted the same basic message included Scott Pattee, Water Supply “specialist” from the USDA [U.S. Dept. of Agriculture] and Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). “This is an anomalous year,” he said. It is “potentially” one of the worst forecast years ever, he added. He said “deep wells” will not be affected. He said he gets to go into the mountains to see the snowpack, riding on snowmobiles and in helicopters – a “tough” job, he laughed.

    WA Dept. of Fish and Wildlife Teresa Scott is the “drought coordinator”, who said she works closely with Ecology. She explained all the aspects about how a low river flow might hurt the fish. They are looking at water access for fish and “enforcement”, and “all the rest of it.” The fish hatcheries will have to go “find and net” the fish when they don’t come back to the fisheries, she said. They will be using aerators and oxygen pumps to help the fish. “We go into streams and move rocks, so the fish can get through,” she said. They built flumes in eastern Washington to help with fish passage. “We’ll see wetland dry up in summer,” she said.

    Chitwood asked “What are we going to do to get fish to their spawning grounds? We’re going to monitor them.” He talked about sand bags in key positions to deepen the channels.

    Bryan Suslick, Dept of Natural Resources, reiterated that the rainfall has been near normal, but not the snowpack. “It ‘looks like’ it ‘might be’ an early start to the fall rain season,” he said. All predictions are done through computer modeling. He advocated for the fire-wise program, which Andy Haner of NOAA National Weather Service from Seattle reviewed.

    After approximately 1-1/2 hours of slideshows and presentations (from 6:15 -8 p.m.), a panel set up to make statements and answer questions from the remaining approximate 90 people in the audience.

    Local farmer Ben Smith, Maple View Farms and president of the Dungeness Water Users Association, said when the river gets to 120cfs, an “action plan” will go into effect, and the community will be asked to reduce or eliminate watering their yards. “As irrigators, we are being as efficient as we can,” he said. Surges have been done in the past, but not sure of the effectiveness. “We are committed to exploring all options,” he said.

    Amanda Cronin, Project Manager with WWT [Washington Water Trust] is working with irrigators. The WWT is holding a “reverse auction” with taxpayers’ (Ecology grant) money, with the seven irrigation districts and companies in a volunteer program to pay irrigators not to irrigate. Preliminarily, there have been 28 bids from 15 landowners to be paid for not irrigating; so far, 21 of the bids have been accepted from 13 of the landowners, she said. That’s 800 acres that won’t be irrigated, according to Cronin.
    She explained regulations for senior rights/water rights. Temporary transfer of water rights, public education, funding assistance for public entities, and grant programs ‘would be in place’.

    There are Senior and Junior users. “Senior users have priority. In a drought, we have a duty to protect Senior users,” affirmed Cronin. She continued, “We can give an order to shut off which has impacts to Junior users.” She spoke of many fish problems relating to water availability for fish. “We have to step up enforcement, when we have people trying to catch them,” she announced. Many people left the building during and after her presentation.

    Chitwood said they are going to monitor what the challenge looks like. He talked about minimum flow in the river. “We are going to do whatever we can do to get from point A to point B,” he said. He prefers sand bags, rather than hauling fish to safely. He talked about sand bags in key positions to deepen the channels. “We can use volunteers, give me a call,” he said.

    A panel representing several entities, joined Ben Smith who represents the irrigators. Smith is president of the Dungeness Water Users Association and is also a dairy farmer, at Maple View Farms, in Sequim.

    Amanda Cronin WWT and David Garlington a City of Sequim representative joined three more panel members, at the table. It was stated that the City of Sequim, Irrigators, Tribes, DRMT and PUD (Public Utility District) were working together to address water supply.
    Cronin, from Seattle said she had worked on various water issues since 2008. She said there are volunteer irrigators who would not irrigate from August 15 to September 15th, with commercial crops five acres or more. There are 28 bids from 15 owners. She said 13 owners were accepted. It would include approximately 800 acres. “Whether that water will be available, we will see what happens,” she said.

    Garlington spoke about using less water such as lawn watering, and capturing storm water runoff in storage or infiltration. He also discussed putting a deeper well near the river. He said when later questioned that 2.5 percent of the water is used by the City of Sequim.

    An audience member asked Smith how it would be determined to shut off the irrigation ditches. Smith answered, “40 CFS. We agreed to take no more than 60 CFS left in the river.”

    When asked about flowers and lawns, Smith answered that very little is used for lawns. Eighty percent of the state is used for irrigation, according to what the Irrigation Ditch Company supplied. “We are committed to exploring all options….we will get things done. I am optimistic,” said Smith.

    A question was directed to Cronin about money from DOE. One of the panel members responded that “It is from taxpayers to the legislature.” He said he expected they would release it soon.

    Cronin said that they are looking for storage near River Road. The amount is $32,000,000 for only that reservoir, according to Cronin.

    A question was posed by former Clallam County resident, Ron Suslick. He said it was $56,000,000 seven years ago. He asked, “What did you do with it?” A facilitator answered, “Probably used it.”

    Cronin answered a question that Washington Water Trust is “pretty much a group.”
    Questioned about well safety, it was noted by one facilitator that wells below 20 feet could be a problem and that wells near a river were less likely to go dry.
    [Note: Panel members were gathered at the front and randomly answered questions and names were not mentioned, at that time.]

    When questions were asked about the status of ground water, the attendees were told, “we are at the high end of the normal now.” The City, Port Williams, and River Road are normal, in that they are from a deeper aquifer.

    When the bulldozers were mentioned for removing gravel to better accommodate fish, one community member reminded them there would be bulldozers for moving the dike. The answer from the front entourage was, “the dike is moved back to create more wetlands.”

    Diane Hood mentioned wells going dry. Holes in pipes were also questioned.
    Smith said “that option was discussed.”

    At the close of the meeting, a question was asked how much the water trust has spent on water storage. Cronin said the water trust sold certificates. The amount collected so far is approximately $100,000., she said, spent mitigating the Dungeness water rights acquisition projects. “All money goes back, “she announced. She said it was not going to storage. “Generally the Dungeness Restoration Project.” said Cronin.

    This is the full unedited report by Lois.

    ——————————————————————-

    The following is  additional documented information

    —————————————————————————————-

    Community Drought Forum

    May 21, 2015

    6:00-8:30PM

    Guy Cole Convention Center

    202 North Blake Avenue, Sequim, WA 98382

     

    OBJECTIVES:

    • To provide information about the current drought and how it is impacting water supplies (for humans and wildlife).
    • To describe drought response to date by various entities.
    • To answer questions and hear concerns people have about the drought.
    • To let people know what they can do to try to lessen the impacts of drought.

     

    TIME

    TOPIC

    SPEAKER

    6:00 – 6:25 1.   Welcome and Introductions

    • Drought Overview
    • Status and Response
    Michael Gallagher and Jeff MartiWA Department of Ecology
    6:25 – 6:45 2.   Water 101 and Water Supply Outlook(Snowpack, Precipitation, Streamflow) Scott PatteeNatural Resources Conservation Service
    6:45 – 7:05 3.    Fish and Wildlife Impacts/Needs During Drought Teresa ScottWA Department of Fish and WildlifeScott ChitwoodJamestown S’Klallam Tribe
    7:05 – 7:45 4.   Wildfire Preparation/Weather Forecasts Julie Knobel and Bryan Suslick WA Department of Natural ResourcesAndrew Haner National Weather Service
    7:45 – 8:25 5.   PANEL DISCUSSION           Local Actions Related to Water Supplies/Drought

    • Water Users Association
    • Washington Water Trust
    • City of Sequim
    • Clallam PUD
    • Washington Department of Health
    MODERATOR:  Mike Gallagher, WADOE Ben SmithAmanda CroninDavid Garlington

    Tom Martin

    Ginnie Stern

    8:25 – 8:30 6.   Closing Remarks Michael Gallagher and Jeff MartiWA Department of Ecology

     

     

     


  • Earth Day Message to Congress

    Earth Day Message to Congress

    I am asking for an email response from our Federal and State Elected Representative with the RESULTS/scientific finding  of the US Climate Change Study Explores Weather Modification.

    US Climate Change Study Explores Weather Modification

    The U.S. study was expected to be finished in the fall of 2014.

    Demand accountability.. WA State RCW 42.30.010

    The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

    Demand accountability… you have an email list..use it.

     IT IS GLOBAL AND IT IS LOCAL

    Besides the United States, forty-two other nations have weather modification programs, according to a report released in July by the EXPERT Team on Weather Modification Research of the World Meteorological Organization.

    WINTER PROGRAMS GENERALLY HAVE SNOW PACK CRITERIA BY WHICH SEEDING MAY BE SUSPENDED?

    What is known about regional effects?

    Washington Drought 2015 | Washington State Department …

    www.ecy.wa.gov/drought/ 3 days ago – Washington State  Governor Inslee declares more areas in drought– Ecology in drought … Jay Inslee declared a drought in 13 river basins in Washington state.

    Demand accountability… you have an email list..use it.

    ——————————————————

    Email sent to Rep. Derek Kilmer including my other elected Representatives

    Earth Day is April 22, 2015.

    Take some time to read more about climate change.

    Please share this with my other elected Representatives. This includes “US Climate Change Study Explores Weather Modification” I am sending it as a public comment on Clallam County SMP Update. The US Climate Change Study was expected to be finished in the fall of 2014?

    I am asking for an email response with the results of the US Climate Change Study Explores Weather Modification. I would like to take, some more of my time, reading some more about climate change. Please share this comment and question with my other elected Representatives.

    ————————————————————————————–

    This includes

    US Climate Change Study Explores Weather Modification 

    I am sending it as a public comment on Clallam County SMP Update.

    Weather Balance By God

    Posted on April 20, 2015 11:03 am by Pearl Rains Hewett Comment

    US Climate Change Study Explores Weather Modification

    Aug 15, 2013 – The Chinese government used its weather modification branch to work … WINTER PROGRAMS GENERALLY HAVE SNOWPACK CRITERIA BY WHICH SEEDING MAY BE SUSPENDED, based on … “Because global warming may impact the security of other countries … The U.S. study is expected to be finished in the fall of 2014.

    Mark Leberfinger, AccuWeather.com Staff Writer

    A U.S. STUDY is under way to evaluate several possible ways TO LIMIT CLIMATE CHANGE including solar radiation management and carbon dioxide removal.and solar radiation management,

    TO DETERMINE WHAT WE KNOW AND DON’T KNOW ABOUT THEIR PHYSICAL CAPABILITIES, TECHNICAL FEASIBILITIES, KNOWN RISKS, AND INTENDED OR UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES,” Rugani said.


  • SB 5916 A New “FEE” for All

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

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

    THIS IS A ISSUE OF STATEWIDE CONCERN.

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

    —————————————————————————-

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

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

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

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

    THE FEES AND CHARGES IMPOSED IN THIS CHAPTER

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

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

    —————————————————————–

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

     ———————————————————-

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

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

     Please take the time to read the entire SB 5916.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    ————————————————————————————–

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

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

    (a)LODGING;

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    ————————————————————————————–

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

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

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

    —————————————————————————————-

    SENATE BILL 5916 FUNDING FOR A STATEWIDE TOURISM MARKETING PROGRAM?

     

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

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

    Behind My Back | Clallam County $$$ Prospectus

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

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

    ———————————————————————————————-

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

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

    —————————————————————————————

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

    ————————————————————————–

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

    NEW SECTION.

    Sec. 1. FINDINGS

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

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

    SECOND SUBSTITUTE SENATE BILL 5916

    State of Washington

    64th Legislature

    2015 Regular Session

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

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

    READ FIRST TIME 04/02/15.

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

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

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

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

    The bottom line

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

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

    ——————————————————————-

    Behind My Back | Fee Fie Foe Fum

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

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

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

    FEE FEE FIE FIE FOE FOE FUM…..

     


  • Clallam County SMP Update

    Clallam County SMP Update

    CLALLAM COUNTY VESTED CITIZENS  HAVE A  VOICE

    A GOOD READ 624 SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

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

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

    2015 Comments

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    032115 – PHewett

    031815 – PHewett

    031815 – KSpees

    2015 Comments

    031515 – KSpees

    031515 – PHewett

    031415 – KSpees

    031315 – KSpees

    030115 – PHewett

    030115 – PHewett

    030115 – PHewett

    022815 – PHewett

    SMP Comments under review by the Planning Commission:

    2015 Comments

    022715 – ForksCity

    022715 – BrandtPtOwners

    022715 – HSmyth

    022715 – SierraClub

    022715 – CGeer

    022715 – LPhelps

    022715 – RFletcher

    022715 – KNorman

    022715 – SBruch

    022715 – RBloomer

    022715 – RBloomer

    022715 – DStahler

    022715 – MDoherty

    022715 – SBogg

    022715 – RKnapp – JKT

    022715 – BLynette

    022715 – BLynette

    022715 – RPhreaner

    022615 – JLarson

    022515 – SierraClub

    022515 – TEngel

    022515 – AMatthay

    022515 – LPhelps

    022515 – KSpees

    022415 – DeptOfInterior

    022415 – TSimpson

    022415 – TFreeman

    022415 – BLake

    022415 – JCress

    022415 – Taylors

    022415 – EGreenleaf

    022315 – GBergner

    022015 – BBrown

    022015 – GBrown

    022015 – TRief

    022015 – RAmaral

    022015 – WCook

    022015 – DKalinski

    022015 – DFrascati

    022015 – JHelpenstell

    022015 – JFletcher

    022015 – CTilden

    022615 – PABA

    022015 – GJensen

    022015 – SWikstrom

    022315 – SBonner

    022215 – JElleot

    022115 – TSage

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    022015 – KSpees

    021915 – DWahlgren

    2015 Comments

    021915 – NKoseff

    021915 – KDuff

    021915 – BVreeland

    021915 – CStrickland

    021915 – EStrickland

    021915 – GSmith

    021915 – DOE

    021915 – SGilleland

    021915 – LBowen

    021915 – HMeier

    021915 -DChong

    021915 – SAnderson

    021915 – OEC

    021915 – RHuntman

    021915 – BLynette

    021915 – CWeller

    021815 – WFlint

    021815 – SNoblin

    021815 – LNoblin

    021815 – PHewett

    021815 – KAhlburg

    021815 – EBowen

    021815 – PFreeborn

    021815 – TTaylor

    021815 – KGraves

    0218105 – GCase

    021815 – KCristion

    021815- SReed

    021815 – SLaBelle

    021815 – MGonzalez

    021815 – JAdams

    021815 – SKokrda

    021815 – KFarrell

    0211815 – MMazzie

    021815 -HKaufman

    021815 – MCrimm

    021815 – CCarlson

    021815 – SFarrall

    021815 – JWinders

    021815 – TErsland

    021815 – FWilhelm

    021815 – SPriest

    021815 – RHolbrook

    021815 – LLaw

    021815 – LHendrickson

    021815 – JMaddux

    021815 – DHagen

    021815 – MHinsdale

    021815- DWatson

    021815 – DWarriner

    021815 – DRigselie

    021815 – JBaymore

    2015 Comments

    021815 – Plauché & Carr LLP

    021815 – PHewitt

    021815 – JCollier

    021815 – JCollier

    021815 – CMiklos

    021815 – PMilliren

    021815 – RPhreaner

    021815 – BBurke

    021815 – GCrow

    021815 – CJohnson – NOTC

    021815 – CParsons – State Parks

    021815 – JMarx

    021715 – JDavidson

    021715 – RAmaral

    021715 – CGuske

    021715 – TTrohimovich – Futurewise

    021815 – DSchanfald

    021715 – Port of PA

    021715 – PMillren

    021715 – EWilladsen

    021615 – EChadd-OCA

    021315 – SLange

    021315 – CKalina

    021215 – RCrittenden

    021115 – RKaplan

    021115 – SScott

    021115 – PHewett

    020915 – RMantooth

    020615 – PRedmond

    020615 – CVonBorstel

    020515 – DHoldren

    020515 – JMichel

    020215 -DHoldren

    020515 – DHoldren

    020415 – SCahill

    020215 – CEvanoff

    013115 – MBlack

    013015 – SHall

    013015 – BConnely

    012715 – BGrad

    012715 – DGladstone

    012715 – BBoekelheide

    012715 – KWiersema

    012015 – JBettcher

    011615 – PHewitt

    011615 – ACook

    011415 – PLavelle

    011215 – PHewitt

    010915 – PHewitt

    010915 – RKnapp

    010715 – WSC

    2014 SMP Comments under review by the Planning Commission:

    2014 Comments

    122914 – MQuinn

    121614 – OCA

    111814 – PHewett

    111814 – PHewett

    111714 – PHewett

    091514 – PHewett

    081814 – PHewett

    SMP Comments on earlier drafts of the plan can found here

    ———————————————————————–

    SMP Legal Action Continues

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

    Gene Farr lives in Jefferson County.

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

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

    Is it the editing of the local paper or me?

    Karl Spees – Concerned American

    Thx Gene excellent letter.

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

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

     

    SMP Legal Action Continues

     

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

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

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

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

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

    Gene Farr

     


  • Space Needle “Workers” insulted

    LOCAL WORKERS advised  to Make Poverty Fun?

    THE NEWSPAPER HEADLINES

    Space Needle “WORKERS” insulted by advice to ‘Live on Less’

    INSULTED definition speak to or treat with disrespect or scornful abuse.

    ——————————————————–

    THE LOCAL “WORKERS” ISSUE,  IT IS FEDERAL, BUT  IT IS LOCAL MEDIA

    Part of the FREE presentation advise “WORKERS” to budget and “Make it Fun!”

    GO TO THE  FREE OR DISCOUNT events “Be creative.”

    WORKERS? EMPLOYEES  ‘LIVE ON LESS’? ADVISED TO MAKE POVERTY FUN?

    This LOCAL WORKERS? ‘LIVE ON LESS’ POVERTY ISSUE is not about minimum wage.

    ——————————————————————————————–

    It is not just Space Needle WORKERS that are insulted by advice to ‘LIVE ON LESS’?

    SENIOR CITIZENS ARE INSULTED BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY  “LIVING ON LESS”

    (70 plus, year old senior citizens are WORKERS at  Wal- Mart greeters just to make ends meet)

    ALL WORKERS ARE INSULTED BECAUSE THEY ARE ALREADY” LIVING ON LESS”

    MANY “WORKERS” are already WORKING two jobs just to make ends meet.

    IT IS ABOUT OUR AMERICAN PRESIDENT, FEDERAL, STATE AND LOCAL  GOVERNMENT LEGISLATORS, LEGISLATING IN LA-LA LAND THAT HAVE BEEN CONTINUOUSLY TAXING AMERICAN WORKING CITIZENS  INTO POVERTY.

    DEFINITION OF LA-LA LAND  A EUPHORIC DREAMLIKE MENTAL STATE DETACHED FROM THE HARSHER REALITIES OF LIFE.

    OBAMA’S EUPHORIC DREAM ACT?

    OBAMA’S ILLEGAL ALIEN IMMIGRATION SPENDING?

    Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act  of 2011 (DREAM ACT)

    Behind My Back | The $3.7 Billion Dollar Dumping Fee?

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/07/15/the-37-billiondollardumpingfee/

    Jul 15, 2014 – And, I am NOT TALKING ABOUT CONGRESS LEGISLATING AND SPENDING $3.7 BILLION IN AMERICAN TAXPAYER DOLLARS TO TAKE …

    TAKING AND SPENDING $3.7 BILLION IN AMERICAN HARD WORKING, TAXPAYER DOLLARS ?

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

    EMPLOYED AMERICAN WORKERS ‘LIVE ON LESS’? IN LA-LA LAND CAN MAKE POVERTY FUN?

    FIND SOMETHING FREE TO DO? POVERTY CAN BE FUN.

    IT’S FUN TO GO TO THE FOOD BANK AND IT’S FREE.

    FOR FAST FOOD, IF YOUR REALLY HUNGRY, IT’S FUN TO GO  A SOUP KITCHEN, IT’S FREE TOO

    Behind My Back | Obama’s Affordable “FOOD ACT”

    www.behindmyback.org/2014/01/22/obamasaffordablefoodact/

    Jan 22, 2014 – OBAMA celebrates MLK holiday, VISITS SOUP KITCHEN Jan 20, 2014 WASHINGTON (AP)

    Did the president or his family eat any of the affordable

    FREE burritos stuffed with “unidentified” vegetables and cheese?

    —————————————————–

    AND MORE,  ILLEGAL ALIENS TAKING U S JOBS

    Behind My Back | 2014 American Immigration Crisis

    www.behindmyback.org/category/2014-american-immigration-crisis/

    Aug 12, 2014 – Who knew there is a (FAIR) FEDERATION FOR AMERICAN IMMIGRATION … http://www.fairus.org/issue/illegal-aliens-taking-u-s-jobs.

    THIS ‘LIVE ON LESS’ “WORKERS” POVERTY ISSUE IS NOT ABOUT MINIMUM WAGE.

    IT IS NOT ABOUT AMERICAN “WORKERS” BEING CREATIVE  AND WHERE TO GO TO GET THE FREE FUN STUFF

    ——————————————————————————————–

    This LOCAL WORKERS? ‘LIVE ON LESS’ POVERTY ISSUE is not about minimum wage.

    WORKERS? To me, as an American citizen”WORKERS” is offensive word.

    AND, I AM NOT THE ONLY ONE.

    Worker – Definition and More from the Free Merriam …

    www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/worker

    Merriam‑Webster

    I FIND IT OFFENSIVE, so I looked up the definition and sure enough, a worker is defined as;

    (1) one who works at manual or industrial labor;

    ( 2) any sexually underdeveloped members of a colony (ants, bees, etc.) that perform most of the labor.

    PLUS a person or animal that works, in particular.

    WHY NOT JUST CALL THEM “GRUNTS”?  a low-ranking OR UNSKILLED soldier OR OTHER WORKER.

    To me  the word “WORKER” DENOTES COMMUNISM

    The word “WORKER” denotes communism

    So I Googled  “WORKERS” denotes communism.

    The Principles of Communism – Marxists Internet Archive

    https://www.marxists.org/…/11/prin-com.htm

    Marxists Internet Archive

    IT IS A TERRIFYING READ… (but that’s another story)

    WORKERS” is an Offensive Word


  • SMP Public Comment #161

    SMP Public Comment #161

    To Clallam County Planning Commission

    And, Commissioners’ McEntire,  Chapman and Peach

    Concerning fatal errors in due process, not posting SMP public comments

    Omitting SMP public comments and a failure to provide  complete and accurate

    summaries of  SMP Public Meetings during the entire SMP process of

    the Nov. 2014 proposed SMP Update Draft

     

    Failure to notify interested parties (WRIA 20 shoreline property owners  and members of the advisory committee on SMP meetings)

    Failure of CLALLAM COUNTY government to provide  critical early and continuous public participation in to the SMP Update

    The purpose and intent of nearly a year of inactivity on SMP public meetings and  participation on the SMP Update? A cooling off period, if  we ignore them for a year maybe they will just go away?

    ———————————————————————–

    FAILURE  TO POST AND RESPOND TO SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Jo Anne Estes

    To: Merrill, Hannah ; Gray, Steve

    Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 12:07 PM

    Subject: WHAT IS NO NET LOSS WORKGROUP?

    —————————————————————————-

    SMP PUBLIC COMMENT #440 posted 10/4/13

    Failure to provide public outreach  and participation to WRIA 20  throughout the process.

    This is an SMP Public comment
    WA STATE RCW 42.56.030
    Pearl Rains Hewett

    SMP UPDATE EXCLUSION AND OMISSION

    WRIA 20 private property owners are PART OF CLALLAM COUNTY SMP UPDATE

    There were no private property owners representing WRIA 20 seated at the table for the Clallam County SMP Update Committee.
    Shall we question why the WRIA 20 private property owners were and are IN MANY CASES, being treated like SECOND CLASS CITIZENS and were not informed, not invited, not selected, not appointed, not allowed to actively participate in SMP  Public Meetings?
    Failure to make a special effort to reach the under-represented WRIA 20  throughout the process communities/stakeholders.

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

    AND,  Failure to  ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION

    Sent: Tuesday,  8:48 AM

    THEY want us to be upset and discouraged, Commissioner Mike Chapman suggested I should/could  QUIT.

    Ironically, Commissioner Mike Chapman suggested just weeks earlier, somewhat sarcastically, that if I did not like the way things were going I should participate by volunteering to be on the SMP Update Citizens Advisory Committee.

    Hmmm? May 10, 2011 Commissioner Mike Chapman suggests that  if I do not like the way things are  going

    I should/could  QUIT.

    Don’t let life discourage you; everyone who got where she is had to begin where she was.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

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

    FAILURE?

    Chapter 42.30 RCW

    OPEN PUBLIC MEETINGS ACT

    This is the Legislative declaration on RCW 42.30.010

    The legislature finds and declares that all public commissions, boards, councils, committees, subcommittees, departments, divisions, offices, and all other public agencies of this state and subdivisions thereof exist to aid in the conduct of the people’s business. It is the intent of this chapter that their actions be taken openly and that their deliberations be conducted openly.

    The people of this state do not yield their sovereignty to the agencies which serve them. The people, in delegating authority, do not give their public servants the right to decide what is good for the people to know and what is not good for them to know. The people insist on remaining informed so that they may retain control over the instruments they have created.

    [1971 ex.s. c 250 § 1.]

    Notes:

         Reviser’s note: Throughout this chapter, the phrases “this act” and “this 1971 amendatory act” have been changed to “this chapter.” “This act” [1971 ex.s. c 250] consists of this chapter, the amendment to RCW 34.04.025, and the repeal of RCW 42.32.010 and 42.32.020.

     

    FAILURE ? As related to the Washington State Shoreline Management Act, RCW 90.58

    RCW 90.58.130

    Involvement of all persons and entities having interest means.

    To insure that all persons and entities having an interest in the guidelines and master programs developed under this chapter are provided with a full opportunity for involvement in both their development and implementation, the department and local governments shall:

    (1) Make reasonable efforts to inform the people of the state about the shoreline management program of this chapter and in the performance of the responsibilities provided in this chapter, shall not only invite but actively encourage participation by all persons and private groups and entities showing an interest in shoreline management programs of this chapter; and

    (2) Invite and encourage participation by all agencies of federal, state, and local government, including municipal and public corporations, having interests or responsibilities relating to the shorelines of the state. State and local agencies are directed to participate fully to insure that their interests are fully considered by the department and local governments.

    [1971 ex.s. c 286 § 13.]

    ——————————————————————

    Shoreline Master Program Update

    FAILURE?  THE CLALLAM COUNTY SMP PUBLIC PARTICIPATION STRATEGY

    March 2010 Revised March 2011

    4.1 Phase I ‐ Public Participation Program

    Clallam County will incorporate public participation in all phases of the SMP process ,document public participation efforts (e.g., public meetings, community events)

    AND KEEP A RECORD OF PUBLIC COMMENTS RECEIVED.

    —————————————————————————-

    FAILURE?

    UNPOSTED SMP COMMENTS

    Citizens Advisory Committee on the update of the SMP

     —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: sgray@co.clallam.wa.us

    Cc: earnest spees

    Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 2:07 PM

    Subject: Clallam County Shoreline Management Plan 1976 and Citizens Advisory Committee 2011

    Steve

    Re: Clallam County Shoreline Management Plan 1976

    I read the 1976 SMP

    My biggest concern would be Page 8 Section 8.

    Lake Sutherland Private property owners have every reason to be fearful.

    Is it history repeating itself? Like the National Park take over of all private property on Lake Crescent?

    I was just a girl when it happened, but I have living memory of the grief it caused.

     

    Citizens Advisory Committee 2011

    While the WA State law about participation does NOT specify private property owners.

    Our Family Trusts own 900 acres of land in Clallam County, we have paid tax on our private property for over 60 years.

    We have property in water sheds, including the Sol Duc River, Elwha River and Bagley Creek, legal water rights, hundreds of acres of designated Forest land, logging concerns, a gravel pit, property for development and a rock quarry.

    With 60 percent of Clallam County under Private ownership;

    I ask you?

    Has anyone (as as private property owner) EVER had a right to, or been entitled to, or had a position on the CCDCD Citizens Advisory Committee on the update of the SMP?

    Pearl Rains Hewett PR-Trustee

    George C. Rains Sr. Trust

    ————————————————————————–

    THIS IS POSTED #50 SMP PUBLIC COMMENT

    FAILURE? Omitting public comments and a failure to provide a complete and accurate

    summary of a Public Meeting

     —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: SMP@co.clallam.wa.us

    Cc: Gray, Steve

    Sent: Tuesday, March 15, 2011 9:53 AM

    Subject: ESA Adolfson’s focus study groups

    I read the focus study groups report prepared by ESA Adolfson.

    It was not representative of the meeting I attended on Jan. 26, 2011.

    There was no mention of Lake Sutherland and the outpour of concern by the private property owners. State boats taking pictures of their docks and homes etc. The fear of what the update of the SMP would mean to their private property by making all of them non-conforming.

    I feel that the report was biased, it did not address the issues proportionately, that in their reporting they did misrepresent and not report private property owner’s spoken grievances.

    In ESA Adolfoson’s compliance attempt, they placed far more emphasis on the state take over of private property beach’s and the impute from agencies and business’s  then the concerns of the 60% of private property owners in Clallam County.

    I find it very disappointing  that our Clallam County Commissioners have allowed a totally self serving group of conservationists to publish biased findings and facts as the result of these public focus groups.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    ————————————————————————————–

     UNPOSTED SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

     —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Gray, Steve

    Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 8:32 AM

    Subject: Fw: STATE DIRECTIVE BY WAC 173-26-191

    Steve,

    Jim Kramer asked for  a copy of this WAC.

    I would also like to add this as my comment on the Advisory meeting on 4/11/11.

    Has a direct link for advisory comments been established?

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Advisory Committee Member

    ———————————————————————————–

    FAILURE TO POST  SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Lear, Cathy

    Sent: Saturday, April 16, 2011 12:00 PM

    Subject: RCW’S FOR PROTECTION OF PRIVATE PROPERTY

    Cathy and Margaret,

    After listening to the questions asked by concerned citizens at both public and the advisory SMP update meetings,

    I would like to submit, as my comments, the following RCW’S to educate, inform and clarify private property owners of their rights and protection under WA State law.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Advisory Committee Member

    PROTECTION FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY

    Protection of single family residences

    RCW 90.58.100

    (6) Each master program shall contain standards governing the protection of single family residences and appurtenant structures against damage or loss due to shoreline erosion. The standards shall govern the issuance of substantial development permits for shoreline protection, including structural methods such as construction of bulkheads, and nonstructural methods of protection. The standards shall provide for methods which achieve effective and timely protection against loss or damage to single family residences and appurtenant structures due to shoreline erosion. The standards shall provide a preference for permit issuance for measures to protect single family residences occupied prior to January 1, 1992, where the proposed measure is designed to minimize harm to the shoreline natural environment.

    PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION

     Unintentionally created “Wetlands”

    RCW 90.58.030

    Definitions and concepts.

    (h) “Wetlands” means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.

    PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION

    LAKE SUTHERLAND

     

    RCW 90.24.010Petition to regulate flow — Order — Exceptions.

    Ten or more owners of real property abutting on a lake may petition the superior court of the county in which the lake is situated, for an order to provide for the regulation of the outflow of the lake in order to maintain a certain water level therein. If there are fewer than ten owners, a majority of the owners abutting on a lake may petition the superior court for such an order. The court, after notice to the department of fish and wildlife and a hearing, is authorized to make an order fixing the water level thereof and directing the department of ecology to regulate the outflow therefrom in accordance with the purposes described in the petition. This section shall not apply to any lake or reservoir used for the storage of water for irrigation or other beneficial purposes, or to lakes navigable from the sea.

    [1999 c 162 § 1; 1985 c 398 § 28; 1959 c 258 § 1; 1939 c 107 § 2; RRS § 7388-1.]

    Notes:

         Effective date — 1985 c 398: “Sections 28 through 30 of this act shall take effect January 1, 1986.” [1985 c 398 § 31.]Lake and beach management districts: Chapter 36.61 RCW.

     

     

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: earnest spees ; Jo Anne Estes

    Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2011 9:21 AM

    Subject: STATE DIRECTIVE BY WAC 173-26-191

    All,

    I find this unacceptable.

    Directing and identifying how our Clallam County Officials can withhold permits to private property owner’s because the State can not legally or constitutionally regulate our private property at a state level.

    We must question every addition into our revised Clallam County SMP that goes beyond State SMP requirement.

    FYI

    Pearl

    WAC 173-26-191

    Agency filings affecting this section

    Master program contents.

    The results of shoreline planning are summarized in shoreline master program policies that establish broad shoreline management directives. The policies are the basis for regulations that govern use and development along the shoreline. Some master program policies may not be fully attainable by regulatory means due to the constitutional and other legal limitations on the regulation of private property. The policies may be pursued by other means as provided in RCW 90.58.240. Some development requires a shoreline permit prior to construction. A local government evaluates a permit application with respect to the shoreline master program policies and regulations and approves a permit only after determining that the development conforms to them. Except where specifically provided in statute, the regulations apply to all uses and development within shoreline jurisdiction, whether or not a shoreline permit is required, and are implemented through an administrative process established by local government pursuant to RCW 90.58.050 and 90.58.140 and enforcement pursuant to RCW 90.58.210 through 90.58.230.

     ——————————————————————-

     FAILURE TO POST SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

    —– Original Message —–

    From: earnest spees

    To: Sheila Roark Miller – DCD Director 2010 ; Steve Gray

    Cc: Karl Spees ; pearl hewett ; Kaj Ahlburg

    Sent: Sunday, April 24, 2011 11:28 AM

    Subject: Shoreline Advisory Committee Minutes.

     

    Please forward to:

    Margaret Clancy & Jim Kramer

    1.  We would like a copy of the minutes of the first Clallam County Shoreline Advisory Committee.  We need to know if our comments were recorded to our satisfaction or whether we need to resubmit them.

    2.  We were told that we would be given a website with your slides and material used in your presentation. Also a site to submit additional comments.

    It will be good to see the half million +dollars the County has paid ESA Adolfson for the public input and the representation of the Citizens of Clallam County to be well spent.

    Karl Spees – Representative of the CAPR

    Advisory Committee Member

    ———————————————————————-

    FAILURE TO POST SMP PUBLIC COMMENTS

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Jo Anne Estes ; earnest spees

    Cc: Gray, Steve

    Sent: Monday, April 25, 2011 7:39 AM

    Subject: Fw: Shoreline Advisory Committee Minutes.

    JoAnne,

    See below,

    I agree with Karl

    I have emailed comments to Cathy Lear and Margaret Clancy.

    I have questions. The consultants pie charts indicate 65% of Clallam County shorelines are private property?

    When less than 17.1% (or less) of the entire County is private property?

    We have no link to an Advisory Committee comment site.

    We have no link to a public comment site.

    I read the 25 page report of Jefferson County’s public comments on their SMP update, after the fact.

    I want to know what comments are being made about Clallam County’s SMP update and I want to know before the fact.

    Pearl

    Advisory Committee Member

    ————————————————————————————————

    As Members of the Clallam County Shoreline Advisory Committee.

    WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY RESPONSE Sheila Roark Miller – DCD Director 2010 ; Steve Gray

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: earnest spees ; pat tenhulzen ; Jo Anne Estes

    Cc: marv chastain

    Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 9:35 AM

    Subject: All SMP public comments PRIVATE?

    All

    I am working on comments and recommendation to the SMP update.

     Since, all of the SMP public comments are being held private?

     I guess we will have to find a way to make our privatized, public comments PUBLIC?

     Were all of Jefferson County public comments held private until after the fact?

     How can we get a public web site so public comments are made PUBLIC?

     Perhaps we could use WA State Full Disclosure law?

    Pearl

    Advisory Committee Member

    ———————————————————————-

    I guess we will have to find a way to make our privatized, public comments PUBLIC?

    SO…  I ended up sending this  SMP comments to Jim Jones??

    I had his email address

    UNPOSTED SMP COMMENT

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: jim jones

    Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:23 PM

    Subject: TAKING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC SHORELINE ACCESS

    1. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CLALLAM COUNTY SMP UPDATE

    Jim,

    Because you are in a position to influence the outcome of the SMP update and I am both on the Advisory Committee and a private property owner I feel compelled to inform you on issues of concern, not what is spoken at meetings, like last night, but as written comment.

    As Commissioner Doherty  mentioned last night, times are changing.

    I have spent the last three months on line researching, complying and analyzing, statistics, laws, Port Townsend’s SMP update, the 7th revised addition of the WRIA, trespass by WFDW, Pacific Legal foundation, Jefferson County 25 page public comments on their SMP update, noxious weed control and attending public meeting, just to mention a few.

    I felt that both Commissioner Doherty and Shelia we unprepared  for public comment last night.

    The trespass discussed by WDFW was on 4 parcels of Rains Sr. Trust Land.

    The fear of the people on Lake Sutherland was my comment at a Commissioners meeting.

    I found and have been circulating the Oregon taking of property value.

    I will  provide only documented information to you.

    I am passionate about private property and Constitutional rights.

    1. TAKING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY FOR PUBLIC SHORELINE ACCESS

    Statistics taken from

    Clallam County future land use map

    79.2 % of Clallam County is PUBLIC LAND

    17.1% of Clallam County is PRIVATE PROPERTY

    3.7% other

    79.2%  (or more) of Clallam County is PUBLIC LAND and it’s SHORELINES

    are available for PUBLIC ACCESS.

    My public comment and recommendation  for the SMP update is that no additional private property be taken for PUBLIC SHORELINE  ACCESS.

     Any additional PUBLIC SHORELINE ACCESS on private property shall be strictly on a volunteer basis and not as a requirement for permits.

    Owning 79.2% of Clallam County, the Olympic National Park, National Forest Lands and the Dept of Natural Resources should be encouraged to provide PUBLIC SHORELINE ACCESS.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    As Trustee of the George C. Rains Trust

    Private property owner

    Advisory Committee Member

    ————————————————————–

    AND…  I ended up sending this  SMP comments to Jim Jones??

    I had his email address

    ANOTHER UN-POSTED SMP COMMENT

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: jim jones

    Sent: Tuesday, April 26, 2011 1:36 PM

    Subject: WA RCW’S THAT PROTECT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS

    Jim,

    DCD Sheila Miller suggested that fear of the government may be dispelled by educating.

    Instead of educating fearful Lake Sutherland private property owners, why not help them?

    I researched and found three laws that  protect private property owner.

    3. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CLALLAM COUNTY SMP UPDATE

    Any WA State RCW’s that are beneficial to the rights and protection of private property owners should be included in the Clallam County SMP update.

    PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION

    LAKE SUTHERLAND

    RCW 90.24.010

    Petition to regulate flow — Order — Exceptions.

    Ten or more owners of real property abutting on a lake may petition the superior court of the county in which the lake is situated, for an order to provide for the regulation of the outflow of the lake in order to maintain a certain water level therein. If there are fewer than ten owners, a majority of the owners abutting on a lake may petition the superior court for such an order. The court, after notice to the department of fish and wildlife and a hearing, is authorized to make an order fixing the water level thereof and directing the department of ecology to regulate the outflow therefrom in accordance with the purposes described in the petition. This section shall not apply to any lake or reservoir used for the storage of water for irrigation or other beneficial purposes, or to lakes navigable from the sea.

    [1999 c 162 § 1; 1985 c 398 § 28; 1959 c 258 § 1; 1939 c 107 § 2; RRS § 7388-1.]Notes:

         Effective date — 1985 c 398: “Sections 28 through 30 of this act shall take effect January 1, 1986.” [1985 c 398 § 31.]Lake and beach management districts: Chapter 36.61 RCW.  

    PROTECTION FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY

    Protection of single family residences

    RCW 90.58.100

     (6) Each master program shall contain standards governing the protection of single family residences and appurtenant structures against damage or loss due to shoreline erosion. The standards shall govern the issuance of substantial development permits for shoreline protection, including structural methods such as construction of bulkheads, and nonstructural methods of protection. The standards shall provide for methods which achieve effective and timely protection against loss or damage to single family residences and appurtenant structures due to shoreline erosion. The standards shall provide a preference for permit issuance for measures to protect single family residences occupied prior to January 1, 1992, where the proposed measure is designed to minimize harm to the shoreline natural environment.

    PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION

     Unintentionally created “Wetlands”

    RCW 90.58.030

    Definitions and concepts.

     (h) “Wetlands” means areas that are inundated or saturated by surface water or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions. Wetlands generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. Wetlands do not include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland sites, including, but not limited to, irrigation and drainage ditches, grass-lined swales, canals, detention facilities, wastewater treatment facilities, farm ponds, and landscape amenities, or those wetlands created after July 1, 1990, that were unintentionally created as a result of the construction of a road, street, or highway. Wetlands may include those artificial wetlands intentionally created from nonwetland areas to mitigate the conversion of wetlands.

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    AS Trustee of the George C. Rains Trust

    Private property owner

    Advisory Committee member

    —————————————————————————

    FAILURE TO INFORM INTERESTED PARTIES  SMP Advisory Committee members

    —– Original Message —–

    From: Jo Anne Estes

    Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 10:31 AM

    Subject: Public Meeting on SMP tomorrow

    Hello, everyone~

    As a fellow conservative and defender of property rights, I am calling on you with an urgent request to attend the Clallam County Commissioners meeting tomorrow at 9:00 a.m. when the Shoreline Master Program update will be discussed.  Meeting information can be found at

    http://www.clallam.net/board/assets/applets/monwork.pdf.  This agenda item is planned for 9:45 a.m.

    Any public comment you are willing to provide is greatly appreciated.  Make your voice heard!  Even if you do not wish to comment, plan to attend the meeting to get a first hand view of our county government.

    Thanks for your consideration.

    Jo Anne Estes

    An Advisory Committee member

    FAILURE TO INFORM INTERESTED PARTIES  SMP Advisory Committee members

    —– Original Message —–

    From: earnest spees

    To: Karl Spees

    Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 9:17 AM

    Subject: Public Meeting on SMP tomorrow!!!!!!!!

    Defenders of Property Rights (Article on A8 in today’s PDN)

    Tomorrow, Monday 2/28/11, there will be a meeting in the commissioners meeting room, Clallam County Courthouse, on the Shoreline Master Program, SMP, Update.

    The meeting is at 0900 (AM) and will allow public input.  Unfortunately this is when most people have jobs and will be working.

    They may be just probing, checking our body temperature, the strength of their opposition to the draconian new rules restricting and regulating use of our private property.  (This may be a classic battle of the  citizens, ‘we the people’ against the big government agenda.)

    Please attend and participate.

    Karl Spees – Pres CAPR 13

    An Advisory Committee member

    —————————————————————————

    FAILURE TO INFORM INTERESTED PARTIES  SMP Advisory Committee members

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: earnest spees

    Sent: Sunday, February 27, 2011 11:08 AM

    Subject: Re: Public Meeting on SMP tomorrow!!!!!!!!

    Yes, I will be there.

    How did you find out?

    They sure as hell didn’t let me know!

    imagine that?

    Pearl

    An Advisory Committee member

     ————————————————————–

    WE WERE INVITED TO BE ON THE Shoreline Advisory Committee?

    May 05, 2011 10:19 AM, Per Steve Gray we are “NOT” an Advisory Committee we just an “Important work group to provide input”.

    SO WE BECAME THE CLALLAM COUNTY SMP UPDATE Shoreline”Important work group to provide input” Committee.

    FAILURE? Omitting public comments and a failure to provide a complete and accurate

    summary of a Public Meeting

    —– Original Message —–

    Sent: Thursday, May 05, 2011 10:19 AM
    Subject: Responsible party
    —————————————–
    TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
    Regarding the 30 members of  the invited Shoreline Advisory Committee.
    Per Steve Gray we are “NOT” an Advisory Committee we just an “Important work group to provide input”.
    ————————————————
    Am I confused? No, I am insulted.
    ——————————————-
    After reading Hannah’s documented, selectively summarized outcome of the first Advisory Committee meeting,
    ———————————————————–
    it is my personal opinion that we, as a committee are not there to give input, constructive comment, or recommendation,
    we are there to be indoctrinated on compliance, based on misleading pie charts and statistics compiled and presented by ESA Adolfson..
    ——————————————————————–
    Comment by Carol Johnson regarding forest management and a new regulation on the SMP compliance report, she questioned why? The forest Act regulates forestry.
    ———————————————————————
    Comment the  “Reading out loud” by Pearl Hewett of the follow WAC 173-26-191.
    ———————————————————————-

    WAC 173-26-191 Some master program policies may not be fully attainable by regulatory means due to the constitutional and other legal limitations on the regulation of private property. The policies may be pursued by other means as provided in RCW 90.58.240. Some development requires a shoreline permit prior to construction. A local government evaluates a permit application with respect to the shoreline master program policies and regulations and approves a permit only after determining that the development conforms to them.

    Comment by Pearl Hewett, If regulation of private property is unconstitutional or illegal by WA State law Clallam County should NOT use it.


    Comment by Kaj Ahlburg, the WAC’s are more stringent then WA State law.

    The selective summary of the “Our Important work group to provide input” at the first meeting, did not mention any of these comments.
    I called Commissioner Mike Chapman.
    Who is responsible? The elected DCD Sheila Rourk Miller.
    Sheila went on vacation on April 26, 2011 the day after the 4C public meeting and will not be back in her office until Monday May 9, 2011.
    I called today and left a message, asking for a meeting with her.
    Pearl
    —————————————————————————-

    UNPOSTED SMP   PUBLIC COMMENTS on NO NET LOSS

     —– Original Message —–

    From: Jo Anne Estes

    To: Merrill, Hannah ; Gray, Steve

    Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 12:07 PM

    Subject: What is No Net Loss Workgroup?

    Hello Hannah and Steve:

    I saw this Notice on the Clallam County Website:

    Thursday:  August 18, 2011 – No Net Loss Work Group , Clallam County BOCC Room 160, 223 East Fourth Street, Port Angeles, 10a.m.-2:00 p.m.

    Is this something either of you are leading?  If not, please forward my email to the correct person. I could not make the meeting yesterday.

    Could you please forward me all copies of the meeting agendas and minutes to date for this group?  I would like to gather this as soon as possible so I can get up to speed.

    Do you know if the Shoreline Advisory Committee been tasked with participating with the No Net Loss workgroup?  If so, I do not recall getting notice.  Please add my email address to the distribution list for all minutes and agendas of the No Net Loss workgroup.

    Thanks very much.  Have a great weekend!

    Jo Anne Estes

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

    As Members of the Clallam County Shoreline Advisory Committee.

    WE WERE NOT RECEIVING ANY RESPONSES FROM

    Sheila Roark Miller – DCD Director 2010 ; Steve Gray

    SO,  I did respond to Jo Anne Estes (a member of the Shoreline Advisory Committee)

    —– Original Message —–

    From: pearl hewett

    To: Jo Anne Estes

    Cc: earnest spees

    Sent: Friday, August 19, 2011 12:54 PM

    Subject: Re: What is No Net Loss Workgroup?

    Jo Anne,

    When people asked about the NO NET LOSS at the public SMP meeting after our Aug.committee meeting (only 16 people showed up) I asked about the no net loss committee? Who are they? They have had only 1 meeting?  Steve Grey admitted, they had only had one meeting. I fear they are from the appointed 9 in the Planning Dept.? Steve did not identify them.

    Your letter to the PDN was good. Unfortunately too many people have taken the “Wait and see what they do attitude”

    Then, they will start screaming and yelling, after the fact!

    You are correct when you say we, as private property owners, are not represented proportionally on the SMP update committee. In fact we are not represented PERIOD.  Remember the meeting we attended at the Audubon.

    I have emailed, questioned, complained, bitched, requested info, made comments, spoken out at public meetings, been ignored when I raised my hand at the John Wayne Marina Public Forum, sent many DOE, Clallam County maps with their statistics  documenting their errors and omissions

     (August 19, 2011)  AND have yet to received a single response from the Planning Dept, Sheila, Hannah and Steve Grey do not respond.

    The committee members comments are not put on line as we were told they would be?

    Are we just, the required by LAW invited?

     Does anything we do have any effect on the outcome?

     Are our comments even given to the Appointed 9?

    FYI

    ESA Adolfson completed a report on Puget Sound for the National Fish and Wildlife Federation in WA DC prior to our Jan 26, 2011 SMP meeting.

    Keep up the good work,

    Pearl Rains Hewett

    Disappointed member of the Clallam County Invited SMP

    Update NOT Citizens Advisory Committee.

    ———————————————————————–

    The bottom line

    AND,  Failure to  ENCOURAGE PARTICIPATION

    Sent: Tuesday,  8:48 AM 2011

    THEY want us to be upset and discouraged, Commissioner Mike Chapman suggested I should/could  QUIT.

    Ironically, Commissioner Mike Chapman suggested just weeks earlier, somewhat sarcastically, that if I did not like the way things were going I should participate by volunteering to be on the SMP Update Citizens Advisory Committee.

    Hmmm? May 10, 2011 Commissioner Mike Chapman suggests that  if I do not like the way things are  going

    I should/could  QUIT.

    Don’t let life discourage you; everyone who got where she is had to begin where she was.

    Pearl Rains Hewett