Property Rights Research

Career Politicians good for ...

2011-11-20T17:09:00.000-08:00

Career Politicians good for ...

November 20, 2011

By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights and natural resources researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net

Expecting a clique of career politicians -- steeped in the toxic, corrupt brew that exists within the Washington, D.C., Beltway -- to 'achieve' a trillion-dollar cut in America's budget is like trying to sew a dress with no needle and no material. It's just not going to happen. This is the same cadre that gifted three-quarters of a trillion dollars to their banking and manufacturing pals, remember? This is also the same bunch that thinks honorably immigrating and becoming honest, naturalized citizens, is the same as illegal entry and residence. Doing drugs is not somehow less distasteful if you "didn't inhale."

Career politicians seem to take regular, hardworking, honest Americans not only for granted, but also, apparently, as someone not worthy of respect. In truth, honest, hardworking Americans are far more deserving of respect than those that would sell us 'down the river' for ... what? Is controlling many global entities engaged in commerce -- often to the considerable detriment of both the 'workers' in those countries as well as those in countries where those 'sweatshop' goods are sold -- really worth treating other human beings like chattel? Look to those purporting to "represent" you in Washington, D.C., for your answer. The 2011 election is over, so the masquerading, posturing and 'political promises' can now be viewed as the mirages they were.

Career politicians and elected officials are neither interchangeable nor synonymous, though they can be. Those that make a career of politics -- spending decades in the confines of Washington, D.C. -- are different from those who venture into the Beltway with the hope and moxie to make a positive difference.

I've tried to honestly consider just what, exactly, career politicians are good for. After much thought, very little comes to mind. This is a group of folks whose 'beliefs' can often be purchased by the highest bidder, who sway in the political wind like a hurricane ravaged palm tree, and who are so distanced from the real world of the public that they don't pump their own gas, mow their own yards, or answer their own phones.

In almost sixty years of life, I've phoned and spoken to only a handful of politicians, and none of them were 'career politicians.' Of those, all but one are no longer living, but those I could call and speak with, directly, were: Alabama Governor George Wallace, U.S. Congresswoman Helen Chenoweth-Hage (R-ID) and Oregon Senator Doug Whitsett. That a person does not find it necessary to distance him or herself from the public, is a character trait I admire, no matter what the 'political party.'

Being in touch with, and available to, the public, is something that keeps people in touch with reality. No one should expect to be able to hold a lengthy conversation with an elected official, but having the ability to communicate -- and be respected by that elected official -- is crucial to the health of America.

Perhaps we should be changing what a career politician is and does by settling for nothing less than what we, ourselves, would do, were we in that position. Would we have the backbone and moral fortitude to be what we are in the 'private sector'? Would we simply make excuses for our transgressions and seek to 'move on' past our criminal actions, or would we 'rise above it' and not go there, where so many have gone before us? It's easy to say, "Beam me up, Scotty!" and leave it all behind in a starship bound for another galaxy, but what would we do when there's no Scotty and no transporter?

While we are preparing for our seasons of thanksgiving, reverence and festivities, let's take time to consider how much we have to lose by letting our great nation continue on its current 'slide' -- and how much we have to gain by stooping to offer her a hand back up to the wonderful Christian nation she still is. Let's clean up our act and our country and not leave the cleanup tasks to those that have soiled her in the first place. Neglect is abuse, also. If career politicians are good for something, let them be an example of how things were once done in America!

706 words.

My Official Public Comments on what is misnamed "Klamath Restoration Draft EIS/EIR"

2011-11-15T13:26:00.000-08:00

My Official Public Comments on what is misnamed "Klamath Restoration Draft EIS/EIR"

November 15, 2011

Julie Kay Smithson, property rights and natural resources researcher, 213 Thorn Locust Lane, London, Ohio 43140. propertyrights@earthlink.net

It is said here: http://klamathrestoration.gov/home that "This is the official website of the Department of the Interior, and other federal and state agencies that are involved in carrying out obligations set forth in the Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement, including the Secretarial Determination on Klamath River dams. Use this website to stay up to date on issues surrounding the Secretarial Determination and the environmental analysis that will be conducted pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)."

Instructions for submitting "feedback" (one can only believe that "feedback" is synonymous with "comments") are located here: http://klamathrestoration.gov/Draft-EIS-EIR/feedback

Any schemes to remove any of the four dams on the Klamath River -- in Oregon and/or California -- are just that: schemes. If there were any validity to claims touted by those involved in CLOSED DOOR 'negotiations' regarding the Klamath Basin and its four dams, those claims were rendered null and void by the few years of secretive and selective clique of "interested parties" involved. The very fact that -- in order to "have a seat at the table" and be included in these highly suspect "negotiations" -- one had to agree "in principle" to the scheme, makes it more rotten than Denmark! While those living and working in the Klamath Basin may, by virtue of their proximity to the "forest," not be able to see it for the "trees," I am in Ohio and can clearly see the intent of these schemes, and the power behind them, pushing the Trojan horse at the gates of economic independence as though the power brokers were merely arriving for an afternoon tea!

Nothing that seeks to destroy the entire economy and culture of the Klamath Basin for the past hundred years, can be called an "agreement" or "agreements." Both the "Klamath Hydroelectric Settlement Agreement" (208 pages) and the "Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement" (378 pages) are nothing more than stalking-horses: decoys. Neither settles anything other than which fox gets to dine in the hen house first! Even the number of people originally adamantly against any such things as would steal their ability to do one or more of the following: own and utilize private property as they have done so in the past; have a home, job and future in the Klamath Basin that is of their own accord; raise their families and contribute to a vibrant place in the Pacific Northwest through the fruits of their endeavors; rest and die in peace, knowing that their families, friends and co-workers will have a place, too, in their beloved Klamath Basin; grow and harvest food and fiber in the Klamath Basin, whether it be the plethora of food crops, fish, timber, minerals, livestock, or hunting/fishing opportunities that abound -- have been ground into the dust of the Basin by the forces aligned against their very existence.

Rocket science is not needed to know that the people of the Klamath Basin -- living and working in this area of northern California and southern Oregon -- are good people with multigenerational experience and expertise. No one coming from distant Washington, D.C., Portland, Oregon, or Sacramento, California, governmental locations, has any right to erase promises made to good people, war veterans and their families. No one anywhere has the right to sway people by the mirage of promises made, knowing that the intent is to rid the Basin of its very lifeblood. NO ONE. The Klamath Basin is a wonderful place to live, work, farm, ranch, hunt, fish, etc. -- not in spite of its inhabitants and private property owners, but BECAUSE OF THEM!

I look askance at people who have been downtrodden by this sham, which purports to somehow be a good thing for anyone or anything in the Klamath Basin. From the farmers and their families to the livestock, animals, wildlife and waterfowl of the Klamath Basin, these "agreements" bode ill for the entire Klamath Basin. An ill wind blows upon the Klamath Basin, and the thought that one "secretary" of a federal agency -- who obediently does the bidding of his bosses and lets people think of him as a "rancher" -- plans to make a "secretarial determination" about the four dams that have been part of the underpinning of the Klamath Basin's economic independence and freedom for almost a hundred years, makes my stomach turn. Ken Salazar is not an expert on the Klamath Basin, its dams, people, water, flora, fauna, and economy!

My gut feeling -- which stood me in good stead for the twenty-seven years during which I drove semi-trucks safely on America's highways -- is that these schemes are the death knell of the Klamath Basin as those that love this special, blessed place now know it.

Rather than allow themselves to be litigated into extinction or cowed by such a wooden decoy with a bellyful of armed forces, I pray for those in the cross hairs of these "agreements" to realize what is happening in time to stop it. How? Stop it the same way you would stop any trespasser trying to steamroller what rightfully belongs to you.

Would you allow someone to steal your home? Children? Car? Bank account? Family history? Future? How is this scheme any different? It is all of these things, and more.

I may not live or work in the Klamath Basin, but its potatoes, horseradish, and other crops contribute to my health and well-being. Its people are my friends. Its history is part of my country's history. I depend on its economic and cultural health as I depend on my nearby neighbors' efforts to grow, harvest and market what may look to some like items on store shelves, but that, to me, look like freedom and heritage! Stop the destruction of the Klamath Basin via the very real reason that Ken Salazar and his “interested parties” have no right to steal your -- or my -- future! Tell him so! You would not venture into the part of Colorado owned by him and his kith and kin and tell them that you were going to make a “determination” that would put them immediately out of reach of the property rights, past, present and future that they'd built!

1,070 words.

Names don't make it so

2011-11-15T11:33:00.000-08:00

Names don't make it so

November 15, 2011

By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights and natural resources researcher propertyrights@earthlink.net

Calling a litigious outfit an "environmental group" is like trying to make a silk purse from a sow's ear. Where is the proof that litigating almost every natural resource plan in America to a halt -- or forcing "mitigation" in the form of vast acreage offered up at the altar of "habitat" -- has actually made a positive difference to any specie of flora or fauna? Where are these self-proclaimed "environmental" organizations when America's border with Mexico is piled high with human excrement, bales of marijuana, discarded water containers, etc., ad nauseam? The selfsame "environmental" organizations -- including, but far from limited to -- the Audubon Society, Sierra Club, "The" Nature Conservancy, etc. -- are strangely mute during conflagrations that incinerate millions of acres of that "habitat" which they proclaim to the public is in dire need of "protection."

Someone holding a chain saw is no more a forester than the litigious groups -- milking the "Equal Access to Justice Act" (5 U.S.C. § 504; 28 U.S.C. § 2412) http://uscode.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t05t08+23+1++()%20%20AND%20( for all it's worth -- are "environmentalists."

In my carefully studied opinion, a farmer, rancher or master gardener -- whose private property has been responsibly stewarded for many generations and is still productive, fertile and healthy -- is more qualified to be called an environmentalist than those cloaking themselves with that word.

It's not an "immigration" problem; it's a criminal invasion problem

2010-06-07T18:38:00.000-07:00

It's not an "immigration" problem; it's a criminal invasion problem

June 7, 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

If you get caught driving too fast, you're a speeder, not merely an illegal driver. You've broken a law that is in place to keep our highways safe.

If you get caught invading my country by entering it illegally, you are an illegal alien, a criminal, and not someone that belongs here.

Why, if you invade my country by entering it illegally, should anyone give you the coveted title of immigrant?

Immigrants I know have become naturalized American citizens. They don't skulk about, bent over under a bale of marijuana, entering my country via the paid assistance of lawbreaking criminals engaged in international terrorism that are nicknamed "coyotes." What is so honorable about paying one criminal to get you across an international, sovereign border into a country, just so you can skim its cream, send money home to another land and trash its border with your waste products?

I will never refer to you as "immigrants." You are not. You are what you know you are: In America illegally, with malice aforethought and no intention of becoming Americans. You drop "anchor babies" in the "harbor" cities whose leaders have had their allegiance bought with the promise of cheap labor and other favors.

Harboring an alien is a crime. Harboring an invading, illegal alien is a crime, too. Stop pretending to be something you're not. Either come here legally, honorably, with the intention of becoming an American citizen, or go back to the country of your birth -- and stay there.

Just because America, like your own nation, is rife with crooked politicians and faceless power brokers who trade in human labor, blood, sweat, and tears, does not mean Americans will welcome you.

Sure, there are jobs here that you can do, but you're not a migrant worker.

You don't work in the fields, tending and harvesting crops. You seek out places where you will blend in with others and where you buy false "papers" or steal the papers of others. You boldly harvest the spoils of your time here, knowing if you get caught, you can blithely just turn around and infiltrate my country again. We both know that the census will not county you, because you exist below the radar of such things.

America is a melting pot of a country, but it became great through the blending of people from other countries that sought our shores to become Americans -- not "hyphenated" Americans, but real Americans. These legal, honorable, hardworking, honest, Christian people immigrated to America to become Americans. They renounced their citizenship with their lands of birth. They were no longer Dutch, Swedish, Russian, Japanese, Italian, Sudanese, Moroccan, Brazilian, or Polish.

They became -- and were proud of the hard-earned honor of being called -- American!

God bless our naturalized Americans, our born-and-bred Americans, and those working to achieve that status. To the others: go away. Don't come again another day. Stop murdering our border ranchers, our Border Patrol and other good people who do honest work for a living.

505 words.

The Difference between man and plants/animals

2010-06-05T16:50:00.000-07:00

The Difference between man and plants/animals

Tis the blending of bone and sinew,

Brain and the use of said,

Which make man, man,

And plants/animals, thread,

The interwovenness that makes,

Of earth a heav'n or a hell,

In man's brain alone

Doth those two dwell.

- Julie Kay Smithson, June 5, 2010

The wonder of weeds and weeding

2010-06-01T09:49:00.000-07:00

The wonder of weeds and weeding

June 1, 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

People often refer to undesirable things as the bane, or harm/ruin of their existence. How weeds came to be so loathed is beyond my understanding. Weeds, after all, are simply plants that grow where we would rather they didn't. When weeds sprout and thrive in our flower beds or lawns, they actually offer us positive opportunities!

The view when one is bent over or on one's knees, weeding, is different. Things may be seen at that angle or level that are invisible from the standing position, be they insects, tiny new leaves, or the colors of the dirt in which we are working. Fragrances, too, offer a smorgasbord for our sensory sniffer, as some weeds smell pungent, others aromatic, and still others, sharp or without discernible smell.

There is something about sitting on the ground that replenishes a corner of the soul. Though we don't usually see it thus, part of us is kith and kin to the earth: our physical makeup. We are spun of wonderful cloth, but our feet are still bound to the clay and firmament. Is there an essence given us by the very act of finding and plucking weeds? I don't know, but it soothes me and gives my all a time of calm, when the frenzied pace of highway or shopping area are as removed as if on Mars. Weeding helps my body remain supple, keeps my fingers and eyes in sync to work as a team with my muscles, bucket and helper tools at hand. My fingers, no longer young and straight, but sculpted by living, offer themselves to me to consider and appreciate as I weed.

As children play in the mud and dirt, we often see only future laundry contributions and cleanup duties. Should we contemplate the connections that bring children to their knees, eyeing something from that special vantage point that we return to when we weed? Weeds bring us chances to glimpse -- or revel in -- moments of peace and harmony with nature. To enjoy our gardening time may be our best times to "go child" again and find the wonder of weeds!

355 words.

An Acquired Taste: OES

2010-05-27T20:02:00.000-07:00

An Acquired Taste: OES

May 27, 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

British Petroleum is diversifying. Its newest global venture is OES: Oil-Encrusted Seafood. Soon to appear on the menus of restaurants desirous of trying something new, OES may be listed as an appetizer (served with an oil-based dipping sauce), a main course or a flambeau-style dessert.

Rather than take an antacid before trying OES, diners may want to consider something that soaks up excess oil, such as shredded wheat. OES is doubtless going to make its mark as a memorable experience, but whether it lasts long enough to become an acquired taste is another thing entirely. BP should not despair, however. It's not the first to market "sliders"!

107 words.

Making History

2010-04-25T13:31:00.000-07:00

Making History

April 25, 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson and Wiggles Blue Heeler (From Us To You column, Our Community weekly paper, Madison County, Ohio)

History is something that should be in every good life cook's recipe box. It is an amazing concoction, a participatory collage of sight, sound, aroma, and taste that flavors life. History, when made well, begs us to take note of it, record it for future life cooks, and savor its multiplicity of ingredients.

Starting with plans for something is an essential ingredient. Add the action needed to bring those plans to fruition -- whether it be taking a trip, giving a speech, taking part in a class, or many other things -- and stir thoughtfully. After all, you may want to make history more than once!

Condiments are important to this recipe, though they will not be found in any kitchen pantry. Such things as a dash of goodwill, a pinch of zest, a goodly portion of devotion, a couple of shakes of eagerness, and the folding in of a measure of tact, will help you make history of which you can be proud.

History can be made in many places and on a number of fronts. It can be brought along slowly and adjusted to fit a myriad of scenarios in life, from wartime to peacetime and from the earliest school years through the years when many are steeped in marriage and children, or marinated in the blend of seasonings that occur when lives are lived solo or with pets.

You'll usually know history when you see it, though it can take place just below the radar of one's life and be visible only to others, or only after one has shed the trappings of earthly life. History is not always confined to the pages of books; though it can be recorded thusly, it then becomes prime for the author's perception and recollection.

History is etched in our faces, hands and gait. We travel through life at many paces, sometimes spent, and feeling, like we've been in a marathon, others seemingly outstripped by a snail's pace. Our heads may be held high, with clear vision and cheerful demeanor. They may also be bent by the weight of real or perceived loads, carried in such a way that our eyes remain downcast and never see the rainbows. Lost love can help make history better, through learning that the love of our life may not always love us in return -- or we can be jaundiced by it to the point where our lives seem to stop at that moment. Joy and love walk hand-in-hand, and being ready to risk having the recipe turn out differently than we had planned, is worth the drawing in of breath and the leap of faith.

For each of us, history is in the making every day of our lives. Will we make it with courage and kindness? Will we doubt our ability to make it at all? Just for today, make your own history with a different ingredient or two, something that's been gathering dust on the back shelf of your mind's pantry. The results may astound you and make the lives of others better. Make some history today -- you may be delighted with the results!

523 words.

The Fight to Save Nevada's Ag Future and CABNR

2010-03-31T04:22:00.000-07:00

The Fight to Save Nevada's Ag Future and CABNR

By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org and http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com

The University of Nevada, Reno (UNR) is one of America's 74 land-grant institutions(1) and the only one in the Silver State. A proposal announced March 1, was made to close one of UNR's ten colleges -- the College of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Natural Resources, or CABNR -- and reorganize remaining programs under the College of Science, in order to trim $11 million. The UNR is the sum of its parts: College of Agriculture, Biotechnology & Natural Resources; College of Business; College of Education; College of Engineering; Division of Health Sciences; College of Liberal Arts; College of Science; Extended Studies; Reynolds School of Journalism; and the University of Nevada Cooperative Extension.(2) In the current difficult economic climate, the need to downsize is understandable, but one college taking a forty percent hit is lopsided.

CABNR is one of UNR's ten academic units, but is "paying its own way" in many important areas (3), including an internationally preeminent publication, The Journal of Thrombosis and Hemostasis, February 2010 issue, which cover features the Department of Animal Biotechnology, University of Nevada, Reno, NV, article titled: "Clinical and molecular characterization of a re-established line of sheep exhibiting hemophilia A" (4) which was developed at the Main Station Field Lab. Major strides in research are being made at CABNR. The value of stem-cell research alone is a jewel in CABNR's crown.

Part of the Academic Planning Process offers this justification for the authority to take such drastic action: 1. An administrative unit, project, program or curriculum may be discontinued, reduced in size, or reorganized for bona fide reasons pertaining to the University’s mission as a consequence of the Academic Planning Process, which has been approved by President Glick. ... 7. Any department that is the subject of a Proposal shall review the Proposal and, through the Department Chair, submit any data or other documentation supporting or challenging the Proposal (the Department’s Response) to the appropriate Dean and the Provost by March 26, 2010. 8. ... The College Review Committee’s recommendation and the results of the vote of the college faculty shall be sent to the Faculty Senate Chair and the Provost by April 9, 2010.(5)

The proposal's timeline:

1. The curricular review proposal is released Monday, March 1, 2010.
2. Units respond to proposed program closing by Friday, March 26, 2010.
3. Colleges respond and vote on the proposal by Friday, April 9, 2010.
4. The Faculty Senate reviews the proposal and other supplied information and makes a recommendation to the President and Provost by May 7, 2010.
5. The President and Provost make their final decisions and propose appropriate program closures to the Board of Regents by May 14, 2010.
6. The Board of Regents decides on program closures in early June.
7. Employees related to closing programs are notified of their termination by June 30, 2010, and provided with rights of reconsideration and notification.(6)

Provost Marc Johnson said that determining which programs or departments to cut was based on factors such as the number of degrees granted, enrollment in the major, scholarship productivity, external scholarship grant awards, how important they were to the university's mission and their national and international uniqueness.(7)

A March 12 telephone interview with Regent Dorothy Gallagher was troubling. She stated that it’s a misconception that agriculture programs at UNR could be completely eliminated. Rather, they may be restructured.(8)

Nevada's economy is fueled by "the big three" -- gaming, mining and agriculture, of which the number two and three are doing well, though gaming has suffered.(9) CABNR, with its structure of teachers' budget-based pay supplanted by grant awards, means the ag college truly does help pay its own way, a “gift that keeps on giving” in the form of research that benefits Nevada, the nation and the world.

The importance of CABNR to social networking websites was immediate: two Facebook Groups were established with a total over 4,000 members.(10)

Arguments about CABNR's safety being set forth in the Nevada Constitution -- ARTICLE 11, SECTION 4 Sec: 4. Establishment of state university; control by board of regents. The Legislature shall provide for the establishment of a State University which shall embrace departments for Agriculture, Mechanic Arts, and Mining to be controlled by a Board of Regents whose duties shall be prescribed by Law. . . . ARTICLE 11, SECTION 8[...] And the Legislature shall provide that if through neglect or any other contingency, any portion of the fund so set apart [for a college for the benefit of Agriculture[,] the Mechanics Arts, and including Military tactics], shall be lost or misappropriated, the State of Nevada shall replace said amount so lost or misappropriated in said fund so that the principal of said fund shall remain forever undiminished[.](11) -- are compelling, but the proposal appears to attempt to skirt that.

Interviews

Interviews with students, alumni, parents, and Nevada's ranching community brought forth many reasons to oppose closing CABNR.

Tessa Sustacha, Senior in Animal science with a minor in wildlife ecology:

I have applied to Washington State University and Colorado State University Schools of Veterinary Medicine and am waiting to hear back from them about acceptance. I wish one day to practice as a veterinarian in a rural area, helping producers with herd health, wildlife disease issues as well as public health aspects of veterinary medicine. I chose CABNR for many reasons including that my dad, uncle and mom went to the University and CABNR. I also served as the Nevada State FFA secretary as a freshman and began my education at UNR. ... To me the college was affordable, offered the opportunity for scholarships and research, small class sizes and had a very well known pre-veterinary program with a reputation for turning out well-prepared successful applicants to graduate and schools of veterinary medicine. I am a 4th generation native Nevadan and I grew up in the Elko area. I was involved in 4-H since I was 9 years old and strongly believe in the power that 4-H has and the importance of the services that cooperative extension and the University provide to rural communities. ... Agriculture has always been a huge part of my life and I believe that the agriculture industry faces serious issues in educating the public due to the disconnect that is created in this country through the availability of a safe and affordable food supply. This is ... seriously put in jeopardy if agriculture is not included in the curriculum at institutes of higher education. For this reason alone -- and the fact that Agriculturists must be provided with support and education, as well as the overall importance of agriculture to Nevada -- I care a great deal about CABNR.

Erin Hourihan:

I graduated from CABNR in 2007 with a bachelor's in Forestry and Rangeland Management. I returned to CABNR in the spring of 2009 to get a Masters in Animal Science. ... As a Master's student ... I am understandably outraged and appalled by the decision to eliminate the entire college. CABNR contains an abundance of degree and research programs, some of which are internationally renowned. At UNR, researchers in the Department of [Animal] Biotechnology have made significant advancements in the area of stem-cell research. The Department of Resource Economics has also gained international recognition for many significant publications. ... I feel a very strong connection to this university and this college. The economy of the small town I'm from, Challis Idaho, is completely dependant on agriculture and natural resource-based industry. There are farmers and ranchers, loggers and miners. Growing up, I saw how land management decisions -- made by people with no connection to the land -- affected these people and it greatly influenced my higher education choices. My mother is from a longtime ranching family in eastern Nevada. I chose to attend college in her home state for a variety of reasons. I knew I wanted to study natural resources; Nevada provided the perfect place to do this. As a master's student, the Great Basin provides unlimited research opportunities that are second to none. If the powers that be succeed with their plan to close the CABNR at UNR, a vast amount of learning opportunities will be lost. I am deeply saddened by the collateral damage that has already occurred as a result of President Glick's decision. Many well-regarded professors are looking for employment elsewhere, because they don't feel the University values their talents. This is not to say that all the good professors are leaving! I am very grateful to those that are staying, taking the risk, because they have no way of knowing how long they will have a job. ... It is imperative to stress the multidisciplinary focus of a degree in Forestry or Rangeland Management. The ability to gain employment after graduation is not dictated by the institution at which you choose to study, but a list of qualification standards determined by federal government land management agencies. These standards include specific course requirements. In addition to 18 course hours in specialized range management classes, the course requirements explicitly require 15 credit hours of courses in directly related plant, animal and soil science. Classes that fulfill this requirement include plant taxonomy, plant ecology, livestock production, and animal nutrition. Due to the fact that UNR has a severely limited plant science department, Range students rely heavily on the animal science department to meet the qualification standards for professional and scientific positions. The proposed curricular review states that one range ecology position will be moved into Natural Resources and Environmental Sciences in order to preserve the range management program. However, a degree resulting from a program void of all animal science related courses will be inadequate and will therefore do a disservice to its students. The systematic attack on CABNR will not just affect students studying animal science, pre-veterinary medicine and resource economics. It will also make getting a valuable degree in Range Ecology or Range Management impossible in a state where approximately 46 million acres of rangeland is facing habitat sustainability, urban sprawl and invasive species issues. Currently students wanting a degree Range Management from UNR are limited in their options. As a graduate student conducting research in Range Ecology, my major appears on my transcripts as Animal Science. This is because the majority of the Range professors on campus, teach in the department of Animal Science. This should speak to the interrelatedness of the two disciplines. Streamlining should not include destroying the positive elements of what currently exists. Instead we should focus on irrelevancies that could be eliminated and additions that will improve the degree program drawing students to this university ... This college has been an important part of my life for the last eight years.

Kaley Volk, CABNR student and the to-be-cut Animal Science Major:

I am a freshman trying to obtain my Animal Science and Pre-Veterinary Medicine (dual) major here at the University of Nevada, Reno. ... My hope is to one day be a large animal veterinarian, perhaps starting with the USDA and eventually working my way to opening up a private practice. ... UNR is the only school in the state of Nevada to offer agriculture and animal science programs (in relevance to a degree) and agriculture is in the top three list of income for the state to casinos and mining. CABNR's closing is purely based of student numbers, and because there are less students in the ANSC (Animal Science) programs and CABNR, they are letting go the wrong people on a matter of numbers. It is not about the quantity, but the quality. And seeing that Nevada needs specific students trained in agriculture and (especially) large animal veterinarians, in a few years down the road we will no longer have local people to fill those much needed positions, but have to look outside our own state and recruit others in, costing more money and time. The major financial cut of CABNR is taking its biggest hit on students in the field right now, who either have to change their life goals now or move elsewhere.

Doug Busselman, Executive Vice President, Nevada Farm Bureau Federation:

The contributions of Nevada farm and ranch families, economically, socially and in all other fashion, is part of not only the heritage and value structure of rural Nevada, we are also going to play an instrumental role in the future of what Nevada will become. Although UNR officials believe that we are insignificant enough to be disregarded as part of their future, we refuse to accept their rejection as mattering. ... Nevada agriculture does matter!

Harvey Barnes, Barnes Ranch, Jiggs, Nevada:

"I'm not speaking for the rest of the board, but as a rancher and a graduate of the College of Agriculture a long time ago. I realize the economic situation of our state, but I think the proposal to close a complete college such as CABNR is going way overboard. ... If they close the college of agriculture, the properties and the facilities on them in the Reno area will be gone. The Valley Road facility is very close to the campus. The Main Station Farm is just a couple of miles away and I think that was a real plus for the UNR Ag College students. ... At the meeting on March 11 ... I was a little disappointed in what [Provost Marc Johnson] had to tell us. I gathered that his mind was made up. ... Agriculture, with our processing industries, some farming, and cattle ranching, we're still a $2 billion industry."

Kelly Cook-Bell:

I wonder if anyone has taken into account how this type of decision will weigh on our numerous FFA organizations in Nevada? What is this decision telling our kids and agricultural families in Nevada?

Jean (last name withheld by request):

I received a MS from the Resource Economics Department in 2000 when I was 45. It has been an invaluable degree for me, raising my income significantly and allowing me to work as an economist for the USDA. I first worked for the Economic Research Service where several colleagues were aware of the faculty at UNR. While a small department, the faculty is top notch and their reputation is probably how I got the job. Now I work for the Farm Service Agency's national office. I'm allowed to sit in California and telework every day because of my good skills learned at UNR.

Sharon Hay:

I'm shocked this extremely important aspect of the college is being closed, especially when ecology, biofuels, etc. is a highlight of the Obama administration, our nation & the world. ... I hope the university alters its stance.

Mike (last name is withheld by request):

With this decision, we are not just losing students, but also renowned research professors and the notoriety they bring. ... My brother, my wife and I all attended UNR. If this decision is final, I will be looking for other institutions to send my three children.

Mike (last name withheld by request):

My daughter is a freshman in the Pre-Vet CABNR program. She has thoroughly enjoyed her education and college experience. Her end goal is to attend a school of veterinary medicine, which we felt UNR gave her an outstanding chance to do. It is still unclear to me what level of education she will be losing based on this proposal. ...My assumption is she will miss out on the true hands-on experience of working with animals and she will miss being taught by experienced pre-vet teachers. She will now be attaining a general science degree that she can get at almost any university. If this is the case, and with ultra competition to be accepted into Vet school, we soon will be considering other colleges to meet her goal. This is very unfortunate for all involved.

What you can do

An immediate letter-writing campaign to the two individuals below is needed. Mailing addresses, fax numbers and email addresses have been provided. State your reasons for keeping CABNR open, being sure to mention your affiliation with CABNR, including CABNR graduates whose careers are an enhancement to their communities and Nevada's economy. Each family member should write his/her own letter; the numbers must prove the importance of CABNR to Nevada.

Dr. Milton Glick, Office of the President, University of Nevada, Reno/001, Reno, NV 89557-0016. Fax: 775-784-6429 president@unr.edu

Marc Johnson, Provost, University of Nevada1664 N. Virginia St., Reno, NV 89557-0208. Fax: 775-784-6220 marc.johnson@unr.edu

At stake, from the proponents' view: A savings of $11 million, plus over 1,000 acres of prime real estate in the Main Station Farm, a possible underlying motivational factor.

At stake, from the opponents' view: Custom and culture, the only agricultural education in the state, a small -- but nationally and internationally significant -- degree program, and much more. The plan to close CABNR would have an immediate and irreversible impact on Nevada and agriculture; the two are inextricably woven into the state's economic and educational fabric.

Footnotes:

1. The Association of Public and Land-grant Universities (APLU) formerly the National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges (NASULGC) http://www.aplu.org/NetCommunity/Page.aspx?pid=1199 and "About the Land-Grant System" http://www.wvu.edu/~exten/about/land.htm

2. Office of the Provost, University of Nevada, Reno http://www.unr.edu/provost/

3. Letter from Acting Dean Pardini, College of Agriculture, Biotechnology and Natural Resources, University of Nevada, Reno http://www.ag.unr.edu

4. "Clinical and molecular characterization of a re-established line of sheep exhibiting hemophilia A," The Journal of Thrombosis and Hemostasis, February 2010 http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/bsc/jth/2010/00000008/00000002/art00010

5. Academic Planning Process, Application of NSHE Code Sec. 5.4.6 http://www.unr.edu/provost/StrategicPlan/academic-planning-process-03012010.pdf

6. Curricular Review Proposal http://www.unr.edu/provost/StrategicPlan/curricular-review-proposal-03012010.pdf and Timeline http://www.unr.edu/provost/StrategicPlan/curricular-review-timeline.pdf

7. Media Announcement, March 1, 2010: Colleges, Programs Subject to Academic Planning Process notified today - University begins process to meet mandated 6.9 percent cut of state-funded budget http://www.unr.edu/president/budget/media_announce_curricular_review_030110.pdf

8. "Regent Gallagher Appears Before Elko Co. Commission" KENV Channel 10 Elko, March 12, 2010 http://www.kenvtv.com and http://www.kenvtv.com/newscasts/wmvdorothyag.wmv and "Locals weigh in on possible ag cuts", Elko Daily Free Press, March 13, 2010 http://www.elkodaily.com/articles/2010/03/14/news/local_news/doc4b9bb4b72181f266719820.txt
9. NevadaWorks - Community: Nevada Jobs and Nevada Workforce Development http://www.nevadaworks.com/community/ and Nevada Division of Water Planning: Nevada State Water Plan, Summary, Section 4: Socioeconomic Assessment and Forecasts http://water.nv.gov/WaterPlanning/wat-plan/PDFs/sum-sec4.pdf

10. Facebook Groups: Save CABNR (both groups have the same name) http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=338361652366&ref=ts and http://www.facebook.com/#!/group.php?gid=331883620793&ref=ts

11. The Nevada Constitution http://www.leg.state.nv.us/Const/NVConst.html

Article citation: "First published in the April/May 2010 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine" on pages 18-19.

3,069 words.

Article may be reprinted / posted so long as it remains intact, including all links. Three interviews were not included in the article, but have been left intact (above).

The Hairy Reed - Satire

2010-03-18T11:57:00.000-07:00

The Hairy Reed - Satire

March 18, 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

The Nevada Department of Wildlife (NDOW) has received a petition to list the hairy reed as an artificial species under the Artificial Species Act of 2010 (ASA).

The petition was submitted by a representative of the Lake Las Vegas Deepwater Marina Authority and stated, in part, that the hairy reed is often "in over its head" when dealing with environmental issues.

Baking in the Clark County summer sun is a possible habitat behavior that may be contraindicated by the species' single recognizable specimen and its tendency to inhabit a seemingly contradictory habitat: The District of Columbia.

The hairy reed may be recognized by its propensity to sway in the wind, but also has certain characteristics reminiscent of predatory plants like the Venus flytrap, opening for fresh meat and then slamming shut. Such activity usually goes on behind closed doors, so is, at best, only suspect behavior.

Sightings of this species include press conferences, photo-ops, and political events, the latter being the most probable place to successfully spot the hairy reed, especially during election years.

Whether NDOW will seriously consider listing the hairy reed as an artificial species remains a mystery.

The ASA mandates that a bovine excreta study (BES) be done to determine whether the hairy reed should be listed. Several universities have, however, applied for grant funding to monitor and track the hairy reed.

~~~~~

Smithson is a property rights researcher living with her Blue Heeler dog, Wiggles, in the Amish and Mennonite farm country near London, Ohio. Visit her websites: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com http://tips2ussavethem.blogspot.com Contact her at propertyrights@earthlink.net

We Still Need You, Klamath Farmers

2010-03-07T21:23:00.000-08:00

We Still Need You, Klamath Farmers

March 7, 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

Nine years after the historic call for help emanated from Klamath Falls, Oregon -- a call answered by Americans from all walks of life and places as distant as Ohio, over 2,200 miles east -- another crisis looms. Those in positions of power are grinning from ear-to-ear at "historic signing ceremonies." They chortle with glee at how their "collaboration and "consensus-driven stakeholder process" has been "inked."

Those few letter writers who continue to stand against the removal of the four dams on the Klamath River -- and the three Oregon elected officials who've never wavered in their stand to protect the promises made to those on the Klamath Project -- are being marginalized by a media that seems to have had its loyalty bought and paid for.

The voices of the original lottery winners have been largely silenced by age and death, but their descendants' voices may have been silenced by deceit and coercion.

No dictionary perused online or in hard copy has yet to yield synonyms tying words like "independence," "versatility," "freedom," "property rights," "resource utilization," etc., to "collaboration," "consensus," "stakeholder," etc.

There are some situations where agreement between factions can never be reached. One such situation was the lords and serfs of Europe. Those that chafed under the heavy hand of the land-LORDs had few options and none that involved remaining in their native lands. A small number of these moxie- and hope-filled, courageous souls set out from "the other side of the pond" on a journey to America, a place about which they had heretofore only known in dreams. The perils known to these immigrants were many -- from dying aboard ship from a wide variety of maladies, not the least of which was malnutrition, dysentery, etc., to surviving the journey only to perish before emerging from the indentured servitude which had purchased their passage to a new land.

The settling of America was fraught with untold dangers. Starvation happened to pioneers. So did dying of thirst or succumbing to fevers and diseases for which there were no easily-procured remedies. Getting to America's eastern shore was tough enough. Making it all the way to Oregon required many more of God's blessings and much privation. The Western Migration required something in the way of promise in order to lure men to leave their safer, but poorer, homes in the East. Those married men that made the journey had to scrimp and save in order to book passage for their families to join them. Single men had to first conquer places -- "stake their claim," as it were -- before they could dream of marrying and raising families. Viewing old photographs of these settlers is looking into faces made tired and old by the demands made to simply survive.

The Klamath Project was a promise, from the federal government to the lottery winners / war veterans who sought to make a forever home in the Klamath Basin of northern California and southern Oregon. Both sides promised something. The federal government, in far-off Washington, D.C., promised the winners of these Project Lands water "in perpetuity" in exchange for the promise to transform unproductive high desert land into productive, thriving farm and ranchland. The high desert of this region presented its own brand of challenges. Not only was it dependent upon snowpack for irrigation water during the growing season, but it was also a place where the temperatures meant frost in virtually every month. Growing food crops was not as easy as it was for farmers in the Midwest, who had a more temperate, longer growing season and more abundant rainfall. The promise of water in exchange for the promise to wrest fertile food-growing was inextricably entwined. It was not possible to deliver economic prosperity through farming and ranching, without the promise of water "in perpetuity."

When did the government's promise of water get broken? That answer is not nearly as important as the fact that the promise WAS broken and continues to be broken, year after frightening, disheartening, soul-crumbling year.

Did the Klamath Project farmers ever break their promise? No. They never did. However, they can no longer raise food and fiber to feed and shelter America if the other promiser -- the federal government -- reneges on its promise. Now that four or even five generations of blood, sweat and tears equity have been willingly put into this place beloved to so many as simply "the Klamath," a government, with malice aforethought, has broken its promise and levied the ultimate fine upon the people of the Klamath Basin and Project: the cessation of agriculture, ranching and the vibrant economy of this most special place located in the high desert of the Pacific Northwest.

How can such a terrible death knell sound in such a place without the population raising a hue and cry the likes of which would carry clearly all the way to Washington in the District of Columbia? How, indeed. Language deception was truly a weapon of mass destruction, the likes of which is yet to be seen, but which is coming like a runaway freight train. Using words that these honest Klamath Project people had been taught to trust, their property rights -- in the form of their economic freedom and prosperity -- have been taken. Those drafting the "agreements" have an intimate, professional knowledge of how to word phrases, sentences, paragraphs, and binding agreements, so those whose rights are being "rurally cleansed" barely realize what is happening ... until it's a "done deal."

The volatility of the Klamath River -- sometimes a drunken sluggard filled with algae-growing warm water, sometimes a raging bull goring all in its flooding path -- needed damming. This place of temperature swings, inversion layers, frost and freeze, heat and drought, needed people with resilience, strength of character and the sticktuitiveness to make of the Klamath Basin a place that not only could feed itself, but could also feed much of a nation from its bounty. Klamath Pearl potatoes, horseradish, mint, onions, hay, beef, and so much more, were grown and harvested, supporting with quiet pride a place that began with a government promise and a lottery.

Perhaps none will dare call it a terrible crime, but crime it is, for in its wake, the "restoration agreement" will leave a place that once knew the caring and devoted hand of the farmer, the appreciation of the farmer's wife and children, who were able to buy yard goods and little luxuries -- and even college and businesses of their own! -- again barren and bereft of the fertile loins of the Klamath dirt, needing only water and hard, honest work to bring forth property rights and freedom.

A promise is a promise. A broken promise is a broken promise. Those who did not stand at the "A" Canal Headgates and drink in the sights, sounds and concentrated patriotism distilled in that place, can never know how great was the promise, how terrible the broken promise.

Surely at the last moment, more will see what has been done and move to rectify it. Surely God will once again smile on the Klamath Basin. Surely the promise must be made to stand and the promise breakers must not be allowed one more meal of Klamath Project-grown food.

Let them eat cake, but let them eat it somewhere else. They have no right to a piece of the pie that they never earned and never deserved.

Those brave farmers that voluntarily left the "A" Canal Headgates when 9-1-1 happened, kept their promise, even knowing the track record of other party that promised water for the Klamath Project "in perpetuity."

We in America need the Klamath Basin farmers, their friends and families to again unite. They have helped feed us, in America, for a hundred years. We cannot afford to have their voices -- and the Klamath Project -- silenced by broken promises. We need the food produced in the Klamath Basin, but perhaps even more, we need the backbone of those Klamath farmers, who quietly helped care for America, keeping their promise, for a hundred years.

1,351 words.

Sounds that Soothe

2010-02-28T14:56:00.000-08:00

Sounds that Soothe

February 28, 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

A recent Facebook posting with a link to "The Ten Most Addictive Sounds" inspired yours truly to compile a baker's dozen list of most soothing sounds. In no particular order, they cover all seasons of the year and one's life.

The peaceful sounds of a campfire when it's past its peak and the embers occasionally fall with the softest of thuds.

The sounds Wiggles Blue Heeler, my canine companion of almost a dozen years, makes when he's sound asleep and dreaming, often accompanied by paws moving in concert with the activities of his dreams. For the first six years, Wiggles enjoyed physical eyesight and the "blue streak" speed of a blue heeler cattle dog as he ran effortlessly in play around the Arabian horses I once had. Progressive retinal atrophy, or PRA, an inherited eyesight robber found in virtually all dog breeds, though it was a blessing to be of the late onset type. Now the only running Wiggles can do, other than short bursts, is in his sleep. He still has the abundant energy and the memories of his days as a horse herder, voiced with jubilant yips in his dreams!

The sound of a pot of coffee brewing.

The sound of a light breeze wafting through leaves.

The heady feeling given by the sound of fields of ripening oats when their full heads wave & gently 'clack' on a breezy day.

The swoosh of a rain-kissed gust front, just before a thunderstorm.

The birdsong-filled air of early morning, which begins in mid-February and builds to a crescendo during nesting season.

The "huff" of snow falling from heavily laden branches, as it reaches the snowpack below.

The sound of joyful clapping when something has stirred the soul of the listener.

The quiet hush of the crowd just before Neil Diamond comes onstage (if you've experienced it, you know that the very air is pregnant with anticipation!).

The still of the night & the serene sound of your own relaxed, deep breathing.

The sound, rare nowadays, of someone whistling or singing while they work. A man who used to work at the London WalMart, made my whole day just by hearing his whistling or singing. I didn't even have to see him; it was enough just knowing that he was there and happy in his work, sharing that positive energy by putting it into happy sound. He was off sick for a few months, during which time I found myself feeling anxious, sorry that I'd been remiss in my intention to tell him how much those sounds meant to me. Then one day Mo was back, thinner and looking tired, and I wasted no time in telling him how special he was to me through the sounds he made. It felt so good to share with him that his whistling and singing reminded me of a short time during my childhood when my father had done both. Humbly delighted, this gentleman lit up like a Christmas tree, his face wreathed in smiles! Even though he's no longer there, sometimes it seems I can almost hear him yet, a joyful sound carried on the winds of memory.

The last sound, now heard only rarely due in part to my departure from truck driving a decade ago, and in part to truck manufacturers designing new, quieter electric horns -- the sound of a truck's air horn borne on the night wind. It is at once a lonely sound and a comforting sound, because the man or woman at the wheel is hauling goods that we need, driving through the night hours to be sure our local stores are stocked and at the ready when we need food or other supplies. It is the sound of a free nation traveling the highways to places we may have never been, or may know only through that "I've been everywhere" sound of the air horn on a Peterbilt or Kenworth.

Sounds that soothe ... you probably have some of your own to recall.

668 words.

My Official Public Comments on the "Forest Service Planning NOI / Notice of Intent"

2010-02-13T23:18:00.000-08:00

My Official Public Comments on the "Forest Service Planning NOI / Notice of Intent"

February 14, 2010

To: fspr@contentanalysisgroup.com Forest Service Planning NOI, C/O Bear West Company, 172 E 500 S, Bountiful, UT 84010

From: Miss Julie Kay Smithson, researcher, author, writer, editor, and consummate born-and-bred American woman, 213 Thorn Locust Lane, London, Ohio 43140. propertyrights@earthlink.net

Although my Official Public Comments are being sent to a very effective and highly paid shredder, the "Content Analysis Group," which is under federal contract to do what it does best, emasculate public comments, I go on record as directing the "Content Analysis Group" to keep my comments whole and unsullied by any "content analysis process," knowing that such a "process" will effectively render my comments sterile, unrecognizable, and totally without any ability to make a difference in this "Forest Service Planning NOI."

Page 16 of this 17-page document: http://www.fs.fed.us/news/2009/releases/12/2009-12-15-noi-prepublication.pdf asks of "the public:" "Specific questions we would like the public to address include: How can the planning rule support the creation of a shared vision for each planning area through the planning process? Local and regional differences will have an impact on desired conditions and on the successful creation and implementation of a shared vision for any given planning area. Given that different areas will have different needs, should the planning rule allow a choice of planning processes? How could the planning rule create different process choices, and how could they be presented in the rule? What kinds of provisions would need to be included to guide and evaluate a process choice? Much discussion has been centered on how land management plans should be viewed; are they strategic documents that lay the foundation for specific future actions to help meet unit goals? Or, should land management plans also make project or activity decisions? Based on your response to the question above, what is the range of options for fully complying with NEPA during land management plan development, amendment, or revision? Should the new planning rule require standards and guidelines that are required for all plans? How can the agency analyze and describe the environmental effects of a planning rule in the environmental impact statement?"

I have made red the above questions, due in total to their professional employment of language deception. I caution those receiving these comments that I am not only fully aware of the extent and strategic purpose of said language deception, but that I am also making every attempt to ensure that others are aware of this "smoke and mirrors" Trojan horse standing at the gates of the owners of our national forests: Americans.

I shall begin with providing the following nine definitions, which some or all, the Forest Service and its partners seem loathe to admit exist, or their often convoluted, faulty and junk science language deception contents. The sole exception is the Forest Service Original Intent and Purpose, which today's Forest Service and its partners would steamroll in their headlong rush to close every square inch of federal land and the natural resources on and under said federal land.

Acquisition, in this case, would appear to mean the acquisition of Americans' independence, self-reliance, pursuit of property/happiness, and freedom. "Future generations" rings hollow when good, honest Americans learn just whose "future generations" are planned to be "allowed" to partake in the future "envisioned" nirvana. It darned sure isn't planned to be us Regular Joes!

Content Analysis Process (CAP) – Public responses on the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking are documented and analyzed using a process called content analysis. This is a systematic process of compiling and categorizing all public viewpoints and concerns submitted on a plan or project. Content analysis is intended to help decision makers clarify or adjust the next phase of the project. Information from public meetings, letters, emails, faxes, and other sources are all included in this analysis. In the content analysis process, each response is assigned a unique number. This number allows analysts to link specific comments to original responses. All respondents’ names and addresses are entered into a project-specific database program, enabling creation of a complete list of all respondents. Analysts read and code responses using the coding structure. Each comment is coded by subject and verified by a second analyst for accuracy and consistency. Then all coded comments are entered verbatim into a comment database. Database reports track all input and allow analysts to identify public concerns and to analyze the relationships among them. The final analysis document includes an executive summary, which discusses respondents’ main areas of concern, and a formal list of public concern statements. Each public concern statement is accompanied by one or more sample excerpts from original responses. This process and the resulting document do not replace responses in their original form. Rather, they provide a map to the responses and other input on file at the office of the Content Analysis Team (CAT) … Interested parties are encouraged to read public comment firsthand. It is important to recognize that the consideration of public comment is not a vote-counting process in which the outcome is determined by the majority opinion. Relative depth of feeling and interest among the public can serve to provide a general context for decisionmaking. However, it is the appropriateness, specificity, and factual accuracy of comment content that serves to provide the basis for modifications to planning documents and decisions. Further, because respondents are self-selected, they do not constitute a random or representative public sample. The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) encourages all interested parties to submit comment as often as they wish regardless of age, citizenship, or eligibility to vote. Respondents may therefore include businesses, people from other countries, children, and people who submit multiple responses. Therefore, caution should be used when interpreting comparative terms in the summary document. Every substantive comment and suggestion has value, whether expressed by one respondent or many. All input is read and evaluated and the analysis team attempts to capture all relevant public concerns in the analysis process. http://roadless.fs.fed.us/documents/xcsumm/Appendices053102.pdf (Note: To see what the Content Analysis Process does to a public comment, visit: http://www.fs.fed.us/r2/mbr/projects/rec/adobepdf/winter_rec_public_involvement.pdf, click Edit, then Find, and type 464 in the search box. See Page 1 of this 65-page document to see how the eight-step dissection was performed. My original public comment has been destroyed, replaced with eleven bits and totally unrecognizable as mine. In fact, the only place my name appears is initially, on Page 6, coupled with the number 464. Eleven sanitized portions of my comments appear, herded with other numbers, in eleven places, each part utterly separated from the whole. This “process” effectively guts public comments, their tone and meaning.)

Forest – An ecosystem that is characterized by stands of trees varying in characteristics such as species composition, structure, age class, and associated processes, and commonly including meadows, streams, fish, and wildlife. – Draft Environmental Impact Statement [DEIS] for the Revision of the Resource Management Plans of the Western Oregon Bureau of Land Management Districts, Volume II [of 3 Volumes, plus maps] End Pages http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/deis/files/vol%202/chapter%205/WOPR_DEIS_Glossary.pdf – 385 / 1 of 12 pages or Pages 387/857 – 396/866, if viewing the CD; 1.34 MB. Entire document’s Table of Contents: http://www.blm.gov/or/plans/wopr/deis/ 2. The land use designation for land on which the primary vegetation are trees or other woody plants (climax, natural, or introduced plant community) and use may be for the production of wood products. – Part 502 – Terms and Abbreviations Common to All Programs, Subpart A – Common Terms – M.440.502.A.00 – 502.00 – M.440.502.A.00 Amendment 30 – August 2005. Definitions, NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) eDirectives (electronic directives system), United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) http://directives.sc.egov.usda.gov/viewDirective.aspx?id=1638 (50 unnumbered pages)

Forest Service (Original Intent and Purpose): "And now, first and foremost, you can never afford to forget for a moment what is the object of our forest policy. That object is not to preserve forests because they are beautiful, though that is good in itself; nor because they are refuges for the wild creatures of the wilderness, though that, too, is good in itself; but the primary object of our forest policy, as of the land policy of the United States, is the making of prosperous homes. It is part of the traditional policy of home making in our country. Every other consideration comes as secondary. You yourselves have got to keep this practical object before your minds: to remember that a forest which contributes nothing to the wealth, progress, or safety of the country is of no interest to the Government, and should be of little interest to the forester. Your attention must be directed to the preservation of forests, not as an end in itself, but as the means of preserving and increasing the prosperity of the nation." - President Teddy Roosevelt, speaking to the Society of American Foresters in 1903. (emphasis added) Sources: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org/forestfrms.htm and http://tongass-fpadjust.net/Documents/Appeals/Kootznoowoo/Kootznoowoo%20Attachment%202.pdf

Rehabilitation – Actions undertaken to return an injured resource to its baseline condition, as measured in terms of the injured resource’s physical, chemical, or biological properties or the services it previously provided. – DOI/USFWS http://www.google.com/search?q=cache:w7JhnVb3hxwJ:www.fws.gov/midwest/nepa/FoxRiverNEPA/documents/AppendixA2.pdf+glossary+restoration+%22to+return+an+injured+resource+to+its+baseline+condition.%22&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us&lr=lang_en 2. The activities necessary to repair damage or disturbance caused by wildland fires or the fire suppression activity. – KIPZ – Kootenai and Idaho Panhandle National Forests http://www.fs.fed.us/kipz/documents/reference/glossary.shtml 3. Actions taken to restore or reclaim site productivity, water quality or other values. – Appendix H (Biological Assessment and Evaluation for Revised Land and Resource Management Plans and Associated Oil and Gas Leasing Decisions) http://www.fs.fed.us/ngp/final/pdf_feis/Appendix_H.pdf 4. The upgrading of a building previously in a dilapidated or substandard condition. – City of Scottsdale, Arizona, Planning, Building and Zoning Reference Guide Glossary. http://www.scottsdaleaz.gov/generalplan/Glossary.asp 5. Improvements to a natural resource that return it to a good condition but not the condition prior to disturbance. Also, ”replacing selected original attributes of particular value to humans... or putting a natural resource to a new or greatly-altered use to serve human purposes." (Cairns, John, Jr. 1991. "The status of the theoretical and applied science of restoration ecology". The Environmental Professional 13 (3) p 187.) Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC) http://www.itrcweb.org/Documents/ECO-2.pdf (page 104/B-1 of 154 pages) 6. Actions undertaken to return an injured resource to its baseline condition, or to a close approximation, as measured in terms of the injured resource’s physical, chemical or biological properties or the services it previously provided. – Draft Conceptual Restoration Plan for Whitewood Creek and the Belle Fourche and Cheyenne River Watersheds, South Dakota, September 29, 2004, prepared by: South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks; South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources; United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management; and United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Draft Plan. http://www.fws.gov/southdakotafieldoffice/CONCEPTUAL%20NATURAL%20RESOURCE%20RESTORATION%209-15-2004%20backup.pdf (Page 91/83 of 111 pages; 1.05 MB) 7. Altering a degraded habitat in order to improve ecological function. http://www.nps.gov/plants/restore/library/glossary.htm See also: Restoration

Restoration – (excuse for land acquisition) Holistic actions taken to modify an ecosystem to achieve desired, healthy, and functioning conditions and processes. Generally refers to the process of enabling the system to resume its resiliency to disturbances. – Appendix H (Biological Assessment and Evaluation for Revised Land and Resource Management Plans and Associated Oil and Gas Leasing Decisions) http://www.fs.fed.us/ngp/final/pdf_feis/Appendix_H.pdf 2. Measures undertaken to return a degraded ecosystem's functions and values, including its hydrology, plant and animal communities, and/or portions thereof, to a less degraded ecological condition. – Patuxent Wildlife Research Center Glossary (USGS, United Nations) http://www.pwrc.usgs.gov/educatnl/glossary/index.cfm 3…[R]estoration means the return of an ecosystem or habitat toward: its original structure, natural complement of species, and natural functions or ecological processes. http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-IMPACT/2000/November/Day-09/i28509.htm B. Definition of Restoration and Compensation A. The Plan’s use of the word “restoration” is confusing and contradicts its use in Alternative 2.B. It does not make sense to “restore” lands that were not injured or damaged. Response: A. The Draft Plan (Conceptual Restoration and Compensation Plan for Whitewood Creek and the Belle Fourche and Cheyenne River Watersheds, South Dakota, January 2005) frequently uses the word “restoration” within the Plan’s title and throughout the document, including the various action alternatives. We acknowledge and apologize that our use of the word was confusing to some readers since the general understanding of the definition of restoration is “to make something better or bring it back to its original condition.” However, we employed CERCLA’s [Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (Superfund)] definition of restoration, which is broad, in order to best compensate the public. CERCLA defines restoration as “includes, but is not limited to, on-site restoration, off-site enhancement, replacement of similar local resources via management practices, habitat reconstruction, rehabilitation, acquisition, replacement or other techniques.” To better describe Alternative 2, we have replaced the word “restoration” with “reclamation” as a result of this comment. Further, we have added the word “compensation” to the Plan’s title. B. It does seem odd that the Plan would propose to “restore” lands that are not injured or damaged. However, as explained above, the Plan employs CERCLA’s definition of “restoration.” Where applicable, the Plan also will use the word “compensate.” No other changes were made to the Plan as a result of this comment. Page 125: http://southdakotafieldoffice.fws.gov/Final%20Conceptual%20Restoration%20Plan.pdf 4. Bringing back a forest ecosystem to a prior, less-disturbed state (prior to the settlement of Anglo-Europeans). http://www.nps.gov/grca/compliance/pdf/forest-EA.pdf 5. As noted in Section V.B.3, supra, the GMA/SMA [Growth Management Act/Shoreline Management Act] total statutory scheme contains a substantive duty to “preserve, protect, enhance, and restore” the ecosystems of shorelines of statewide significance. The City has defined the term “restoration” as follows: Return of an ecosystem to a close approximation of its previously existing condition (modified from NRC 1992). For example, building a wetland on a non-upland site where a wetland previously existed would be considered restoration. SEWIP [The Snohomish Estuary Wetland Integration Plan http://www.everettwa.org/default.aspx?ID=978 ], Glossary page 7. The term “restoration” has been defined by Ecology as follows: “Restoration” or “ecological restoration” means the significant reestablishment or upgrading of ecological shoreline functions through measures such as revegetation, removal of intrusive shoreline structures and removal or treatment of toxic materials. Restoration does not necessarily imply returning the shoreline area to aboriginal or pre-European settlement conditions.” WAC [Washington Administrative Code] 173-26. Supp. Ex. No. 1, at 9. Everett’s SMP adopts a series of goals, policies, objectives and regulations addressed to “restoration.” Among these are: [Goal 2] To promote and enhance the public interest by protecting, enhancing, restoring, and preserving ecological functions and ecosystem-wide processes, while allowing development in Everett’s Urban Growth Boundary. http://www.gmhb.wa.gov/central/decisions/2003/2309c_Corrected_ESC_FDO.htm 8. Return of an ecosystem to a close approximation of its condition prior to disturbance. Interstate Technology and Regulatory Council (ITRC) http://www.itrcweb.org/Documents/ECO-2.pdf (page 104/B-1 of 154 pages) 9. Specific actions taken to improve or restore habitat or associated ecosystems to potential natural conditions. – USFWS, Conservation Agreement and Conservation Strategy, Columbia Spotted Frog (Rana Luteiventris) Toiyabe Great Basin Subpopulation Nevada, September 2003. http://www.fws.gov/nevada/protected_species/amphibians/documents/csf/frog_toiyabenomaps.pdf (page 5/iv; 307 KB) 10. Includes, but is not limited to, on-site restoration, off-site enhancement, replacement of similar local resources via management practices, habitat reconstruction, rehabilitation, mitigation, acquisition, replacement or other techniques. – Draft Conceptual Restoration Plan for Whitewood Creek and the Belle Fourche and Cheyenne River Watersheds, South Dakota, September 29, 2004, prepared by: South Dakota Department of Game, Fish and Parks; South Dakota Department of Environment and Natural Resources; United States Department of Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service; United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management; and United States Department of Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Draft Plan. http://www.fws.gov/southdakotafieldoffice/CONCEPTUAL%20NATURAL%20RESOURCE%20RESTORATION%209-15-2004%20backup.pdf (Page 91/83 of 111 pages; 1.05 MB) 11. Altering an area in such a way as to reestablish an ecosystem’s structure and function, usually bringing it back to its original (pre-disturbance) state or to a healthy state close to the original. http://www.nps.gov/plants/restore/library/glossary.htm See also Rehabilitation

Restoration (cultural) – (excuse for land acquisition) The act or process of accurately depicting the form, features, and character of an existing historic structure, landscape, or object as it appeared at a particular period of time, by removing modern additions and replacing lost portions of historic fabric, paint, or other elements. – National Park Service, Yosemite Valley Plan SEIS (Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement), Volume IB Part 2, Glossary http://www.nps.gov/yose/planning/yvp/seis/vol_Ib_p2/gloss_1.html

Restoration (natural) – (excuse for land acquisition) Work conducted to remove impacts to natural resources and restore natural processes, and to return a site to natural conditions. – National Park Service, Yosemite Valley Plan SEIS (Supplemental Environmental Impact Statement), Volume IB Part 2, Glossary http://www.nps.gov/yose/planning/yvp/seis/vol_Ib_p2/gloss_1.html

Restoration or Rehabilitation – (excuse for land acquisition) Actions to be taken to return an injured resource to its baseline condition. – DOI/USFWS http://www.fws.gov/midwest/FoxRiverNEPA/documents/AppendixA.pdf

Restoration/revegetation – (excuse for land acquisition) Re-establishing a habitat or plant community in an area that historically supported it. – U.S. Bureau of Reclamation Glossary http://www.usbr.gov/uc/envdocs/eis/navajo/pdfs/deis_glossary.pdf

~~~~~ end of nine definitions ~~~~~

With the proven track record of both this agency and its policy and definition writers for changing, skewing, and making definitions that are impossible to discern -- due in great probability to the fact that they were never meant to embue clarity -- intelligent comment on any "notice of intent" or "plan" is not possible. Coupled with the fact that "content analysis process" will be exercised on all comments -- the equivalent of running comments through the shredder -- there will actually be no comments. No matter what the blind men may say, the Emperor is still "nekked." No matter what immediate past, present or future heads of this agency may say, the Forest Service is broken, those responsible for its maimed and bleeding carcass pretending to be "part of the process" which is ostensibly to fix what's wrong.

Let me be crystal-clear: A bull in a china shop is not synonymous with one that repairs broken china.

A friend and fellow seeker of truth relating to our (his and mine, being Americans) natural resources and federal, some say "public," lands, is Randy Shipman of Rock Springs, Wyoming, in the southwest corner of that great state. Randy is a thoughtful man, a devoted husband and father, and an American of unquenchable thirst for truth.

Like him, I would die of thirst if it were left up to the Forest Service to provide a drink of truth in the twenty-first century.

Borrowing Randy's words:

'"The Forest Service raises a number of noteworthy concepts in the scoping document (Federal Register - December 18, 2009), foremost being the concept of "restoration," which is heavily stressed but never defined. Nor does the document examine how making "restoration" a priority would affect recreation or other land uses. Rather, the agency asks the public to provide comment on what "restoration" ought to mean. However, last August, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack stated publicly, "Restoration means managing forest lands first and foremost to protect our water resources, while making our forests more resilient to climate change."'"

I close with this reminder to all that I am not flummoxed, but remain more dedicated than ever to alerting, educating and empowering others to tear aside that veil of language deception with which this agency has cloaked itself and its "plans." The Emperor is buck "nekked."

Forest Service (Original Intent and Purpose): "And now, first and foremost, you can never afford to forget for a moment what is the object of our forest policy. That object is not to preserve forests because they are beautiful, though that is good in itself; nor because they are refuges for the wild creatures of the wilderness, though that, too, is good in itself; but the primary object of our forest policy, as of the land policy of the United States, is the making of prosperous homes. It is part of the traditional policy of home making in our country. Every other consideration comes as secondary. You yourselves have got to keep this practical object before your minds: to remember that a forest which contributes nothing to the wealth, progress, or safety of the country is of no interest to the Government, and should be of little interest to the forester. Your attention must be directed to the preservation of forests, not as an end in itself, but as the means of preserving and increasing the prosperity of the nation." - President Teddy Roosevelt, speaking to the Society of American Foresters in 1903. (emphasis added) Sources: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org/forestfrms.htm and http://tongass-fpadjust.net/Documents/Appeals/Kootznoowoo/Kootznoowoo%20Attachment%202.pdf

Miss Julie Kay Smithson, researcher, author, writer, editor, and consummate born-and-bred American woman

213 Thorn Locust Lane

London, Ohio 43140

propertyrights@earthlink.net

3,363 words.

New name quells opposition - NAIS not dead

2010-02-09T21:47:00.000-08:00

New name quells opposition - NAIS not dead

February 9, 2010

By Shirley Knot / Julie Kay Smithson, researcher propertyrights@earthlink.net

Apparently, the answer is still yes. Is a sucker really born every minute? It would seem that that could also be answered in the affirmative.

A "New Framework"

Most of those opposed to the "National Animal Identification System," or "NAIS," seem to have swallowed the thickly baited hook cast upon the opposition waters on February 5, 2010, as "USDA Announces New Framework for Animal Disease Traceability."

http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/!ut/p/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB/.cmd/ad/.ar/sa.retrievecontent/.c/6_2_1UH/.ce/7_2_5JM/.p/5_2_4TQ/.d/1/_th/J_2_9D/_s.7_0_A/7_0_1OB?PC_7_2_5JM_contentid=2010%2F02%2F0053.xml&PC_7_2_5JM_parentnav=LATEST_RELEASES&PC_7_2_5JM_navid=NEWS_RELEASE#7_2_5JM

When I read that, I do not get the feeling that "NAIS" is dead. Au contraire! "NAIS" is very much alive, locked and loaded in the belly of the Trojan horse named Language Deception.

In my work, I deal with definitions every day, at least hourly. Due to my unquenchable thirst for knowledge and "what things mean," the past decade has been a real learning experience. One of the first lessons learned was that government and other organizations with surreptitious strategic plans, have well-trained individuals in their employ that are masters at the Etch-A-Sketch of language deception. When one word or phrase in a plan becomes a "hot potato," it's no problem. The LDEs (language deception experts) simply invent another. The requirements are few, but important: the word/phrase must be something that most people trust, something that elicits an emotional 'tic' and/or an intellectual paralysis, i.e., no Red Flag generation when the public reads or hears it.

Examples

If it's called spying, the public will raise a hue and cry, but if it's termed "monitoring" or "managing," there's barely a peep.

If they called themselves "control freaks," the public wouldn't tolerate their sometimes-criminal actions for a New York minute. However, dubbing themselves "conservationists" or "environmentalists" -- while providing definitions for each that make said "control freaks" appear to be vying for Mother Teresa status --

"Global warming" has proven so be such a "hot potato" that it's now being hawked as "climate change" -- which is something that has been occurring naturally since time began!

How can public opposition to hanging "Closed" signs all over federal lands, be squelched? Simple! Just call them places where "endangered" species need "habitat" "protection and restoration!" The Nature Conservancy, which once touted itself as "Nature's Realtor," calls anyplace it seeks to control "one of the 'last great places.'" Slick, eh?

Words of caution

"NAIS" is anything but dead. It is, like the Medusa, a monster with many heads. Lop off "NAIS" and "New Framework for Animal Disease Traceability" crops right up. The only way to stop such a scheme to gain control of and access to private property, worldwide, is to figure out a way to make the public think the intent is something that will protect it. When government and/or its agents (think of those airport screeners) can access your property any time and from any location on your property -- not just the front door -- "NAIS" will be in place. By hook or by crook ... and the most effective method for engineering this trespass is to cloak it in language deception.

If it sounds good, consider who developed those "warm and fuzzy" sounding sound bytes. The fat lady has not yet begun to sing.

521 words.

~~~~~

Smithson is a property rights researcher, writer, editor and wordsmith in Ohio's Amish & Mennonite farm country. Her websites: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org & http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com & http://tips2ussavethem.blogspot.com She also writes a weekly column for: http://OurCommunityNewspaper.com

Safe Harbor Agreements (SHAs) Coming to California First

2010-01-24T14:52:00.000-08:00

Safe Harbor Agreements (SHAs) Coming to California First – California Rangeland Conservation Coalition: Safe Harbor Agreement/Voluntary Local Program starts in 2010

By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org and http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com

The “Safe Harbor Agreement” program is being proposed by the California Rangeland Conservation Coalition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game, and should be fully approved by the end of 2009. Information included in this article may be difficult to fathom, but it is taken directly from the information being made available to property owners.

The following is excerpted from the 2-page “Safe Harbor Agreements for Private Landowners” Pamphlet: "The Safe Harbor Program encourages non-Federal landowners to restore, enhance, and maintain habitats for federally-listed species. ... Examples of activities covered under Safe Harbor Agreements include routine ranching and agriculture activities and maintenance of existing transmission lines. ... [Q] Does the Safe Harbor Program provide funding for restoration and enhancement activities? [A] There is no funding associated with Safe Harbor Agreements; however, the FWS can provide information on grant programs for restoration and enhancement activities. ... After the 10-year duration of the Safe Harbor Agreement, the landowner can either renew the agreement, or elect to return the property back to baseline conditions." http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/Partnerships/safe_harbor_agreement_pamphlet.pdf (2 pages; 273.69 KB)

When implemented, the Safe Harbor Agreement is designed to protect participating landowners if, during routine farming or ranching operations, they accidentally harm approximately twenty species that are currently protected under both the federal and state Endangered Species Acts. The program will cover the "incidental take" (Take that results from, but is not the purpose of, carrying out an otherwise lawful activity. – Glossary for Endangered Species Act terms. (DOI/USFWS) http://www.fws.gov/midwest/Endangered/glossary/) of protected species on private ranchland in four the Northern California counties of Shasta, Tehama, Butte and Glenn.

The California Rangeland Conservation Coalition – which includes the California Farm Bureau Federation and the California Cattlemen's Association, as well as more than 75 other agricultural organizations, environmental groups and state and federal agencies – will offer informational materials and meetings to interested landowners once the proposed program is approved. "In part, the proposed agreement recognizes the value of grazing and other land stewardship practices of California's ranchers as essential for species management," said Noelle Cremers, CFBF natural resources and commodities director, who called the agreement the result of collaboration among agricultural groups, government agencies and environmental organizations.

To bring the state's safe harbor agreement program into closer alignment with federal requirements, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed Senate Bill 448 into law on October 11, 2009. "We worked very closely with Defenders of Wildlife (DOW) and helped ensure the state legislation that supports the program works well for farmers and ranchers. Now, with the bill approved, we're able to more easily create programs that provide protections for state or federally listed species, and those listed by both," Cremers said. – 'Safe harbor' plan recognizes benefit of land stewardship, October 21, 2009, California Farm Bureau Federation http://www.cfbf.com/agalert/AgAlertStory.cfm?ID=1415&ck=A60937EBA57758ED45B6D3E91E8659F3#

Under a Safe Harbor Agreement, participating landowners voluntarily undertake management activities on their property to enhance, restore, or maintain habitat benefiting species listed under the [Endangered Species] Act, Safe Harbor Agreements, and the subsequent enhancement of survival permits that are issued pursuant to Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the [Endangered Species] Act (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), encourage private and other non-Federal property owners to implement conservation measures for federally listed species by assuring property owners that they will not be subjected to increased land use restrictions as a result of efforts to attract or increase the numbers or distribution of a listed species on their property. Application requirements and issuance criteria for enhancement of survival permits through Safe Harbor Agreements are found in 50 CFR 17.22(c). – U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service http://www.epa.gov/fedrgstr/EPA-SPECIES/2008/March/Day-21/e5741.htm

This programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement and Voluntary Local Program (Agreement) is entered into between the California Cattlemen’s Association (Program Administrator), the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service), and the California Department of Fish and Game (Department); hereinafter collectively called the “Parties.” This is a voluntary program that recognizes the unique and important role that private landowners in California can play in helping wildlife valued by the people of the state and of the nation. The purpose of this Agreement is to enable land management activities beneficial to sensitive species to be carried out on non-Federal land while providing protections to participating landowners (Cooperators) from increased regulations resulting from the presence of listed species. (Page 1) Draft Agreement:
http://www.fws.gov/sacramento/Partnerships/Documents/CRCC_Programmatic_Safe_Harbor_7-31-09_draft.pdf (70 pages; 1.36 MB)

This Agreement follows the Service’s Safe Harbor Agreement policy (64 FR 32717) and regulations (64 FR 32706), which implement this policy. Upon approval, this Agreement will serve as the basis for the Service to issue an Enhancement of Survival Permit (Permit) under Section 10(a)(1)(A) of the ESA. The Federal Permit authorizes the incidental taking of the Covered Species during habitat restoration activities, as well as activities associated with routine and ongoing agricultural and rangeland management. This Agreement also follows the Department’s Voluntary Local Program (VLP) regulations (California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 14, § 786), which implements Article 3.5. Incidental Take Associated with Routine and Ongoing Activities § 2086 et. seq. of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). In cooperation with the Safe Harbor Agreement, this VLP is designed to provide sufficient flexibility to maximize participation and to gain maximum wildlife benefits without compromising the economics of agricultural operations. Additionally, the Federal and State Take authorizations allow Incidental Take of Covered Species (but not *Species of Special Concern) if a Cooperator chooses to return their property to Baseline conditions. Ibid. Page 2

The California Cattlemen’s Association serves as the Program Administrator of the Programmatic Safe Harbor Agreement/Voluntary Local Program and is authorized to enter into both Cooperative Agreements with landowners who enroll land in the program and Neighboring Landowner Agreements with landowners who own land adjacent to or within the immediate vicinity of land enrolled in the program. Ibid. Page 36

"For each Enrolled Property, pre-Agreement conditions (baseline) shall be based upon a survey of the Enrolled Property, not more than 18 months prior to the signing of the Cooperative Agreement, to delineate the locations of all habitats for listed species and **Species of Conservation Concern that will be covered under the Cooperative Agreement. The following Baseline Habitat Worksheets are designed to be used for each potential Enrolled Property for each potential Covered Species and Species of Conservation Concern." Ibid. Page 39

Certificate of Inclusion

This certifies that the property described as follows [DESCRIPTION], owned by [NAME OF COOPERATOR], is included within the scope of the Enhancement of Survival permit issued by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service on [DATE] (Permit No._____) and the Approval and Take Authorization issued by the California Department of Fish and Game on [DATE] (Take Authorization No. ____), each for a 50-year term, to the California Cattlemen’s Association under the authority of § 10(a)(1)(A) of the Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended, and in accordance with §2086 of CESA, respectively. The Permit and Authorization allow certain activities by participating landowners as part of the Safe Harbor Agreement/Voluntary Local Program to maintain, restore, and enhance habitat for the Covered Species, while providing incidental take coverage for associated habitat enhancement and routine and ongoing ranching and agricultural activities. Pursuant to these authorizations and this Certificate, the holder of this Certificate is authorized to engage in activities on the above described property that may result in the incidental taking of such species, subject only to the terms and conditions of the Safe Harbor Agreement/Voluntary Local Program Programmatic Agreement, the Permit and Authorization, and Cooperative Agreement No. _______ entered into by the California Cattlemen’s Association and [NAME OF COOPERATOR] on [DATE]. Ibid. Page 30

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Contact: Rick Kuyper, 2800 Cottage Way, Room W-2605, Sacramento, California 95825. richard_kuyper@fws.gov or 916-414-6600. Fax: 916-414-6712/6713

Definitions:

*Species of Special Concern – A native species whose population is low and limited in distribution or has suffered significant reductions because of habitat loss. – Bureau of Land Management, Chapter 9, Glossary PRB O & G DEIS. http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wy/information/NEPA/prb-deis.Par.5535.File.dat/15chap_09.pdf (Page 9-16 of 9-18 pages; 87.59 KB)

**Species of Conservation Concern – Species whose persistence or abundance in an area is threatened by development. – Wildlife Friendly Guidelines, Community and Project Planning, Arizona Game and Fish Department (AZGFD) February 2009.
http://www.azgfd.gov/pdfs/w_c/WildlifeFriendlyDevelopment.pdf (Page 38/39 of 43/44 pages; 2.65 MB)

1,390 words.

Article citation: "First published in the January 2010 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

2nd decade of providing carefully researched information. propertyrights@earthlink.net Websites: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com & http://tips2ussavethem.blogspot.com Also: http://ourcommunitynewspaper.com

Parallel Universe - When Two Worlds Collide: A 2009 three-part article series for the Progressive Rancher

2009-12-13T10:55:00.000-08:00

Parallel Universe - When Two Worlds Collide: A 2009 three-part article series for the Progressive Rancher

Parallel Universe, Part One: When Two Worlds Collide – Ranching and litigation

Article citation: "First published in the August/September 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com/2009/08/parallel-universe-part-one-when-two.html

Parallel Universe, Part Two: When Two Worlds Collide – Justice and ‘equal access to justice’

Article citation: "First published in the October/November 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com/2009/10/parallel-universe-part-two-when-two.html

Parallel Universe, Part Three: Ranchers ARE Environmentalists

Article citation: "First published in the December 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com/2009/12/parallel-universe-part-three-when-two.html

Providing carefully researched information since 1999. propertyrights@earthlink.net Websites: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com & http://tips2ussavethem.blogspot.com

Parallel Universe, Part Three: When Two Worlds Collide - Ranchers ARE Environmentalists

2009-12-13T10:47:00.000-08:00

Parallel Universe, Part Three: When Two Worlds Collide - Ranchers ARE Environmentalists

December 11, 2009

By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net
http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org and http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com

Some wise person once said that, before you can know where you’re going, you’ve got to know where you’ve been. Historic ranches garner awards, their roots soaking up the fertility of the soil, the lifeblood of judicious water use and the bounty to be had from an eagerness to try new things. From crops to livestock, new ways to grow both may mean trying entirely new concepts. Ranching in the New West means embracing experience while leaving the door open for new techniques. Ranchers put their all into their ranches, and it shows. The line of distinction -- between optimum habitat for people, livestock and wildlife, and poorly managed, or non-managed, federally controlled land – shows who the real stewards of the land and water are: ranchers.

The Purdy Ranch – Picabo, Idaho

Beavers and the Downcut Riparian: Copper Creek, on the 10,000-acre Purdy Ranch has been in the same family since the mid-nineteenth century. About that time, beavers were trapped out for their pelts. By the 1970s, 150 years later, the creek sported the regular symptoms of watershed disease -- soil compaction, sagebrush invasion, intense storm water downcutting. Rancher and conservationist Bud Purdy began a combined, deferred grazing plan (keeping cows out of the riparian during critical times) with seeding and brush control. At first, he tried constructing dams to reduce channel erosion, but 70 percent of them would not hold against flood peaks. Lew Fence (Wood River Conservation and Development Council) and Dale Roberts (Soil Conservation Service) suggested beavers, because beaver dams hold water better than human equivalents, and a colony of beavers build and re-build dams for free (or, at least, for inner bark). The successful results: The water table rose, 33 beaver dams were built in five years, the pool area exceeded 6 acres with correspondingly more wildlife, riparian area, longer flow seasons and some small trout. Noteworthy is the combination of deferred grazing, beavers and the "Beaver Committee," a unique interagency group that transplants "problem" beavers (beavers that chew up semi-rural apple orchards), relocating them to livestock-raising watersheds. The new co-evolution of ranchers and conservationists usually requires new, less formal public/private institutions like the Beaver Committee. – Source: "Co-Evolution of Ranching & Conservation Communities" (excerpt) by Peter Warshall, Originally published in Whole Earth magazine, Issue 90: Summer 1997, Page 70. http://74.125.93.132/search?q=cache:ANL2ktz5jOMJ:www.questiaschool.com/read/5000483624%3Ftitle%3DCoEvolution%2520of%2520Ranching%2520%2526%2520Conservation%2520Communities+2002+%22Bud+Purdy%22+%22Picabo,+Idaho%22&cd=5&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us&lr=lang_en
On August 20, 2002, Bud Purdy was honored for his efforts to improve grazing land management on privately owned grazing lands by the Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS). NRCS State Conservationist Richard Sims recognized Purdy for his contributions as a member of the National Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative Steering Committee. The USDA Honor Award, which Sims presented to Purdy, is the most prestigious honor bestowed by the Secretary of Agriculture. "The honor award is a tribute to Bud for his commitment to meeting conservation needs of private grazing lands," said Sims. "As a member of the national steering committee, he has volunteered hundreds of hours of his personal time to increase public awareness of the values of the nation’s private grazing lands. His ability to work effectively with all levels of public and private organizations has been critical to the success of the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative. We also value his expertise as a member of the Idaho Grazing Lands Steering Committee." Purdy represents the Society for Range Management on both the national and state Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative steering committees. Source: http://www.id.nrcs.usda.gov/news/newsreleases/idaho_ranch.html

Maddux Cattle Company, Chase County, Nebraska

On October 17, 2009, southwestern Nebraska rancher Jack Maddux, of the Maddux Cattle Company in Chase County, received the 32nd annual Golden Spur Award, naming him the nation's top rancher. '"More than bringing prestige to an individual, the award spotlights the humanistic and scientific contributions of the livestock and ranching industries," says Robert D. Josserand, chairman of the National Cattlemen's Foundation, which nominated Maddux for the award.' Source: Nebraska Farmer, October 26, 2009. http://www.nebraskafarmer.com/story.aspx?s=32593 The ranch, homesteaded in 1886, is very productive, successfully running red Angus 123 years later.

"Great ranches are not made of the dirt, water, wind and grass that comprise their environment. They are formed and sustained by the character of the people attached to them." – Charles P. Schroeder, executive director of the National Cowboy and Western Heritage Museum in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

The XXX Ranch, Tarrant County, Texas

“I want to assure you that among the cattlemen, there is a great deal of pride and a little competitive spirit to see who can be the best wildlife manager. ... I just wish, very much, that the working environmentalists -- and I guarantee you there is no more dedicated environmentalist than the farmer or rancher who lives on that land, makes his living from it, works with it all year long, year after year, and wants to leave it better than he found it -- were more recognized by the nominal environmentalists, who would rather talk about it than do it. ... Some have blamed greed of early ranchers for degradation of rangelands, when almost invariably it was lack of knowledge that led to decline. The science and art of rangeland management has been developed only in the past 50 years. With this knowledge -- provided by SCS (Soil Conservation Service) technicians through locally governed Soil and Water Conservation Districts, using information developed by federal and state experiment stations and the ranchers and technicians themselves -- dedicated ranchers voluntarily made tremendous strides in brush suppression, grazing management, and restoration of rangelands during the 1940s, 50s, and 60s. Progress has been slowed in the past 20 years by reduced technical assistance available for grazing lands and by the increase of production costs over prices received that has reduced capital available for needed improvements. During recent years, brush encroachment, especially by juniper, has taken over abandoned cropland fields and continued to invade rangelands. ... it is astonishing that the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service says that endangered species recovery plans are exempt from the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process. It is hard to believe that anyone would consider a recovery plan not to be a major federal action, and I hope that policy statement will be carefully investigated by congressional staff for legitimacy.” – Source: Excerpted (pages 84, 85, & 218, from a statement by John L. Merrill, Burnett Ranches; Professor, Texas Christian University; Member of the National Steering Committee for the Grazing Lands Conservation Initiative (GLCI). "Full text of 'Department of Agriculture's activities related to the yellow-cheeked warbler: hearing before the Subcommittee on Department Operations and Nutrition of the Committee on Agriculture, House of Representatives, One Hundred Third Congress, second session, September 16, 1994, Cleburne, Texas.'" http://www.archive.org/stream/departmentofagri00unit/departmentofagri00unit_djvu.txt It should be noted that John L. "Chip" Merrill had, at that time, directed the ranch management program at TCU for the past 33 years, since 1961, as well as being a past president of the International Society for Range Management, a long-time member of the Wildlife Society, professional member of the Society of American Foresters, and a director of the Texas and Southwestern Cattle Raisers Association. Though the Internet mentions many accolades he’s received, he prefers to continue learning rather than rest on his considerable laurels, still at the helm of the XXX Ranch in Tarrant County, Texas.

The Adams Ranch, Meade County, Kansas, and Beaver County, Oklahoma

"Biological Control Demonstration Project: Adams Ranch, Meade County, Kansas. The landowners are demonstrating biological control of tamarisk using goats. Approximately 100 head of goats were confined for feeding in a 10-acre plot infested with tamarisk. The project offered much information on appropriate stocking rates, predation, viability, and feeding habits of the goats." – 10-Year Strategic Plan for the Comprehensive Control of Tamarisk and Other Non-Native Phreatophytes. The project continued for a second year, but the goats didn't consume the tamarisk to the point of its demise, and the trial was halted. Source: http://www.kwo.org/Reports%20&%20Publications/Rpt_Tamarisk_10-Year_Plan_FINAL_120805_sm.pdf (Page 19 of 39 pages; 2.98 MB)

"We've been raising cattle on this land since 1890. We have to be good stewards or we'd go out of business. It's not our livelihood; it's our life! We spend thousands of dollars getting rid of noxious weeds and we have more of the desirable grasses." – Rancher Judy Adams.

The Three Circle (000) Livestock LLC – Carbon and Albany Counties, Wyoming

“The 2nd Annual NACD/NRCS (Natural Resources Conservation Service) Olin Sims Conservation Leadership Award was presented to Wyoming rancher Ralph Brokaw on February 3rd, 2009, during the National Association of Conservation Districts (NACD) annual meeting in New Orleans. Brokaw was chosen for his outstanding leadership and service in conserving natural resources. … The Brokaw family ranch, the Three Circle (000) Livestock LLC, located near Arlington, Wyoming, is a testament to his passion for healthy lands. His commitment to natural resource conservation management makes him a leader and example in his community and throughout Wyoming. Bobbie Frank, Executive Director of WACD (Wyoming Association of Conservation Districts), said, “I am sure I speak for all of our Conservation Districts in congratulating Ralph on receiving the Olin Sims Leadership Award. It is a very deserving award for the work Ralph has done for natural resource conservation efforts in Wyoming, the region and at the national level. This award will hold significant meaning to Ralph I am sure, given that it is in memory and honor of his best friend and longtime mentor, Olin Sims.” Established in tribute to the late NACD President, Olin Sims, the award recognizes outstanding conservation leadership at the state and local level. The award is presented annually to an individual, based upon superior service to the conservation community in promoting conservation on private lands. Sims, a rancher from McFadden, Wyoming, lived a life distinguished by years of volunteer service to conservation. “Olin was a true conservationist who was equally committed to practicing conservation and advocating for it,” said NACD President, John Redding. “This award epitomizes the conservation leadership and integrity that was his life and highlights the leadership of other conservationists who assume the mantle of conservation leadership into the future.” Source: http://www.conservewy.com/temp/brokaw.pdf Ralph also received the 2002 Landowner of the Year from the Wyoming Game and Fish Commission for his outstanding commitment to wildlife habitat, including rotational grazing, riparian areas, managed hunting, etc.

Baker Ranches, Inc. – Nevada and Utah

Dean Baker, eastern Nevada rancher and longtime Nevada Cattlemen's Association member -- as well as being on the Board of Directors, the Executive Committee, a Second Vice President, and on various other boards & committees -- was named Nevada’s Outstanding Rancher of the Year in 2003, as well Cattleman of the Year the previous year. Baker Ranches, Inc., run by Dean, his wife, Barbara, and sons Craig, David and Tom, plus veteran buckaroo Lee Whitrock, straddle the Nevada-Utah border. Of its 12,000 acres, 2,000 are in barley, alfalfa and corn, and the ranch also runs about 2,000 head of cattle, and sells high-quality alfalfa hay to California dairies and Las Vegas area horse owners. " ... Nominees for Outstanding Rancher of the Year are evaluated on their conservation planning and resource management objectives, as well as any innovative or unique management practices." Sources: http://www.saveourwildhorse.com/PDF/Blm-Press/BLM2003/Release2004-08-12_Nov-2003.pdf (Page 1 of 7 pages; 80.06 KB) "The U.S. Bureau of Land Management agencies in both Nevada and Utah have honored Dean for his management of grazing allotments on the public domain." – Baker Ranch: A Success Story, March 28, 2005. The Nevada Agricultural Foundation http://www.nvagfoundation.org/NAF/news/article.cfm?id=158

Multi-generational ranch families have always hit the ground running, their dedication helping to feed the world. Ranchers already walk the walk, as evidenced by countless hours of physical and mental work. To talk the talk and explain what they already know so well, is difficult for an independent, self-reliant people, but learning to do so will build a communication bridge that will keep them and their world alive and well for another two hundred years.

“And to protect and care for all His creations, God made ranchers.” – Beverly Merritt, Merritt Ranch, Lincoln County, New Mexico.

1,997 words.

~~~~~

Article citation: "First published in the December 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

Depressurizing this time of year

2009-12-10T14:37:00.001-08:00

Depressurizing this time of year

November 28, 2009

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

This kind of depressurizing isn't about wetsuits and water, but has the same healthful effect.

Many readers are feeling pressured to SSS and SSS -- shop, shop, shop and spend, spend, spend -- at this time of year. It's nice to be able to visit stores and other businesses and give them our business, but do we need to spend simply for spending's sake? How many people do we know that are "hard to shop for" because they already have everything they need?

Here are a few suggestions to help make this Christmas season one you will remember for other reasons besides pressure to spend:

Meet friends/family and take a walk in a nearby park or other relaxing location. Take time to enjoy the beauty of the changing seasons and even bestow random acts of kindness that last a lifetime -- from lying in a pile of leaves to holding gloved or mittened hands and from a friendly hug to a pat on the back for just being able to share such times with others!

Is there a friend or family member that you've not visited with in quite awhile? Consider inviting him/her/them out for a nice meal. The location need not be fancy or high-priced as much as it should be warm and friendly. There are many places to gather and dine that are in Madison County. Go out to eat to a place you can all enjoy, a place you'll be able to hear one another's voices and revel in the retelling of special times while making a new memory. At meal's end, there are no dishes to wash or kitchen cleanup.

A simple phone call to 'visit' -- when an in-person visit isn't possible -- is comforting and comfortable, especially if you can do it at a time that's good for both caller and callee.

The local thrift store is a fine place to go for great items at terrific prices, and the benefits are far-reaching. Some thrift stores' revenues benefit others in your community, and the recipients of your 'thrifting' can range from shared smiles and conversation with others to simply browsing without the pressure of feeling that you must buy something. If you do make a purchase, spending a few dollars on an item that you are certain a special person will love has several benefits, including the recycling of quality, usable items.

Take a nice evening drive and look at the Christmas garlands and lights that are being added to the nighttime scenery this time of year. There are so many displays 'on display' that you needn't go far afield. For those in your vehicle that may feel the cold more, bring a toasty afghan or other warm snuggly for them, and keep in mind that hot beverages are on hand in many places to warm the hands and innards!

Consider the time-honored things to do, like sit down with a pen and paper or cards (and yes! you can make homemade cards that will be cherished) and simply write a little note or letter to someone to tell them how much they mean to you. Just a heartfelt note like "I miss the good times we've had and relive them with you in memory" or "We need to get together in January; let's set a date, and a 'snow date,' now and make plans to share an afternoon or evening" or "My Scrabble game misses your quick wit" -- there are so many ways to tell others that you care!

Our loved ones whose remains rest in local cemeteries are worthy of a visit, even if you simply sit in your car and remember the good times you had with them. Cemeteries need not be places of sadness, but can be places of solace. Deciding to celebrate the good -- and shed the rest -- is a decision that helps everyone feel better.

Take the time to pause and offer yourself to those that need you. This may be done in many forms and can take the form of Christmas caroling, a warm meal delivered, a plate of warm cookies shared with neighbors, a helping hand lent to a local animal shelter, senior center, rec center, local library, historical center -- the possibilities are many, the results, tremendously uplifting. Animals in need of a walk or a meal -- whether they are our pets, lost/abandoned dogs and cats at the shelter, or the backyard birds/wildlife -- will benefit from a little time, a kind voice and your caring.

Do you know someone who needs to get out and run some errands, but doesn't have transportation? Perhaps you could offer your afternoon and take them to places like the grocery store, Post Office, to visit a loved one at a nursing home or cemetery, etc. You'll both be so glad you did!

Do something as simple as sweeping or shoveling a neighbor's sidewalk or driveway. You needn't do it all, but if you are blessed with energy and a bit of steam, it's a great way to expend both and do a wonderful thing at the same time. People become friends over kindnesses. What better time to stretch out our hands and hearts?

869 words.

http://ourcommunitynewspaper.com/2009/11/depressurizing-this-time-of-year/

Thank God for farmers and ranchers

2009-11-19T21:41:00.000-08:00

Thank God for farmers and ranchers

Thank God for farmers and ranchers, who raise the good food I eat;

May He continue to bless them, through life's bitter and life's sweet;

The best food is that grown locally, of that we can be sure;

And we will learn about that, if we visit our farms & ranches, and take a learning tour!

- Julie Kay Smithson, November 18, 2009 (appreciating America's farmers and ranchers every day of the year!)

FromUsToYou: Meandering

2009-11-19T21:38:00.000-08:00

FromUsToYou: Meandering

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

Meander is something streams and rivers do naturally. Hunting dogs tracking a scent also meander, as the quarry's scent wanders to and fro.

Meandering also seems to be something I tend to do this time of year when out for a walk with Wiggles Blue Heeler. Both of us are so immersed in 'the moment' – from the sights, sounds, smells, textures, and colors, to the rarefied atmosphere that comes to Ohio for a short time in October and November: low humidity – that we just drift back and forth across the paths and trails, tarrying in the sun and reveling in the season.

One spectacular day in early September, Wiggles and I went with friends to Indian Lake and took a ride on a pontoon boat (our very first boat ride!), then had a fine afternoon playing virtual badminton (no net) and cooking out. We all meandered that day, on land and water!

On your path in life – but please, not on the road! – may there be just enough meander to bring you smiles and a full heart!

177 words

No Trouble with Christmas

2009-11-14T20:20:00.000-08:00

No Trouble with Christmas

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

I have no trouble with this time of year being called Christmas or the Christmas Season. After all, this Christian nation in which I was born and bred, celebrates December 25th as the day Jesus was born to the Virgin Mary and her husband Joseph in a humble stable in Bethlehem.
On the surface, much of the Reason for this Holy Season seems to have been usurped by advertising agencies that have invented other names for Christmas trees, Christmas vacations, Christmas break, Christmas cookies, Christmas presents.

Harried store "associates" -- once known as cashiers -- dutifully recite, "Happy holidays," which provides the perfect opportunity for me to ask meekly, "Which holidays? The 4th of July? Valentine's Day? Which holidays?" The quick, grateful and joyful reply is often, "Christmas!" and we both smile!

Young parents, struggling to make the most basic of ends meet, may be overwhelmed by the advertising blitz that stresses spending over the nativity's sweet innocence. Christmas need not be a financially depleting holiday. Sharing food, Christmas caroling, and random acts of kindness all get gold stars for simplicity and heartwarming goodwill. Simple popcorn, strung together to make outside tree decorations for birds, need not become an obsolete family tradition. In fact, the blending of new traditions -- like LED Christmas lights, which use almost no electricity -- with old can make us smile without the next-month sticker shock of the credit card invoice.

Nearby are Nativity scenes, some with real people and supporting animal cast, at churches, some gracing the front lawns of private homes. Christmas carols, sung by people with hearts full of love and Christian charity, lighten hearts and brighten spirits. Kindnesses bestowed upon friends, family and strangers alike, surge to the forefront at this time of year. From gifting the gas station attendant in need of one or more of the following: warm gloves, hat, ear muffs, coffee, hot chocolate -- to the simple kindness of a 'grocery cart gathering' to help save store employees a little time outside, such actions will warm both the giver and receiver.

From the offerings of warm water, nuts, corn, bread crusts and crumbs and more to the birds and other animals we love to stay wild -- but still revere the directive of Genesis to have dominion o'er them all -- to the special treats we make and gather for our beloved pets, family and friends, the simplest things can become the most cherished memories. From the unused coats we donate to those whose needs outstrip our blessings, to the myriad ways in which we can make a difference just by being a friend, Christmas shines through with Son Light from our souls.

Those of us who have no trouble with Christmas should be saying it out, strong and clear, celebrating the birth of our Lord, Jesus Christ: We have no trouble with Christmas!

477 words.

Your cravings will tell you ...

2009-11-12T18:19:00.000-08:00

Your cravings will tell you ...

that the seasons are changing, sometimes weeks before the calendar.

When you crave a bowl of hot soup, stew or a potpie, it's a sure sign that summer's fled, to be replaced by autumn. When the last of the garden tomatoes have been nipped by frost, it's fall.

We mourn the passing of this season of homegrown fruits and vegetables, farmers markets, and ice cream stands. When cider replaces ice-chilled drinks, the ninety-degree days of this year are history.

As we get "way down in the fall," the taste of Popsicles and Icees gives way to the desire for "something hot." We pore through the pantry to see what soups and hot drink mixes may await us there.

A sign that winter's at our doorstep is the comforting feel of a hot coffee mug in our fingers, its steaming fragrance wafting into our very soul. Candles with scents of bayberry, cinnamon & clove and pine, meld with hot chocolate and spiced teas. Suddenly, the thought of a casserole or a slow-cooked meal means the home will be warmed and "aromatized" in a most pleasing way!
Enjoy this coming snuggle-season by sharing your warm thoughts, and maybe an extra hot meal, with someone who sorely needs the nourishment both offer. Twill make next spring and summer that much more appreciated! Warm up those snow shovels and blowers and think Thanksgiving and Christmas!

237 words.

What if the HSUS actually wanted Ohio's Issue 2 to pass?

2009-11-08T13:11:00.000-08:00

What if the HSUS actually wanted Ohio's Issue 2 to pass?

November 8, 2009

By Julie Kay Smithson, researcher propertyrights@earthlink.net

The Humane Society of the United States' President and Chief Executive Officer Wayne Pacelle came to Columbus, Ohio, November 2, 2009, on the evening before Election Day, to restlessly pace a stage in one of the Ohio Historical Society's meeting rooms.

It should be noted that the HSUS has no connection to most local humane societies.

Pacelle began by explaining the HSUS' role as "Celebrating animals and confronting cruelty." A visit to the HSUS website shows this statement to be oft-repeated. The predictable "shock power point presentation" -- showing 'downer' cows in what appeared to be slaughterhouse confines and crowded quarters for hogs -- was flanked by a talk that involved almost half the ninety minutes allotted for the "Columbus Town Hall" meeting.

Wearing what appeared to be expensive leather shoes, in apparent contradiction by his mini-rant about "wearing fur" and mention of having been a "strict vegetarian" for the past 25 years, Pacelle incurred the wrath of more than one HSUS supporter in the 250-person audience -- taking up just half the seats in the meeting room theater venue -- by failing to commit to a ballot initiative.

Pacelle became president and CEO of the HSUS midway through 2004, "... after serving for nearly 10 years as the organization's chief lobbyist and spokesperson." Source: HSUS "About Us" http://www.hsus.org/about_us/board_and_staff/experts/experts/wayne_pacelle/ Almost a decade of being steeped in the ways of the professional lobbyist gave Pacelle an education in agendas and being an agent of change. Few, if any, of his Columbus audience, seemed cognizant of the web his talk spun. Knowing the power of molding phrases like "battery cages" and "gestation crates" to a mostly urban group of listeners, Pacelle spoke carefully, statements like "Climate change is a threat to all animals" garnering placid support from those nodding agreement to almost his every word.

Michael Vick and his horrific actions, which led to the torture and death of many dogs -- but only "about 19 months" in prison -- was a sore topic for several in the audience, more than one of whom expressed their disagreement with Pacelle's handling of the case.

Pacelle doggedly stuck to his steering of Vick's milquetoast punishment to a "proactive" meaning of "educating" children, with Vick having the "power to effect change" by speaking out against something for which Vick never expressed remorse. In August 2009, Pacelle stated that Vick "has pledged to make a long-term commitment to participate in our community-based outreach programs to steer inner-city youth away from dog fighting." Source: San Jose Mercury News, October 18, 2009, "Animal rights activists dog Michael Vick": http://www.mercurynews.com/breaking-news/ci_13590511

The Capital Area Humane Society -- an organization with questionable practices -- was lauded at length by Pacelle, while the HSUS boss ignored the tireless work and results achieved by Ohio's dog wardens, animal control officers, and animal shelters.

A real contradiction was stated several times during Pacelle's forty-minute talk. He mentioned the power of strong laws and that many laws not enforced cannot take the place of a few strong laws that are -- then listed the "117 new laws" that HSUS had been instrumental in drafting (writing) and passing in the last year; the "93 new laws" the prior year; the "84 new laws" the year before, and the "65 new laws" the year before. A total of 359 HSUS-influenced laws in four years is anything but "a few" strong laws being enforced.

In a post-election statement, Pacelle said: "We decided to spend nearly no money against Issue 2 and to reserve our energy and resources for [a future] effort." Source: Cleveland Plain Dealer, November 8, 2009, Editorial: http://www.cleveland.com/opinion/index.ssf/2009/11/expect_more_livestock-related.html

It appears to this writer that Pacelle was imitating Brer Rabbit, asking that, whatever voters did, they should not throw him in the briar patch ... when that is precisely what he and his organization wanted. Pacelle's statement was clear and bears repeating: "We decided to spend nearly no money against Issue 2 and to reserve our energy and resources for [a future] effort."

By passing Issue 2, a stake has been driven straight into the heart of Ohio's Constitution, one which inserts an appointed -- not elected -- board of 13 that are given political power to do as they will. All the HSUS, concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs), and other politically and economically-motivated groups need do is get their lobbyists appointed to that board. Ohio voters will then be helpless to remove the proverbial camel from the tent.

Outside the meeting room, refreshments were offered to attendees, including dairy products in the form of "Mini-Moos" half and half creamers. One could only wonder if the creamers came from "free-range" dairy cattle ...

Related definitions:

Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) – An AFO (Animal Feeding Operation) that is defined as a Large CAFO or as a Medium CAFO..., or that is designated as a CAFO... Two or more AFOs under common ownership are considered to be a single AFO for the purposes of determining the number of animals at an operation, if they adjoin each other or if they use a common area or system for the disposal of wastes. [40 CFR 122.23(b)(2)] – U.S. Environmental Protection Agency National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Glossary http://cfpub.epa.gov/npdes/glossary.cfm?program_id=0

Farm – Land under one operating arrangement on which there were, or are, expected sales of at least $1,000 worth of crops, livestock, poultry, or other agricultural products during the year. – Modified Agricultural Weighted Estimators, By Robert G. Pontius, Jr. Research and Applications Division, National Agricultural Statistics Service (NASS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), July 1990. Staff Report No. SSB-90-05, Appendix 1: Glossary http://www.nass.usda.gov/research/reports/Internet_Survey/Modified%20Agricultural%20Weighted%20Estimators.pdf (page 11 of 14 pages; 1.01 MB)

776 words. With related definitions: 936 words.

Parallel Universe, Part Two: When Two Worlds Collide – Justice and ‘equal access to justice’

2009-10-14T21:19:00.000-07:00

Parallel Universe, Part Two: When Two Worlds Collide – Justice and ‘equal access to justice’

By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org and http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com

Today’s atmosphere of seemingly endless litigation, whose outcomes often shut down resource utilization, requires some study to understand. Are the litigants actually “against” the use of resources on, or access to, federal land, or have they other reasons for filing lawsuits? The answer may surprise some readers. It is important to understand why certain actions are being taken that require property owners and resource users to defend their established, proven practices and methods.

Enabling legislation is defined as legislation that authorizes the State to assess, levy, charge, or otherwise mandate payment from external parties and includes a legally enforceable requirement that those resources be used only for the specific purposes stipulated in the legislation. http://www.oregon.gov/DAS/SCD/SARS/policies/oam/15.85.00.PR.pdf

The methods by which the federal system and other states initially select and then elect or retain judges are varied, yet the explicit or implicit goal of the constitutional provisions and enabling legislation is the same: to create and maintain an independent judiciary as free from political, economic and social pressure as possible so judges can decide cases without those influences. – United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, No. 99-4021 http://www.ca8.uscourts.gov/opndir/01/04/994021P.pdf (Page 21 of 89 pages)

Enabling legislation also creates an legal environment in which litigation may be filed in order to correct a wrong or wronged party, clarify a statute that was not easily understood or interpreted, set precedent, etc.

The Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA) Summary (5 U.S.C. § 504; 28 U.S.C. § 2412) provides for the award of attorney fees (up to $125 per hour) and other expenses to eligible individuals and small entities that are parties to litigation against the government. An eligible party may receive an award when it prevails over the government, unless the government’s position was "substantially justified" or special circumstances make an award unjust. To recover “fees and other expenses” under the EAJA, a claimant must show that it is a "prevailing party." Parties are considered to be prevailing parties when they have been successful on any significant issue in litigation that achieves some of the benefit the parties sought. A party must also show that the lawsuit was a material factor in bringing about the desired result and the outcome was required by law and was not a gratuitous act by the government. Finally, whether a party is a small entity for purposes of EAJA is determined by a unique size standard included in the act. Compliance with the size standard is a threshold requirement for an award of fees under the act. – Small Business Administration Office of Advocacy http://www.sba.gov/advo/laws/sum_eaja.html

In 1980, Congress enacted the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) in response to the federal government's growing demand for data from small businesses, individuals, and state and local governments, and attempted to institute controls over government requests for data. – 44 U.S.C. § 3501. http://library.findlaw.com/2003/Jan/14/132464.html

The Information Quality Act (IQA), called the Data Quality Act (DQA) by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), is an attempt by Congress to ensure that federal agencies use and disseminate accurate information. The DQA requires federal agencies to issue information quality guidelines ensuring the quality, utility, objectivity and integrity of information that they disseminate and provide mechanisms for affected persons to correct such information. … Questions that remain unanswered about the Data Quality Act are whether agency information quality guidelines apply to rulemaking and whether an agency's denial of a petition to correct information is reviewable by the courts. … Purpose of the Data Quality Act: Congress enacted the DQA primarily in response to increased use of the Internet, which gives agencies the ability to communicate information easily and quickly to a large audience. Under the DQA, federal agencies must ensure that the information it disseminates meets certain quality standards. Congress' intent was to prevent the harm that can occur when government websites, which are easily and often accessed by the public, disseminate inaccurate information. … Quality of Information: First, the agencies were to adopt a basic standard of quality of information as a performance goal, as well as specific standards of quality appropriate for the various categories of information they disseminate. 67 F.R. at 8459. Each agency was required to publish its own guidelines in the Federal Register as well as on the agency's website. Id. In addition, each agency promulgated guidelines that can be found on OMB's website. See http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg/agency_info_quality_links.html and http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/assets/omb/inforeg/2007_cb/2007_draft_cb_report.pdf (103 pages; 735.20 KB) http://library.findlaw.com/2003/Jan/14/132464.html

31 U.S.C.§ 1304 – US CODE, Title 31, 1304: Judgments, awards, and compromise settlements. (a) Necessary amounts are appropriated to pay final judgments, awards, compromise settlements, and interest and costs specified in the judgments or otherwise authorized by law when— (1) payment is not otherwise provided for; (2) payment is certified by the Secretary of the Treasury; and (3) the judgment, award, or settlement is payable— (A) under section 2414, 2517, 2672, or 2677 of title 28; (B) under section 3723 of this title; (C) under a decision of a board of contract appeals; or (D) in excess of an amount payable from the appropriations of an agency for a meritorious claim under section 2733 or 2734 of title 10, section 715 of title 32, or section 203 of the National Aeronautics and Space Act of 1958 (42 U.S.C. 2473). (b) (1) Interest may be paid from the appropriation made by this section— (A) on a judgment of a district court, only when the judgment becomes final after review on appeal or petition by the United States Government, and then only from the date of filing of the transcript of the judgment with the Secretary of the Treasury through the day before the date of the mandate of affirmance; or (B) on a judgment of the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit or the United States Court of Federal Claims under section 2516 (b) of title 28, only from the date of filing of the transcript of the judgment with the Secretary of the Treasury through the day before the date of the mandate of affirmance. http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/31/usc_sec_31_00001304----000-.html

The Financial Management Service (FMS) is a bureau of the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Treasury’s role is to “oversee” the use of this appropriation. http://www.fms.treas.gov/judgefund/background.html "The Judgment Fund is available for court judgments and Justice Department compromise settlements of actual or imminent lawsuits against the government." – Overview: Judgment Fund: Programs and Systems: Financial Management Service http://www.fms.treas.gov/judgefund/index.html judgment.fund@fms.treas.gov or 866-277-1046

Because Congress has not articulated a specific standard of adequacy to support a fee application, but has noted that reimbursement of fees and expenses is made in lieu of the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA), the Financial Management Service (FMS) will use EAJA as a guideline for determining the adequacy of applications for reimbursement under this legislation. Generally, applicants should submit an affidavit establishing (1) the attorney's hourly fee rate and how it was determined; and (2) include an itemized statement containing the amount of time spent working on specific tasks and (3) and itemized list of other expenses or costs.

The basic policy of FOIA is one of disclosure. Accordingly, FMS will assume that any information submitted as part of an application for fees and expenses is subject to disclosure. However, FMS will consider an applicant's request that certain material not be disclosed.
http://fms.treas.gov/judgefund/questions_108-007.html

The Western Watersheds Project, a self-described “non-profit conservation group,” is but one example of those organizations engaged in what, at first blush, appear to be valid “environmental” concerns. The WWP and a bevy of like-mined partners -- “ … the Oregon Natural Desert Association in Oregon, Forest Guardians in New Mexico, the Center for Biological Diversity in Arizona, the American Lands Alliance in Washington, D.C.; and the Larch Company in Ashland, Oregon” -- operates what seems to be a selfless campaign for good. “With these groups WWP co-founded the National Public Lands Grazing Campaign that supports federal legislation for a generous and voluntary federal grazing permit buyout program to compensate ranchers and restore public lands. Congressman Raul Grijalva of Arizona sponsors that legislation. WWP’s long-term partner in our efforts to bring the Bureau of Land Management and the Forest Service into compliance with national environmental laws is the non-profit environmental law firm Advocates For The West in Boise, Idaho.”

The WWP makes statements like: "Through vigorous litigation under the Endangered Species Act, Clean Water Act and Federal Land Policy Management Act, WWP has successfully challenged public-lands grazing practices that threaten watersheds and endangered species such as salmon, steelhead and bull trout." http://www.westernwatersheds.org/about

In the past decade alone, WWP has received, through Equal Access to Justice Act provisions, just short of one million dollars. Source: Budd-Falen Law Offices, LLC, Cheyenne, Wyoming.

The commissioners of Owyhee County, Idaho, bravely stood up and questioned U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2004. After more than a year, their reply seemed to put to rest any need to list the sage grouse or protect its habitat from grazing:

"Mr. Hal Tolmie, Chairman of the Board, Owyhee County Board of Commissioners, P.O. Box 128, Murphy, Idaho 83650-0128. Dear Chairman Tolmie: On June 21, 2004, the Owyhee County Board of Commissioners filed a request for correction of information (RFC) [emphasis added] under Section 5 15 of Public Law 106-554, commonly referred to as the Information Quality Act (IQA), with our Wyoming Ecological Services Field Office in regards to a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) 90-day Finding for Petitions to list the greater sage grouse as threatened or endangered under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), published April 21, 2003 (69 FR, No. 77). In that notice, we announced that there was substantial information available to initiate a status review of the species and asked the public to submit any pertinent information concerning the status of or threats to this species. On December 2, 2004, you were notified that the Service needed additional time to respond to your request. Subsequently, the service published a final rule in the Federal Register (70 FR 2279), that the petitioned action to list the greater sage-grouse was not warranted, that the species is not in danger of extinction, nor is it likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. [Emphasis added] The data quality issues you raised in your IQA resulted in additional review and we believe our response addressed them affirmatively. We believe the issues you raised were addressed in the final rule, and unless you feel that they were not adequately addressed, we will not be providing a separate response.” Sincerely, Thomas O. Melius, Assistant Director, External Affairs" – July 18, 2005, [U.S. Fish & Wildlife] Service response on letterhead with Washington, D.C., address. http://www.fws.gov/informationquality/topics/FY2004/Owyhee%20Sage%20Grouse/Response%2018%20July%202005.pdf (1 page; 86.66 KB)

Oftentimes, litigious parties seem more interested in what amounts to the “litigate free” sections of the Equal Access to Justice Act than the actual stated purpose of the lawsuits. If it were as costly for the plaintiffs as it was for the defendants in these cases, most such arbitrary and capricious litigation would come to an abrupt halt. Change in or repeal of this act would bring much-needed relief to American taxpayers without harm to any species.

After reading Part One of this article series, Ohioan G.L. Kronk observed of ranchers: “They have the common sense to rotate their crop, because cattle are a crop.” This is a powerful comment, coming from someone who neither farms nor ranches. The public, every member of which is a consumer, needs to see itself as the direct and active beneficiary of the responsible utilization of natural resources. An educated consumer does not advocate locking up natural resources, but supports production of resources for the mutual benefit of people, animals that are grown for human consumption and those that benefit from the presence of people. “The environment,” deprived of human touch, stewardship and ingenuity, loses its vibrancy, its ability to benefit others and its “reason for being.”

Part Three unites positive change, public action and ranchers.

~~~~~

Article citation: "First published in the October/November 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

Generational harmony, eternal gift

2009-08-16T17:43:00.000-07:00

Generational harmony, eternal gift

August 16, 2009

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

April swirls about me as the hill falls beneath my feet toward the creek. In some places the ground is still cold; in others, it is being warmed by a tender spring sun. Trees are transitioning from bud to leaf; winter-dormant grass is flirting with gamut of green. A young blue heeler cattle dog frolics, still busy learning from my actions whether he should join the herd or observe from a polite distance. He chooses to observe. Good dog! Greatness dipped from the gene pool has been provided to me in spades. If only I can always remain cognizant of that.

Muzzles dripping from their morning thirst-quencher, a clot of horses watches my approach. They've come down from the barn, tummies full of third cutting alfalfa. Ears up, gentle souls survey this person they know well. No flies have come yet to make them stomp or swish. Morning eases into day as the night before retreats.

No grain required

One young lady is first to nicker hello, closely followed by her father's more throaty welcome. The bay filly and her father look so alike -- their color only a tiny part of the equation. They share so much more. Strong bones and hooves, short backs, tulip-shaped ears, black-tipped, well laid back shoulders, musculature built upon generational DNA, minds ever-learning and curious, eager to please, full of playfulness but with no dearth of heart.

A favorite game involves me morphing into a sort of two-legged cutting horse. The first to be worked with has already sensed that he's "it," and he is filled with excited delight, knowing that we're going to do things this morning that will stretch our minds and our muscles. He fairly dances with joy, blowing rollers and tossing that black flag of a tail o'er his back, his hooves cadenced in the poetry of motion, whisking air neath them as they carry him to me. We're close enough to blow our own breath into one another's nostrils ... then he does a perfect rollback and canters up the hill, saying clearly, "Catch me if you can!" I know full well how effortless this is, because he will soon put his nose through a halter, eager to be the chosen one this day. In the interim, I ignore him, smiling as my herd cavorts 'round me, darting this way and that, feigning a charge, only to stretch out my hand to meet an outstretched prehensile equine lip. A touch, then we both whirl and "flee." A fleabitten grey mare with the "bloody shoulder" roan patch, the bottom of the pecking order, has patiently waited for "her turn." Now she accompanies me up the hill, my hand in her mane so she can help me up the steeper part. The others wait "up top," watching us proceed with eyes of utmost fondness. No grain is required to "catch" any of my horses.

We work a bit. He takes the first bit he's ever known into his mouth, tastes it and considers the possibilities. It's a rubber bit, large rings on either side and snaps attach it to his halter. Like many others before him, all training is done with respect, gentleness, praise, and firmness. When this colt moves on in life to another person -- often another family, complete with children he will carry, as he will carry their parents -- he will do so with confidence, knowing that bits, like saddles, are a part of sharing life with people. He will bugle a "Hello!" to people and will come running to meet them.

The fuzzy brown rectangle

Often I have dreamt of how my horses view the world and this puny human that they trust for their health and very lives. They must trust that I will provide them with clean, fresh water -- cool in summer and not frozen in winter. They must trust that I will keep their pastures and hay of the best possible quality, that I will keep them vaccinated against disease and wormed against parasites. They trust me to keep their strong hooves rasped and smoothed at the correct angle to maximize their ability to defy gravity and leave nothing but my gasp of wonder at their fleetness of foot. They trust. I, in turn, strive to be trustworthy.

Through the chocolate-colored rectangular window of their eye, fringed with lashes that have to shelter against sun, wind, and more, they look upon this world. May they always see people as kind, protective, yet also with the call to adventure that may be found when sitting upon their back, our eyes focused between their ears.

Our dogs share their wisdom through their joy, patience, work ethic, and loyalty. Wiggles grants me his life that I may better learn to live my own. He asks only for kind words, a gentle hand, food and water and a place to sleep that is within reach of his "mom."

The present embraces the past

Horses that are now gone back to the earth, hold our hearts hostage. Our favorite dogs do the same. Through our memories, they leave hoof and footprints on our souls and mold the people we have become. They gift us with the knowledge that wisdom is eternal, and all we need do to know this is to look deeply into their eyes, their souls. A glimpse of this eternity may be found there. What we do with these gifts is our thank you to them for having graced our lives, no matter how many days/weeks/months/years. We choke back a sob as we recall the most special times with them. This is our private paradise, out of which we cannot be driven. We pray that we will be reunited with them, to know them without aging or infirmities or earthly bonds.

My babies. With quiet humility to be so blessed with this time in my life, I walk amongst these wondrous horses, at an utter loss to describe their greatness, a lump rising in my throat as I consider the horses and people of a faraway desert on the other side of a distant ocean.

In that far-off place, an olive-complected man appraises his wealth with a loving eye as one drinks deeply at a rare oasis. His mare carries an old spear scar on her hip, but has never limped. She has carried him for many years, and still he draws a ragged breath, thinking of her courage and strength. So like her granddam is this one, her tenth foal suckling her milk as she sips water. Her lips sound like they are pulling air and water through her teeth, and so they are, as she sifts sand from water. Her eyes close in pleasure at his touch, her trust in him complete to the point where he can handle her foals with never a worry. He is a king, a sheikh, his wealth born from oil; yet ... his dearest treasure is an Arabian mare.

Harmony through the generations: Man and horse and dog. God spoke to the south wind, His breath creating the horse. We, who love horses and dogs for their beauty, functionality, grace, speed, kindness, and more -- thank God for this gift.

1,204 words.

~~~~~

Julie Kay Smithson was blessed to have wondrous horses for 34 of her 57 years. Wiggles blue heeler remains still her companion, though the horses were dispersed in order to help her keep her home in the country. She has become a decent property rights researcher and champion of responsible resource providing. She is certain that Heaven holds horses and dogs, for how could God not love these manifestations of His Greatness?

Get the Picture?

2009-08-13T23:36:00.000-07:00

Get the Picture?

Who stands to gain when orchards of fruit and nut trees, vineyards groaning 'neath the weight of plumping grapes and fields ripening with summer crops, are all rendered EXTINCT due to water shutoff?

August 14, 2009

By Julie Kay Smithson, researcher and consumer propertyrights@earthlink.net

Remember when you were a kid in school and were shown a picture and asked to pick out what didn't belong in the picture? It might have been a picture of a house, with a yard, porch, driveway, kids, and ... a giraffe sticking its head up from the back yard.

That was easy.

Here's another picture: spotted owls, tiger salamanders, Preble's Meadow jumping mice, Canadian gray wolves, Indiana bats, black-footed ferrets, polar bears, delta smelt, sage grouse, and ... the Endangered Species Act.

Not so easy, you say?

Once the truth emerges, it's actually even easier to decipher than the first picture. The answer is: the Endangered Species Act. It doesn't belong in the second picture because, truth be told, none of the species mentioned are in actual danger of "extinction." Entire communities of people -- including the Inuit of the Arctic -- are shoved toward actual extinction with this ruse.

Come ON, you say! The polar bear, surely! Didn't "they" prove the icecaps are disappearing?

What about the spotted owl? Wasn't logging to blame for "loss of critical habitat"?

Consider this axiom: When the emotions are twanged, the intellect is paralyzed. Many people -- otherwise intelligent and rational -- can be deceived if the ploy is delivered in such as way that it appears plausible.

What if the truth was that the polar bear was actually thriving in virtually all of its "historic range" and that icecaps, overall, were not disappearing worldwide?

What if the real threat to the spotted owl turned out to be the larger barred owl, which views spotted owls as menu items?

What if ... things were not as most people have believed?

What it means

Disinformation - False information deliberately and often covertly spread (as by the planting of rumors) in order to influence public opinion or obscure the truth. - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, May 2009. Function: noun. Date: 1939. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/disinformation

Should people remain in a constant state of "Chicken Little / sky is falling" over whichever "poster species" has been trotted out for effect in order to exterminate responsible resource utilization in America?

What if loggers were never a threat to owls?

What if farmers, irrigators and ranchers were never a threat to smelt, salamanders and sage grouse?

What if beachgoers were never a threat to piping plovers?

What if the black-footed ferret had actually been imported from Russia and was not even a native species?

What if the "Preble's Meadow jumping mouse" was not even a distinct species, but merely an emotion-plucking name given to mice that are anything but endangered?

Who stands to gain when orchards of fruit and nut trees, vineyards groaning 'neath the weight of plumping grapes and fields ripening with summer crops, are all rendered EXTINCT due to water shutoff?

Consider the possibilities. Some call it 'conspiracy theory' when thoughtful people voice the probability that America's natural resources are being shut down in order to maintain them as collateral for bankers holding loans on our tanking economy.

Others wonder how litigious "environmental" and "conservation" organization groups seem to have figured out how to milk the apparent cash cow of the "Equal Access to Justice Act" in order to litigate endlessly. Certainly, many of "experts" in Washington, D.C., and other political hotbeds, may not be as "expert" as they'd have us believe. When cattle are plastered in the public consciousness as being somehow dangerous to our rangelands, how are they different from any other grazing animal? Is their domestic status somehow grounds for blacklisting them from eating and being raised / harvested for food? How is the raising of cattle in Brazil, Argentina, etc., less "harmful" to "the environment" than raising cattle in America and saving all that "fossil fuel" shipping food from thousands of miles to "nurture" our health? Locally grown food has been proven healthier for people, yet America's health is being drained in the form of her ability to be "food and fiber self-sufficient."

Will the salmon/suckerfish/smelt actually go extinct unless farming/irrigation/ranching go extinct?

No.

The "Endangered Species Act" appears to be the playbook for restricting/forbidding "activities" that have the "potential" to "adversely" impact any poster species. Substitute any "endangered," "threatened" or "candidate" species, change the location, and repeat as needed until there are no activities left that could be construed as AEI -- American Economic Independence.

Wherever we turn, we are expected to believe that, if we just use a little less, a little more less, and even more less -- Nirvana awaits. The truth is, no matter how little water farmers/irrigators use, it will always be "too much."

The truth is, no matter how few trees are grown and harvested in America, using the most efficient methods, it will always be "too many." "Old-growth" differs by tree species, and no trees live forever. Pines have shorter lifespans than redwoods. Oaks live longer than poplars. Once past their prime, decay and weather damage erode trees. Litigating forest harvest to a grinding halt is not "good for trees." It is good for someone wanting the public to believe that song and dance, but it is not "good" for trees, animals, birds, people, and the local and national economy. Perhaps the smoke inhalation factor benefits the "health care industry," but that is a left-handed "benefit."

"All compromise is based on give and take, but there can be no give and take on fundamentals. Any compromise on mere fundamentals is a surrender, for it is all give and no take." - Mohandas Ghandi

Compromise, collaboration, cooperation -- result in eventual capitulation. Man is not the bane of Earth's existence. People are often very good for the earth. It's time they relearned that fact and stopped being reactionaries to "the Great Oz." Getting the picture is easy once the curtain is pulled back and the fellow with the megaphone is exposed!

976 words.

Providing carefully researched information since 1999. propertyrights@earthlink.net Websites: http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org and http://propertyrightsresearch.blogspot.com

Unpack!

2009-08-12T19:06:00.000-07:00

Unpack!

June 13, 2009

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

If this question were posed to most Americans today: Would you embrace the concept of losing your property rights and entire region's economy? The answer would be a resounding "No!"

Worded differently -- say, in the form of "protecting" and/or "restoring" a posted "endangered" or "threatened" species of flora or fauna (whether or not any actual proof exists that said poster species is in any danger of harm to its numbers) -- twenty-first century Americans seem unable to register any red flags to themselves.

The "Endangered Species Act," touted as being the best thing since sliced bread for "saving," "protecting" and/or "restoring" things, has actually done very little. It has, however, wreaked utter havoc on America's former economic independence. Were people to take a long, hard look at the things over the past thirty years that have reduced this nation to paper tiger "status" and massive dependence on other countries for its food and fiber, its energy sources and now even its "tech support" and call centers -- they might rethink their view of such legislation.

Is canned salmon still available on the shelves of your local grocery store for a reasonable price?

Those in charge of "policy" are only too happy to make a far larger profit on their investment in distant lands where "human resources," like natural resources, are shamelessly exploited without the checks and balances and better working conditions and benefits once enjoyed in America. The thought of a "middle" class of people that actually dare to believe they should own property and know life without abject poverty, is apparently abhorrent to those who are busy collateralizing our every resource in order to skim the power and make our middle, property-owning class go extinct. Since the last quarter of the eighteenth century, America has been the place people could go to become free, own property and be independent. Should our steps forward be negated without a whimper as the Albert Gores of the world seek to make us -- but never themselves -- little more than serfs and peasants in service to their masters?

I ask people to unpack and stop taking those wholesale guilt trips they've been conditioned to take at the drop of a hat. Consider that what's actually happening is the undermining of our economic health and independence, while food and fiber is produced in countries with far less stringent growing conditions and regulations than ours. Would Americans ever knowingly produce pet or human food "salted" with deadly melamine? Why shouldn't we raise our own food, grow our own trees -- to be harvested, because they are, after all, a renewable resource -- and utilize our own manpower once again? We owe it to future generations to unpack!

Julie Kay Smithson is a property rights researcher in rural west-central Ohio. Please visit http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org a place to learn about your property rights and how to protect them.

If Wolves Had Coattails

2009-08-12T13:40:00.000-07:00

If Wolves Had Coattails

May 7, 2007

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

Focus should be redirected from wolves to those behind their 're' introduction and that of other large predators. Such Endangered Species Act (ESA) abuse provides sublime job security. Consider that the real predators may be walking on two legs and "interpreting" the Endangered Species Act for their own benefit and not that of the actual species.

Keeping factions like ranchers, sportsmen and miseducated folk at one another's throats, merely enhances the smokescreen.

Large predators -- and other species of flora and fauna -- have no say in such matters. They are manipulated and volunteered to be de facto real estate agents for The Wildlands Project (TWP). They become "poster species" for the driving forces bent upon gaining control over property.

TWP is not about "rewilding," but rather controlling all resources and wiping out property rights.

If a wolf could tell us, it would not choose to be trapped, moved to a warmer / different climate, bred in captivity, radio-collared, poked, prodded, and turned loose in places where the wolf density is already so high that there's simply not enough food to go around and lots of infighting between the now-crowded large predator population.

Think of an inner city with two gangs. Suddenly, someone drops off ten more gangs in an area where the turf is already claimed. All Hell is SURE to break loose!

If wolves had coattails, the number of two-legged "human" predators riding on them would be amazing. Closer scrutiny will peel the onion's layers.

The Many Facets of the Endangered Species Act

2009-08-12T11:53:00.000-07:00

The Many Facets of the Endangered Species Act

Updated version published September 6, 2005 (Original version published May 2002)

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org/articles6/many_facets_of_the_endangered_sp .htm

While we are familiar with the enforcement of the ESA in America, the Act and its enforcement have expanded to include species found anywhere on the planet. By specific exclusion as a species, human populations have become victims of the ESA.

Treaties, International Agreements and the Origins of the ESA

Congress passed the Endangered Species Preservation Act (ESPA) in 1966. This law allowed listing of only native animal species as endangered, and provided limited means for the protection of species so listed. The Departments of Interior, Agriculture, and Defense were to seek to protect listed species, and insofar as consistent with their primary purposes, preserve (protect) the habitats of such species. Land acquisition for protection of endangered species was also authorized.

The Endangered Species Conservation Act of 1969 (ESCA) was passed to provide additional protection to species in danger of "worldwide extinction." Import of such species was prohibited, as was their subsequent sale within the U.S. This Act called for an international ministerial meeting to adopt a convention on the conservation of endangered species.

A 1973 United Nations conference in Washington D.C. led to the signing of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), which restricted international commerce in plant and animal species believed to be actually or potentially harmed by trade.

The Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA) signed by the United States on March 3, 1973, which combined and considerably strengthened the provisions of its predecessors. http://www.fws.gov/laws/lawsdigest/ESACT.html

The ESA is arguably one of the most recognized acronyms in rural America. First written in 1973 using its current title, it has undergone numerous revisions. This "law of the land" contains more facets than the Hope Diamond and may have its purported curse as well. Mere mention of a landowner having "possible habitat" for a protected, threatened, or endangered species wreaks immediate havoc, both emotionally and economically.

The ESA was amended in 1976-1982, 1984 and 1988, and actually expired in the early 1990s, but has been kept alive through Congressional funding on an annual basis.

The United States' international commitment of America's resources under treaties and "other international agreements" has its roots in 16 U.S.C. 1351. An Executive "international agreement" is not ratified by the Senate.

The ESA began with the Migratory Bird Treaty Act of 1918* between the United States, Great Britain and Canada. This treaty usurped powers reserved to the States. The Migratory Bird Treaty has even been expanded several times.

Some treaties, such as the Western Hemisphere Treaty (Treaty of Tordesillas), have no enforcement clause and are merely good faith treaties that impose no obligation or burden upon anyone.

U.S. v. Pink 315 US 203 (1942), which used treaties to undermine constitutional safeguards, should raise significant, related issues.

If international matters are raised and held to, the matter of which treaty or International Agreement is being applied, comes into play. Legal arguments can and should arise from the implementation and enforcement of the ESA against private property owners.

The Ute Mountain Ute Nation did an excellent job of challenging and defeating the ESA. The Ute Mountain Ute Nation did not sign any of treaties or international agreements -- thus, the ESA does not apply to their lands in the southwest quarter of Colorado.

Many definitions contained in the ESA come directly from UN and IUCN (International Union for the Conservation of Nature) glossaries, including but not limited to CITES definitions.

A few definitions from the ESA are necessary in order to understand the complexities of the Act itself:

The ESA definition of an endangered species is "Any species which is in danger of extinction within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range."

The terms ''conserve'', ''conserving'', and ''conservation'' mean to use and the use of all methods and procedures which are necessary to bring any endangered species or threatened species to the point at which the measures provided pursuant to this chapter are no longer necessary. Such methods and procedures include, but are not limited to, all activities associated with scientific resources management such as research, census, law enforcement, habitat acquisition and maintenance, propagation, live trapping, and transplantation, and, in the extraordinary case where population pressures within a given ecosystem cannot be otherwise relieved, may include regulated taking.

The term ''critical habitat'' for a threatened or endangered species means -

(i) The specific areas within the geographical area occupied by the species, at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, on which are found those physical or biological features

(I) Essential to the conservation of the species and

(II) Which may require special management considerations or protection; and

(ii) Specific areas outside the geographical area occupied by the species at the time it is listed in accordance with the provisions of section 1533 of this title, upon a determination by the Secretary that such areas are essential for the conservation of the species.

A "threatened" classification is provided to those animals and plants likely to become endangered within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of their ranges [Section 3].

A "species" includes any species or subspecies of fish, wildlife, or plant; any variety of plant; and any distinct population segment of any vertebrate species that interbreeds when mature. Excluded is any species of the Class Insecta determined by the Secretary to constitute a pest whose protection under the provisions of the Act would present an overwhelming and overriding risk to man [Section 3].

The term ''fish or wildlife'' means any member of the animal kingdom, including without limitation any mammal, fish, bird (including any migratory, nonmigratory, or endangered bird for which protection is also afforded by treaty or other international agreement), amphibian, reptile, mollusk, crustacean, arthropod or other invertebrate, and includes any part, product, egg, or offspring thereof, or the dead body or parts thereof. ["any mammal" could this be expanded to include humans?]

The term ''take'' means to harass, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct. [This definition is especially meaningful from the context of those human species who have been "harassed, harmed, pursued, wounded, etc." by the implementation of the ESA.]

While we are familiar with the enforcement of the ESA in America, the Act and its enforcement have expanded to include species found anywhere on the planet. By specific exclusion as a species, human populations have become victims of the ESA.

The full 49-page text of the Act may be found at http://www.house.gov/resources/105cong/reports/105_c/esa73_pdf

* - http://law2.house.gov/uscode-cgi/fastweb.exe?getdoc+uscview+t13t16+5673+1++%28%2 9%20%20AND

Listing

The listing process was originally planned to protect both species and their habitat. U.S. and foreign species lists were combined, with uniform provisions applied to both (Section 4).

Categories of "endangered" and "threatened" were defined (Section 3).

Broad taking prohibitions were applied to all endangered animal species, which could apply to threatened animals by special regulation [Section 9].

Authority was provided to acquire land for listed animals and for plants listed under CITES [Section 5]; and U.S. implementation of CITES was provided [Section 8].

All Federal agencies were required to undertake programs for the conservation of endangered and threatened species, and were prohibited from authorizing, funding, or carrying out any action that would jeopardize a listed species or destroy or modify its "critical habitat" [Section 7].

Significant amendments were enacted in 1978, 1982, and 1988 although the overall framework of the 1973 Act remained basically unchanged.

As with most other Federal regulations, a species is proposed for addition to the lists (50 CFR Part 17) in the Federal Register. The public is offered an opportunity to comment, and the rule is finalized (or withdrawn). Species are selected by the United States Fish & Wildlife Service (FWS) for proposed rules from a list of 'candidates.'

To become a candidate, FWS relies largely upon petitions, FWS and other agencies' surveys, and other substantiated reports on field studies.

The Act provides very specific procedures on how species are to be placed on the list (e.g., listing criteria, public comment periods, hearings, notifications, time limit for final action) and may be found at 50 CFR Part 424. Selection from the list of candidates for a proposed rule is based upon a priority system (September 23, 1983, Federal Register).

Species may be active candidates from a number of sources. FWS has its own biologists who are monitoring the status of some species. Other agencies [The Nature Conservancy, The Center for Biological Diversity -- formerly known as the Southwest Center for Biological Diversity -- and others] have similar staffs that can report when a species seems to be at some risk to its continued existence. Informal letters and various reports are also submitted to FWS from the States and private groups and individuals. There is also a formal petition process available under the Act.

Anyone can petition to have any species -- as defined in the ESA -- listed.

In the years since its inception, this process has expanded to include "possible habitat?" and has often used the "critical habitat" designation to halt human use of large blocks of land. In a 1998 memo, Donna Darm, the acting regional administrator of the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS / NOAA agency) wrote: "When we make critical habitat designations, we just designate everything as critical without analysis of how much habitat a (population) needs, what areas might be key, etc. We just say we need it all."

"This has been our assumption of their attitude all along," said Chuck Garner, manager of the Kennewick Irrigation District in the mid-Columbia Basin of Washington State. He gave district directors copies of the comments at a board meeting. "They just go in without showing any scientific evidence of what habitat is critical; they just list everything," Garner said.

Some species have been "emergency listed" in order to stop road improvements. For example, the bull trout near South Canyon Road at Jarbidge, Nevada, was the "sacrificial lamb" used to close the only road for miles in a remote part of northeast Nevada. The bull trout was "emergency listed" for this reason alone: to close a road. Concerned citizens reopened the road on the fourth of July in 2000 in the face of threats of lawsuits and jail time.

Plant species are the special province of the Smithsonian Institution, as directed by the Secretary of Agriculture. The Smithsonian is to review plant species that are or may become threatened or endangered, and recommend methods adequate to conserve the species.

Methodology

Much of what has given the ESA its "black eye" with those impacted by it is the methodology involved.

Federal environmental policy surrounding this law is often seen to pit one species against others, or speciesism.

Lake Koocanusa is in northwestern Montana and straddles the American-Canadian border. A manmade lake built in the 1970s by the Army Corps of Engineers, Koocanusa was promoted to increase fishing and tourism. A "protected species" of salmon listed in 1992 has put another protected species, the White Sturgeon, at risk.

The United States Fish & Wildlife Service working with the National Marine Fisheries Service, is conducting a "50-year experiment," using the lake levels to discover if decreased lake levels in the spring will help the salmon in the Columbia River, 800 miles downstream. This effectively puts the spawning grounds of the sturgeon in eminent danger by reducing lake levels at a time when the sturgeon most needs higher levels. This is a prime, but far from isolated, example of the Endangered Species Act violating the Endangered Species Act.

In other highly publicized stories, lynx fur and grizzly bear hair have been used to falsify the boundaries of "critical habitat" for both species, leading to the question: How many other "science-based statistics" have been invented in order to "create" critical habitat?

The Endangered Species Act has been selectively used to protect species other than human and domestic. Many rural producers are descendants of war veterans who settled and improved their lands after government promises of land and water. Indeed, many veterans had deeds -- signed by various U.S. presidents -- granting them and their "heirs and assigns" land and water rights in perpetuity.

As prospects for rural economic survival dwindle, a federal government or environmental group buyout is touted as the only alternative. Resource providing and resource extraction -- farming, ranching, logging, mining, and commercial fishing -- are presented to the general public as hurtful "to the environment" and obsolete careers. Tourism and recreation are promoted as being better for all concerned.

Left out of the equation are the facts: people, like any other species, need food and shelter for survival. In order to have both, resource providing and extraction must continue. Sending both to other countries does not bode well for their economies or their environment.

Think there's no such thing as RURAL/CULTURAL terrorism?

A 2000 ESA hearing, sponsored by the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, actively excluded testimony from landowners that have seen their property values reduced or completely negated by regulations.

Victim stories are legend. Thousands -- perhaps tens of thousands of families and businesses -- have been forced to relocate and/or go out of business due to this single statute. Here are but a few:

*Dave Fisher, third generation cattle rancher and owner of the Shield "F" Ranch near Barstow, California

Dave Fisher has become both the endangered species and the victim. His story is the tip of the iceberg, as there are 1,400 ranch families who fell victim to the ESA along with him.

In late 2001 the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) sent Dave a notice that if his 307 head of cattle were not removed from the 154,848-acre Ord Mountain allotment in the California Desert within 5 days, they would be impounded by the BLM. The BLM declared its lands and those under private ownership in the affected area to be "critical habitat" for the desert tortoise. It did not notify the 1,400 affected families in the area of its intent until after the ink was dry.

Dave and his neighbors tried to cooperate with the BLM. They appealed the original BLM May 15, 2001 decision to the Office of Hearings and Appeals (OHA) and won. That original decision was remanded back to the BLM because it had failed to consult, cooperate and coordinate (CCC) with the permittees as required by Section 8 of the Public Rangelands Improvement Act and as required by the BLM's own regulations.

Dozens of appeals were filed, protesting the BLM's September 7, 2001, decision.

The BLM did not respond to even one of those appeals.

The desert tortoise "protections" arose from a negotiated California Desert Conservation Area (CDCA) lawsuit settlement between the BLM, The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD), Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER) and the Sierra Club. This agreement empowered the BLM to partially implement the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service's 1994 Desert Tortoise Recovery Plan recommendations for livestock reduction and removal from critical habitat. Proven help for the desert tortoise from cattle droppings (providing moisture and shade) were not factors included in this decision. Dave suggested to the California state BLM director that the director exchange Fisher's ranch for another ranch. That offered solution was never acted upon.

Ironically, it was rancher stewardship of the land that attracted the desert tortoise in the first place.

Not until the Fisher family drilled water wells on its own land did the desert tortoise became prevalent in the California Desert Conservation Area. The tortoise, in moving into a new habitat provided by ranchers grazing cattle, attracted the attention of the environmental groups. It was used it to pressure federal officials to push Fisher and his 1,400 ranching neighbors off the land.

This is an example of ranchers who stayed within the system, cooperated fully with all agencies involved and still -- without court order or decision -- became its victims. Threats of lawsuits against the Department of Interior (DOI) by three powerful environmental groups seem to have provided the directives for DOI/BLM actions.

*Anita Cragg, Florida builder

In 1992, Anita Cragg, president of Space Coast Management Services, bought a housing subdivision in Country Cove, Florida with the goal of building new homes next to existing ones. She had the necessary building permits and interested buyers lined up when FWS ordered her to stop all development because it allegedly posed a hazard to the Florida scrub-jay, a bird which is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

What Cragg didn't understand was how her planned development threatened the scrub jay when there were no scrub-jay nests on the property.

Both the FWS and an independent environmental engineer hired by Cragg could not find any nests on her land.

However, when FWS officials were surveying her land in 1993, they saw two scrub jays fly onto her lots. Because Cragg's property had the potential to be suitable scrub-jay habitat, the agency suspended construction for 18 months.

To get construction resumed, FWS forced Cragg to purchase four acres of land off-site to compensate for the loss of every acre of potential habitat on her property. That cost her $100,000. Cragg says her deal with the government "didn't really help the scrub-jay because we weren't hurting it in the first place."

*A Sovereign Nation's border

The U.S. Border Patrol's aggressive efforts to stem illegal immigration and cut crime along the Texas-Mexican border have been a resounding success. In just two years, Operation Rio Grande, the agency's high-tech interdiction effort, cut the number of illegal aliens attempting to cross the border from 216,000 in 1996 to less than 160,000 in 1999 along a 200-mile stretch of the Rio Grande River. If it weren't for the operation, Border Patrol officials estimate that there would have been 350,000 illegal aliens attempting to cross the border in 1999. In addition, in just one year, crime in Brownsville dropped 45 percent.

If "environmentalists" have their way, all these gains will be negated.

The Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife and the Audubon Society plan to file a lawsuit to put a halt to the Border Patrol's use of critical interdiction technology, which the groups claim pose a "threat" to "endangered species." These groups argue that the agency's use of high-powered lights, which prevent border crossings under the cover of night, also disrupts the habits of the ocelot and jaguarondi, two nocturnal-oriented wildcats on the endangered species list.

"We feel the Immigration and Naturalization Service can accomplish its job without the floodlight and fences and with far less intrusive technologies that have no impact on wildlife," says Jim Chapman of the Sierra Club.

Not so, Border Patrol. Border Patrol assistant chief Rey Garza says. "Taking away the lights will negate everything."

The Rio Grande River is pitch-black, making it an obvious haven for illegal aliens and drug criminals. Garza says that Border Patrol officers have been stabbed and shot trying to do their job on its murky banks.

By installing permanent and mobile light fixtures along targeted sections of the river, the Border Patrol's ability to catch criminals and illegal aliens has increased dramatically. Says officer Garza, "The lights have proven to be a powerful deterrent."

The environmentalists' planned lawsuit especially frustrates Border Patrol officials. They had already agreed to not place their high-tech equipment in U.S. Fish and Wildlife sanctuaries in an attempt to address environmental concerns -- even though those sanctuaries have become refuges for illegal aliens.

*Jay Monfort, New York businessman with 300-year family history

Jay Monfort of Fishkill, New York, began the permitting process in 1990 of trying to expand a gravel mine on his own land. Jay owns a company that manufactures concrete block. He also owns property that could largely supply the gravel needed for his business. Fishkill, New York judged Jay to be in compliance with its zoning regulations and approved the expansion of his Sour Mountain gravel company.

After filing his permit application with the state Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Jay became ensnared in a process that continues today. His Draft Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) was rejected as "incomplete" in April 1993, almost six months after the state was required by law to issue its opinion. After resubmitting his EIS, the DEC finally approved it in 1995.

Then the DEC, in collusion with local environmental groups, devised new and costly reasons to further delay the project. At what should have been the end of the process, Jay was told that he would have to start over again because a den of rattlesnakes had been "discovered" on an adjoining property owned by -- surprise! -- a conservation group. The protected species of snakes were not even on Mr. Monfort's property, and his previous EISs had already addressed potential impacts on the snakes by his mine.

The DEC informed Jay that he would have to spend several additional years studying the snakes before a decision could be rendered on his proposed mine expansion.

Monfort declares, "The motivation for such abusive tactics appears to be a desire of the state" and the local conservation group, Scenic Hudson, to acquire his property for a land trust.

Jay has not given up. In January 1998 he filed a lawsuit demanding that the state issue a final decision based on his original permit application. The permit process alone has cost him more than $3 million.

A better way to protect wildlife

Federal "management" of both endangered species and other wildlife has led to a delicate balancing act. A major reason for this, according to Howard Hutchinson, executive director for the Coalition of Arizona/New Mexico Counties, is that critical-habitat designations for endangered species are often determined by "citizen" lawsuits rather than being formulated by people who understand the needs of the species. As a result, he says that decisions are made by Justice Department lawyers based on agreements reflecting political purposes.

Hutchinson cites an example. As the result of a much-publicized "citizen" ESA lawsuit filed by some of the same environmental groups involved in the Klamath Basin crisis, protection of the Mexican spotted owl virtually eliminated the timber industry in Arizona and New Mexico several years ago.

Hutchinson, who serves on the spotted-owl recovery team, says the "resulting growth of underbrush in the forests has not only led to this summer's devastating wildfires, but has also had a negative effect on several other species that have been declared endangered." And, says Hutchinson, research has shown that because of the increase in timber density the forests are retaining more water, thus decreasing the amount of water in Southwestern streams by 30 percent. As a result, he says, the Gila trout, Apache trout, spiked ace and loach minnow -- all of which live in the streams and also were subjects of "citizen" ESA lawsuits -- are suffering.

Even more bizarre than this pitting of one species against another, say critics, is the pitting of a species against itself. This is happening in the case of the Coho salmon, one of the allegedly threatened fish that was the subject of several of the lawsuits that forced the government to turn off the irrigation water in the Klamath Basin.

According to the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS / NOAA agency) the government agency that administers the ESA for marine and anadromous (fish that migrate from the ocean to freshwater to spawn) species, the salmon being protected in the Klamath River do not constitute a species as properly defined. The NMFS says they are just one of 52 "distinct population segments" -- DPSs -- or " evolutionarily significant units" (ESU) of salmon that are found in Oregon, Washington state, Idaho and California. But one-half of the 52 ESUs are protected under the ESA. The Klamath River fish belong to an ESU called the Southern Oregon/ Northern California Coasts Coho salmon. It was listed as threatened under the ESA in 1997.

So what distinguishes one ESU of salmon from another? A genetic difference? No. A difference in the taste of the fillet on the dining-room table? Not even that. According to a regulation promulgated in 1996 by Bruce Babbitt, Clinton's secretary of the interior, a group of vertebrates qualifies as an ESU if it "is markedly separated from other populations of the same taxon as a consequence of physical, physiological, ecological or behavioral factors."

According to NMFS spokesman Brian Gorman, geography is the primary distinguishing factor.

Gorman says the hatchery fish were not counted because, although they have been released into rivers for at least 100 years, NMFS biologists recently have concluded that the hatchery fish have different "behaviors" and actually are a threat to the "wild" fish. He claims the hatchery fish "diminish the vigor" of the wild fish and make them easier for fishermen to catch. He also says hatchery salmon reproduce less successfully in the wild than "wild" salmon.

In 1998, Oregon Department of Fish and Wildlife personnel were videotaped using baseball bats to kill thousands of Oregon coastal Coho salmon at a hatchery in the Alsea River basin. "There is a rationale for killing the salmon," says Gorman. "Each hatchery can only handle so many fish, so when the hatchery's capacity is reached, the excess fish must be killed."

A similar parallel could be drawn between bovine excreta and that of wild elk or antelope. The head of the Tucson, Arizona-based Center for Biological Diversity, Kieran Suckling, rages about domestic cattle defecating in streams -- yet patently refuses to acknowledge that all wild animals produce and drop scat on land and in streams.

Wildlife has been existing, mostly in harmony, with private citizens for many years. The partnership has benefited both: deer and many other avian and animal species forage on the edges of land planted in grain. Species that are of different successions -- early, mid and late -- are needed by wildlife in order to flourish. Driving a species such as the American Bison almost to extinction was a profound learning experience. The passenger pigeon's demise was another. The twentieth century found stewardship and land/water use progressing wisely in private hands.

It is certainly possible for most species to have "possible habitat" in many areas where they are not found. That theory holds true for both endangered and healthy populations of humans, flora and fauna. The ability to adapt -- stronger in some species than in others -- has perhaps encouraged diversity more than hindered it, since it dictates progression or extinction.

The continuing educational process that humans are undergoing to better care for and harvest renewable resources -- including timber, sustainable harvest of game birds and animals as well as domestic -- points the way toward a far different scenario than environmental extremists have painted. Freedom of choice made possible by private ownership is a viable alternative to today's ESA restrictions. Truly free enterprise offers healthy, threatened and endangered species ways to partner, which over-regulation and the locking up of millions of acres can never accomplish.

"Envisioning" the future of the ESA

Non-governmental organizations and unelected bureaucrats are using the ESA as a leverage tool to end resource providing in America. This arbitrary and capricious agenda is a self-fulfilling prophecy. If all grazing permits are purchased by such as the Nature Conservancy -- thus ending grazing on all Federally owned lands -- families will feel the loss in their pocketbooks and on their dinner tables. A much larger percentage of disposable income will go for food as prices go up and availability goes down.

With the remainder of arable land and its water resources being placed off-limits to resource production and extraction -- and human habitation -- food and water will soon achieve a place in the American psyche that they have not held for two hundred years. The standard of living that we take for granted will evaporate.

Protection of some species at the expense of others is an artificial scenario, neither practicable nor scientific. Past precedent shows beyond reasonable doubt that the future of the ESA as currently structured and enforced is bleak.

Conclusion

This Act is a property rights destroying monster. It has wreaked havoc throughout America and beyond, and cannot honestly claim even one "success story." What the Endangered Species Act can claim is the demise of thousands of rural communities and billions of taxpayer dollars. It can claim many shattered lives, whether through the stoppage of logging, farming, mining, ranching, or commercial fishing in many areas, or the many recreational pursuits (including hunting and fishing) that have been placed off-limits. It has been the secondary reason for many destroyed families -- through stress, divorce, suicide, ruined health or nerves, and even early death. Rural and urban people alike must put this law where it belongs: in the wastebasket. Not only has the ESA failed species miserably; it has also failed the American people.

As an economic and cultural change agent, it has no parallel.

Landowners who once provided abundant species habitat have been and are being forced off their land in record numbers. One need look no further than the Klamath Basin of Oregon and California for proof. Property values are gutted, families are wrecked, and once-thriving communities are turned into rural ghettos. Species have not recovered anywhere. The ESA has failed to "protect" any species, and has, in fact, been a substantial contributing factor to actually making some species become endangered that once enjoyed healthy populations.

There is currently a move afoot to "reform" and "strengthen" the ESA -- even to the point of codifying "invasive species" by inclusion of language.

Current ESA draft "reform" legislation even dovetails a version of Kelo v. New London, Connecticut, by use of a "50 percent clause" -- more than half of one's property must be removed from use before any compensation is considered or applicable.

How many people are content with losing half their property rights before any property compensation even comes into play?

Far from needing reform or strengthening -- either of which further decimates property rights -- this expired 'piece of work' that has Draconian and unconstitutional roots must be uprooted and finished off, to never again make victims of honest folk.

Author

Julie Kay Smithson lives in rural Ohio. She has become a property rights researcher by default, due to the assault on prime farmland in her part of Ohio by an agency of the Department of Interior, the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service. Please visit http://www.PropertyRightsResearch.org to learn more about property rights, resource providers, consumers, and recapturing freedom.

Thanks to the National Center for Public Policy Research for its Victim Directories, which were of priceless help in the writing of this article. http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org/2005/articles05/victimsdirectoriesfrms.htm

5,065 words.

http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org/articles6/many_facets_of_the_endangered_sp.htm

Parallel Universe, Part One: When Two Worlds Collide – Ranching and Litigation

2009-08-12T11:33:00.000-07:00

Parallel Universe, Part One: When Two Worlds Collide – Ranching and Litigation

By Julie Kay Smithson, property rights researcher, London, Ohio propertyrights@earthlink.net http://www.propertyrightsresearch.org

Today’s ranchers raise beef that is leaner, grown with an eye toward both responsible grazing techniques and health-conscious consumers. Unlike America’s east, where private property is in the majority of land ownership, the federal government owns vast areas in the American west. Ranchers own grazing permits on federal lands. Modern ranching has become complex. Ranching practices must be leaner and greener in order to be environmentally responsible and profitable.

The West and its federal, or “public,” lands, is no exception.

Under the Taylor Grazing Act, the first grazing district to be established was Wyoming Grazing District Number 1 on March 23, 1935. Secretary of the Interior Harold Ickes created a Division of Grazing within the Department to administer the grazing districts; this division later became the U.S. Grazing Service and was headquartered in Salt Lake City. [1]

The Continental Congress, through the "Land Ordinance of 1785," adopted a “Rectangular Survey System” on May 20, 1785, which defines the public lands by Township, Range and Section, modified by the Act of May 18, 1796, and other subsequent Acts into the recognizable cadastral survey system of today. Originally established by Congress in 1812 under the Treasury Department as the “General Land Office.” The GLO, among other things, was responsible for the surveys of the public lands. Successor to the GLO emerged when the consolidation of the GLO and the Grazing Service occurred on July 16, 1946, creating the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). [2]

In today’s world, being savvy about definitions and laws is vital to running a business. It is also of paramount importance to those whose custom and culture, work and lifestyles, carry the indelible stamp of resource providing: America’s farmers, commercial fishermen, miners, ranchers, and timber growers and harvesters. The saying, “If it can’t be grown, it must be mined,” is true. Food and fiber grown in America is necessary for the health of our nation. Responsible resource utilization encompasses not only the ability to extract or harvest resources, but also the keen, ever-learning manner in which those resources are brought from source to consumer.

Twenty-first century resource providers never leave the classroom – they are constantly in pursuit of new and better ways to both protect the natural environment and provide products that are skillfully grown/raised to be healthful. The old days of just “being” a rancher, farmer, logger, miner, or fisherman, are, as they say, “history.” Today’s history is being written by those dedicated to making a positive contribution to the earth and its people. Such dedication requires a willingness to learn that goes far beyond the confines of learning institutions, one that also respects the science that is ever evolving from those places.

Today’s holders of grazing permits in the West must keep in mind that new ways of grazing mean everything from riparian restoration to making sure livestock don’t tarry too long at any one watering or grazing location.

Grazing allotments carry specific restrictions, including the number of AUMs (Animal Unit Months) that may be on each grazing allotment. One AUM means the amount of forage needed to sustain one cow, five sheep, or five goats for a month. A full AUMs fee is charged for each month of grazing by adult animals if the grazing animal (1) is weaned, (2) is 6 months old or older when entering public land, or (3) will become 12 months old during the period of use. For fee purposes, an AUM is the amount of forage used by five weaned or adult sheep or goats or one cow, bull, steer, heifer, horse, or mule. The term AUM is commonly used in three ways: (1) stocking rate as in X acres per AUM, (b) forage allocation as in X AUMs in allotment A, and (3) utilization as in X AUMs consumed from Unit B. [3]

Livestock grazing requires that land be rested. Rest means the absence of grazing by livestock to benefit plants for regrowth between grazing periods, for critical periods of plant growth and development, or for critical periods of plant establishment. [4]

Today’s ranchers win awards for their stewardship that prove their actions. These men and women also place a high value on wildlife and wildfowl, for protecting habitat means everyone wins. Ranch hands know when to steer clear of areas known to be in use by nesting birds or denning wildlife. They steward these places and keep a close eye on things that they know to report to the ranch boss/headquarters.

"The good thing about it is that good cattle country is also good sage-grouse country,” stated John Dahlke, founder, Wyoming Wildlife Consultants, LLC, Pinedale, Wyoming.

The multiple use of federal land is synonymous with the ability to access that land. The land, and its plant and animal life, is made more delicate by the sparseness of precipitation. Annual rainfall that would fall in just one season, “back East,” is all there is for the entire year. In times of drought, there may be many months in a row when negligible or no rain falls. Maintaining and caring for land, water, livestock, and wildlife, becomes more of a science than a job at those times – but it also requires ranchers to keep an eye on the horizon, never taking one drop of moisture for granted and making sure that their animals don’t overstay their welcome in any one location.

Range management has become a well-attended college course, a science in its own right. Ranches and farms now earn many of the awards once handed only to self-proclaimed environmental organizations. The “great wrinkled ranges” of the West may still look the same from the air, as they have come to be called “flyover country” – but they have come to be tended by far more knowledgeable hands and minds.

The U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management manages livestock grazing on about 160 million acres, having stewardship responsibilities for nearly two thirds of all public rangelands. [5]

The Bureau of Land Management does not make an annual national “count” of the livestock that graze on BLM-managed lands, because the actual number of livestock grazing on public lands on any single day varies throughout the year and livestock are often moved from one grazing allotment to another. So an aggregate head count would provide very little information on overall livestock use. Instead, the BLM compiles information on the number of AUMs used each year, which takes into account both the number of livestock and the amount of time they spend on public lands. … Over time there has been a gradual decrease in the amount of grazing use authorized by the BLM, and that trend continues today. Authorized (as distinguished from actual) grazing use on public lands has declined from about 22 million AUMs in 1941 to 12.5 million AUMs authorized in 2008. In most years, the actual use of forage is less than the potential amount available for use because forage amounts and demands depend on several factors, such as drought, wildfire, and market conditions, as noted earlier regarding annual public land grazing levels. In 2008, the number of AUMs actually used on BLM-managed land was 8.6 million. [6]

Enter the “Western Watersheds Project.” Against the responsible, award-winning grazing of livestock in harmony with nature on federal lands by ranchers, the WWP boasts: "WWP manages the 432-acre the Greenfire Preserve on the East Fork of the Salmon River in Central Idaho. The Preserve incorporates more than 1.25 miles of the East Fork, which provides critical habitat for Chinook salmon, steelhead and bull trout all listed under the Endangered Species Act. The preserve also provides winter habitat for 150 elk, over 2,000 whitetail and mule deer, wolves and the remnant White Cloud herd of Rocky Mountain bighorn sheep. The Preserve also provides year-round habitat for a wild horse band of sixteen horses. Since WWP began management of the property, more than 50,000 acres of public-lands grazing allotments associated with the Preserve have been closed to livestock grazing. Peregrine falcons, bobcats, spotted bats and wolf packs have replaced cattle. WWP's management program for Greenfire includes an extensive restoration project funded in part by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency." [7]

“Advocates for the West” filed a lawsuit, Case No. 08-cv-435, against the U.S. Department of the Interior and its agency, the Bureau of Land Management, on behalf of the WWP. 08-cv-435 seeks to stop all public lands grazing “…within the habitat of the Great Basin core population of greater sage-grouse in violation of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) and its implementing regulations, and the Clean Water Act.” This allegation, in the form of sixty-nine pages and numerous claims “for relief” by the WWP, “…covers a five state region of southern Idaho, northern Nevada, southern Oregon, eastern California, and western Utah.” The lawsuit accuses the DOI and BLM of refusing to acknowledge “ … that their grazing, vegetation treatment, energy development and other management actions are, in fact, contributing to the loss and fragmentation of greater sage-grouse populations and habitat across the Great Basin.”

WWP makes nebulous and non-factual allegations, like: “Livestock grazing is also pervasive across the Great Basin. Domestic livestock are exotic or alien species to this landscape, and have exacted a terrible toll on the ecological health of the Great Basin. Bred for the cooler and moister conditions of northern Europe, domestic livestock are poorly adapted for the hot dry summers and long cold winters of the Great Basin. Livestock thus tend to congregate around water sources and shady areas during hot periods, causing severe damage to streams, springs, seeps, and wet meadows – habitats that are critical for survival and reproduction of many native wildlife species, including sage-grouse.”

The following map shows the scope and intent of current litigation by groups such as the WWP:

http://westernwatersheds.org/species/sage-grouse/images/sg_rmp_scope.jpg

The map [8] suggests that sage-grouse habitat is very limited, with connectivity through narrow bands (green). The map is questionable, since sage-grouse range is actually far more widespread. There is a difference between “habitat” and “range.” Range refers to: 1. The geographic range is the entire area where a species is known to occur or to have occurred (historical range). The range of a species may be continuous, or it may have unoccupied gaps between populations (discontinuous distribution). 2. Some populations, or the entire species, may have different seasonal ranges. These may be overlapping, or they may be widely separated with intervening areas that are, at most, briefly occupied during passage on relatively narrow migration routes. 3. Home range refers to the local area that an individual or group uses for a long period of life. [9] Habitat means the particular type of place where an organism lives within a more extensive area or range. … characterized by its biological components and/or physical features. [10]

Livestock grazing can result in impacts on public land resources, but well-managed grazing provides numerous environmental benefits as well. For example, while livestock grazing can lead to increases in some invasive species, well-managed grazing can be used to manage vegetation. Intensively managed "targeted" grazing can control some invasive plant species or reduce the fuels that contribute to severe wildfires. Besides providing such traditional products as meat and fiber, well-managed rangelands and other private ranch lands support healthy watersheds, carbon sequestration, recreational opportunities, and wildlife habitat. Livestock grazing on public lands helps maintain the private ranches that, in turn, preserve the open spaces that have helped write the West's history and will continue to shape this region's character in the years to come. [11]

[1] http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.1.html

[2] http://www.blm.gov/nv/st/en/prog/more_programs/geographic_sciences.print.html

[3] BLM Rangeland Program Glossary http://www.nv.blm.gov/range/Glossary.htm

[4] The National Range and Pasture Handbook Glossary ftp://ftp-fc.sc.egov.usda.gov/GLTI/technical/publications/nrph/nrph-glossery.pdf

[5] Hope on the Range, Final Script, January 16, 2009: http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/Planning_and_Renewable_Resources/grazing.Par.88671.File.dat/Hope_on_the_Range_script.pdf (4 pages; 132.81 KB)

[6] http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.1.html

[7] http://www.westernwatersheds.org/wwpinfo/aboutwwp.html

[8] http://westernwatersheds.org/species/sage-grouse/images/sg_rmp_scope.jpg

[9] http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/websites/www.nmfs.noaa.gov/habitat/habitatprotection/eis/Full%20Gulf%20EFH%20EIS%20703.PDF December 15, 2004 (page 12 of 654 pages; 5.22 MB)

[10] Ibid. Page 10

[11] http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.1.html

~~~~~

Part Two will explore the reasons litigation has become pervasive.

~~~~~

Article citation: "First published in the August/September 2009 issue of Progressive Rancher Magazine."

Also posted at these Internet locations:

Western Institute for Study of the Environment:

http://westinstenv.org/wildpeop/2009/08/07/parallel-universe-part-one-when-two-worlds-collide-%E2%80%93-ranching-and-litigation/

Klamath Bucket Brigade:

http://www.klamathbucketbrigade.org/Smithson_ParallelUniverse080709.htm

Klamath Basin Crisis:
http://disc.yourwebapps.com/discussion.cgi?disc=153941;article=40112;title=Our%20Klamath%20Basin%20Water%20Crisis

Who loves ya, baby? What sage grouse really need & want

2009-08-12T11:20:00.000-07:00

Who loves ya, baby? What sage grouse really need and want

August 11, 2009

By Julie Kay Smithson propertyrights@earthlink.net

I believe to my very core that responsible ranchers should never apologize for the many things they are doing right. Having driven many of the most rural roads of Nevada, Idaho, Utah, Oregon, New Mexico, Colorado, etc., I have witnessed evidence of the caring these strong families have poured into these places. If anything, they must be even more dedicated to these places than the farmers of the East, because forgiving weather conditions seldom happen in the West.

It is very important to me that my research be distilled into something that offers a means for those whose very lives and multi-generational family legacies, to understand the ways in which language has been used very effectively (until now) to put them out of business and off the land.

It is something considered by very few until now -- that words on paper could be such a powerful tool when employed against their honest blood, sweat and tears equity.

The sage grouse is far more important and precious to ranchers than most of them can even put into words, because it is a species that validates their reasons for getting into ranching in the first place: to make land and water burst with abundance in the form of, not only healthy cattle ranging the West, but also the inherent beauty of the arid places in America being helped, not hurt, by men with hope in their hearts and families, too.

The sage grouse is not the only one with an historic range, a mating dance, and the bond of family and offspring. So, too, it is with the ranchers and their families sprinkled across these wide-open places with strange-sounding names that keep calling, calling those whose devotion is evidenced in streams with green along their courses. Men, women and their children still make it their life's work to be part of the abundance, a help to the flora and fauna, a foundation upon which the deer and the antelope may not only play, but may also thrive.

Unkempt places, locked down and shut down, bear silent witness to lack of stewardship. One need look no further than the difference between a working ranch where Westerners show their love in ways not seen by most, but where a quiet pride exists every corner -- and one where the land is blowin' in the wind.

Water rights, grazing rights, property rights -- these rights are never taken for granted by ranchers, who are the real environmentalists.

Just as Patrick Henry remains a building block of America with his soul-stirring words, as powerful today as they were on March 23, 1775 -- "Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take, but as for me: Give me liberty or give me death!" Read his entire impassioned speech here: http://libertyonline.hypermall.com/henry-liberty.html -- so, too, our western neighbors hold true to the building blocks that feed our bodies good, healthful meat, and feed our souls the vast beauties of the places they call home, thereby keeping us free in this God-beloved land of America!

529 words.

Also posted on the Internet here:

http://www.klamathbucketbrigade.org/Smithson_Wholovesyababy081209.htm