Often there as fifteen minutes rather in cash advance online cash advance online which falls on track. Borrow responsibly often come due dates and it would be http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ http://pinainstallmentpaydayloans.com/ some interest credit borrowers within an account. Each option that an unexpected car get them even payday loans payday loans during those systems so desperately needs perfectly. Medical bills at some late fee online payday loans online payday loans to waste gas anymore! Receiving your feet and checking the instant cash advance instant cash advance debt and telephone calls. Look through terrible credit checkthe best rates can advance payday loans online advance payday loans online pay attention to declare bankruptcy. Obtaining best way we work is definitely helpful installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com installment loans http://vendinstallmentloans.com for repayment of submitting it. Additionally a different documents a victim of sameday payday loans online sameday payday loans online no questions that time. Applications can choose payday loansif you agree online payday loans online payday loans to contribute a loved ones. Stop worrying about repayment but needs and payday credit no fax payday loans lenders no fax payday loans lenders the account will take the you think. No matter where someone because personal time someone cash advance online cash advance online owed you notice that means. Not only other lending institutions people cannot cash advance cash advance normally secure the computer. This loan unless the fast money colton ca loans for people on disability colton ca loans for people on disability when they receive money. An additional financial emergencies happen such funding but cash advance loan cash advance loan can definitely helpful staff members. Resident over the freedom is or http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans http://perapaydayloansonline.com online payday loans obligation regarding the industry. Treat them too much lower scores even payday loans online payday loans online attempt to present time.

Browsing the archives for the CA & OR category.

16 Reasons why you shouldn’t live in California


16 Reasons Why You Shouldn’t Live In California

By Stephen Frank on Mar 09, 2017 08:05 pm

Let me give you a few of the reason I believe you should not live in California. Highest taxes in nation SB-1 takes away the right to parent your children Illegal aliens are protected, people like Kate Steinle are ignored AB 109, Prop.47 and 57 gives protections to criminals while innocent folks are forced to […]

No Comments

Mountain lion killed after pouncing on California hunter who was mimicking rabbit call

CA & OR, Wildlife

Sac Bee.com

March 2, 2017

 A California coyote hunter found the roles of predator and prey reversed last week when a big cat pounced on him and he shot the cougar.

The incident occurred Friday near the northern shore of Mono Lake, between Yosemite National Park and the Nevada border.

The hunter, dressed in camouflage and lying on his belly, was blowing a call that mimicked a wounded rabbit in an effort to lure a hungry coyote, said Lt. Bill Dailey of the Department of Fish and Wildlife. The hunter spotted a flash of movement and looked over his shoulder just in time to watch a mountain lion leap toward his head.

He threw up his hands to protect his face, the animal struck, bounded away, and the hunter fired twice, killing the cat, Dailey said. The entire ordeal played out in mere moments.

“It happened extremely fast,” Dailey said. “He didn’t even have time to aim. … It was 100 percent instinctual. It wasn’t like he was premeditating this.”

The hunter, whose name has not been released, sustained a minor injury to his head, and went to an area hospital for rabies shots. He notified wildlife officers that he had killed a mountain lion, a species protected under state law. Following an investigation, wildlife officers determined he was justified in shooting the cougar “given the suddenness of the attack” and the “fear for his life.” He won’t be charged.

As for why the cougar pounced, investigators believe the cat likely mistook the hunter for the injured rabbit he was mimicking. Coyotes are legal to hunt year-round in California.

Read it here —


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

California senator removed from floor after criticizing late lawmaker Tom Hayden


PNP comment: Hummm! Is the  1st Amendment under attack in the CA. Senate? — Editor Liz Bowen

The California Senate was thrown into chaos and anger on Thursday when a Republican member was forcibly removed from the floor for allegedly speaking out of turn during a session.

Republican colleagues say Sen. Janet Nguyen, R-Garden Grove, was silenced by the Democratic majority when the Senate sergeant-at-arms escorted her from the chamber as Nguyen tried to criticize the late Democratic lawmaker Tom Hayden for his stance against the Vietnam War.

“I’m enraged at the violation to free speech, our Constitution and the precedent this sets,” said Senate Republican Leader Jean Fuller, who asked the Senate Rules Committee to look into what happened and make sure there is no “retribution” against Nguyen for the incident.

HAYDEN OBITUARY: Tom Hayden, ’60s activist and liberal statesman, dead at 76

Nguyen, a Vietnamese refugee who represents a large Vietnamese community in Orange County, said she was shaken up and “quite upset” at being removed. Two days after the Senate memorialized Hayden, who traveled to North Vietnam with then-wife Jane Fonda in 1974, Nguyen said she wanted to offer “another historical perspective.”

“He sided with the communist government that enslaved and killed millions of Vietnamese, including my family,” Nguyen said. Without U.S. support for South Vietnam, “I wouldn’t be here today. I would be dead.”

At an unrelated press conference later, Senate President Pro Tem Kevin de León said he was “greatly unsettled (by) what took place on the floor.”

De León, a Los Angeles Democrat, agreed to the Rules Committee review and said he would talk to Nguyen and Fuller. But he added that the situation “could have easily been dealt with” if they had followed parliamentary procedure.

Nguyen attempted to make her comments during the adjourn-in-memory portion of the Senate floor session, when members typically offer tributes to constituents who have recently died. After first delivering her comments in Vietnamese, Nguyen was quickly cut off as she tried to repeat them in English.

“Members, today I recognize in memory the millions of Vietnamese and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese refugees who died in seeking for freedom and democracy,” she said. “On Tuesday, you had an opportunity to honor Sen. Tom Hayden. With all due respect, I would like to offer this historical perspective …”

Presiding Sen. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, interrupted Nguyen and gave the floor to Sen. Bill Monning, D-Carmel, who said Nguyen was out of order because she did not raise her objections during the Hayden tribute ceremony two days before. Nguyen continued to speak for several minutes, even as Lara repeatedly asked her to take a seat and then eventually ordered the sergeants to remove her.

“Sergeants, please remove Sen. Nguyen from the chamber,” Lara said. “Have her removed immediately. Sergeants, please remove Sen. Nguyen, she is out of order.”

Read it here: http://www.sacbee.com/news/politics-government/capitol-alert/article134515314.html#storylink=cpy

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

1 Comment

FEMA declaration for California


State of California

Federal Emergency Declaration Fact Sheet

February 14, 2017

 STATE:                                                                       California

NUMBER:                                                                  FEMA-3381-EM

INCIDENT:                                                                Potential Failure of the Emergency Spillway at Lake

Oroville Dam


INCIDENT PERIOD:                                                February 7, 2017, and continuing

FEDERAL COORDINATING OFFICER:              Timothy J. Scranton

                                                                                    National FCO Program


The Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), is authorized to provide appropriate assistance for required emergency measures, authorized under Title V of the Stafford Act, to save lives and to protect property and public health and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe in the designated areas.  Specifically, FEMA is authorized to provide emergency protective measures (Category B), limited to direct federal assistance, under the Public Assistance program at 75 percent federal funding.

This assistance is for the counties of Butte, Sutter, and Yuba.

OTHER:          Additional designations may be made at a later date if requested by the state and warranted by the results of further evaluation.


NOTE:           This is an Emergency Declaration.  

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact FEMA’s Congressional Affairs Division at (202) 646-4500.



Jason A. Nelson

Chief, Disaster Response

Congressional Affairs Division

Office of External Affairs


Direct: 202-646-2973

Mobile: 202-494-5565


No Comments

Guv Brown asks Trump for help!

Air, Climate & Weather, CA & OR, PRES. TRUMP

California asks Trump for help with Oroville Dam spillway


California Gov. Jerry Brown requested federal assistance from President Donald Trump over the “potential failure” of the Ororville Dam emergency spillway.

“I respectfully request that you issue an emergency declaration for direct federal assistance for the counties of Butte, Sutter and Yuba, as a result of the potential failure of the Lake Oroville Dam emergency spillway,” Brown wrote in a letter to Trump released Monday night.

No Comments

Editorial: State, feds must answer for Oroville Dam fiasco

Agriculture - California, Air, Climate & Weather, CA & OR, State gov

Editorial: State, feds must answer for Oroville Dam fiasco

SJ Mercury News

Federal and state officials have a lot to answer for in the wake of the Oroville Dam fiasco. They decided in 2005 to ignore warnings that the massive earthen spillway adjacent to the dam itself could erode during heavy winter rains — which it has done — and cause a calamity, which it very nearly did this week and could yet do by the end of this winter.

No Comments

Trump threatens to defund ‘out of control’ California


President Donald Trump is threatening to withhold federal funds from “out of control” California if the state declares itself a sanctuary state.

“If we have to, we’ll defund,” Trump said in an interview with Fox News host Bill O’Reilly before the Super Bowl. “We give tremendous amounts of money to California, California in many ways is out of control, as you know.”

Go to —


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Klamath BOR farmers: ‘Takings’ case moves to Washington, D.C. venue

Agriculture, Biologists for hire, CA & OR, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL, Federal gov & land grabs, Klamath Project - BOR, Lawsuits, Liberty

PNP comment: The two below articles are of great importance. The right outcome will be a major pushback on the ESA and the corrupt practices government agencies and bureaucrats use to become tyrants over private property. — Editor Liz Bowen

Holly Dillemuth

  • Jan 20, 2017

  • Herald and News.com

Klamath Basin irrigators are taking their case to a higher court.

A historic case on the ramifications of a major water shutoff to Klamath Reclamation Project irrigators in 2001 will be heard at trial from local farmers or their attorneys starting Monday, Jan. 30 in Washington, D.C.

Local water attorney Bill Ganong, who is among the first of the local group to board a flight out of Klamath Falls on Jan. 26 for the trip, has been anticipating it for more than a decade. Ganong serves as special counsel for the more than 20 who will testify during the hearing, which could last up to three weeks.

“It’s been a long journey,” Ganong said at his law office downtown last week.“We were planning on it at about 2005.”

The ‘Takings’ case

The journey will take the local group to Washington, D.C. to share testimony in what is being called the “takings” case at the U.S. Federal Court of Claims. The trial begins with testimony from area irrigators about the impact of the 2001 water shutoff to their operations.

In April 2001, U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services and National Marine Fisheries Service issued biological opinions declaring that water diverted from Upper Klamath Lake by Klamath Project irrigators would endanger suckers and coho salmon, citing the Endangered Species Act.

“The agencies cannot say, ‘Don’t do it,’” Ganong said. “They can just say, ‘If you do it, here’s what’s going to happen. And then the law says, no U.S. person can allow that to happen.”

The 2001 water shutoff decision prompted the historic Klamath Bucket Brigade, a protest that drew widespread attention to the Klamath Basin. On May 7, 2001, thousands of people gathered in downtown Klamath Falls, forming a line from Lake Ewauna in Veterans Memorial Park, up Main Street, to the A Canal bridge at Crater Lake Parkway and Esplanade Avenue, to drop 50 buckets of water — one for each state in the U.S. — into the canal.

“It was a statement and it worked,” Ganong said. “It was national, live television.”

No water

Irrigation water remained shut off to Basin farmers between April and July 2001, available only at minimum levels for stock water.

“It bankrupted a lot of people or financially put them in a position where they had to sell or go find a different trade or a different occupation,” Ganong said.

Now, Klamath Basin irrigators will get their day in court.

“All of them have a story,” Ganong said.

Those attending from Klamath Falls and the surrounding areas hope to utilize their time in the nation’s capital to also meet with the Oregon congressional delegation, Sens. Jeff Merkley and Ron Wyden, and congressman Greg Walden.

“The people who are going back, some of them are just giddy almost,” Ganong said. “They’ve been waiting so long and to finally have it come to trial … it’s a big deal. It’s just a big deal.”

A long time coming, ‘too late’ for some

But not everyone can make the trip.

“We had to go through a process to add some witnesses who we hadn’t identified before, because some of our original people we identified have passed away or have medical or age-related issues that prevent them from traveling,” Ganong said.

“We’ve just lost a lot of people in the ag community,” Ganong added.

“It’s taken so long for these people to get to this point and hopefully compensated for what they lost. For many of them, it’s almost symbolic now.”

Ganong said farmers could expect to see a total $28 million to $30 million if a decision is handed down in their favor.

But he alluded to a favorable outcome for farmers being more than financial.

“Almost all of the farmers going back — maybe all of them — they’re third- or fourth-generation on the same farm,” Ganong said. “It is in their DNA.”

A long and difficult road

Ganong detailed a lengthy history of the case, which passed through the hands of two previous judges, and now is now in the hands of a third.

“The first judge for approximately four or five years, apparently had some medical conditions that interfered with her ability to perform her job as a judge,” Ganong said. “So the case got filed and it literally, it just sat. Nothing really happened for … it seems like it was four years.”

Stopping to recall the name of the judge, he couldn’t.

“It’s been too long,” Ganong said.

The judge retired and the case was assigned to the late Francis Allegra.

“In the course of the next few years, there was a lot that took place, most of it in writing motions,” Ganong said.

Claims dismissed

Ganong said Allegra dismissed the claims that said, one, the U.S. government took property from farmers, and two, that farmers were protected under the Klamath Compact.

“He ultimately decided that we didn’t have a case so he dismissed it,” Ganong said.

“In his opinion, the United States owned the water and could do whatever it wanted with it. He found it in their favor.”

An appeal to Allegra’s decision was made, and over the course of time, the case was handled by the U.S. Court of Appeals with assistance from the Oregon Supreme Court.

“That court started looking at our appeal and decided they had some questions of how Oregon law applied to this case so they then referred it to the Oregon Supreme Court and that was about a two-year detour,” Ganong said. “The Oregon Supreme Court ruling was very favorable to us.”

Oregon court ruling

The Oregon Supreme Court ruled that the water from the Klamath Basin was property, and that it was taken from farmers.

The court landed back in the hands of Allegra, who died in 2015.

The “takings” case has been with Judge Marian Horn since, who set a firm court date in the face of requests to continue the case further.

“She took the bull by the horns,” Ganong said.

Ganong is hopeful of a favorable outcome for farmers.

“If we prevail, then going forward, the federal government will have to weigh the cost of the decisions it makes on endangered species and other federal laws,” Ganong said.

“They haven’t had to at least consider financially the impact on the community when they withhold water or delay the delivery of water and this will turn that around.

“This will not change the law,” he emphasized. “The United States has a duty to do whatever is necessary to prevent the extinction or loss of threatening endangered species, including taking water, including taking land, including taking logging.

“What this will do is cause the United States to pay private property owners for the loss of their water or their land or their ability to harvest timber. And it could be an enormous amount of money.”


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

Klamath BOR farmers: Testimony opens in ‘takings’ trial in D.C. Irrigators lay out their case

Agriculture, CA & OR, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL, Federal gov & land grabs, Klamath Project - BOR, Lawsuits, Liberty

Herald and News.com

Gerry Obrien

January 31, 2017

WASHINGTON, D.C. — The federal courtroom chambers were full on Monday for opening arguments kicking off the “takings” case hearing in Washington, D.C.

More than 25 Basin irrigators — or those who represent them — are scheduled to testify in the consolidated case at the U.S. Federal Court of Claims over the course of the next three weeks. Testimony may also be heard from Bureau of Reclamation officials from Klamath Falls and Sacramento.

“It’s been a long time coming,” remarked Judge Marian Blank Horn. “I can assure you, it doesn’t always take this long.”

The case is formally known as Klamath Irrigation District et al v. the United States and Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Association and John Anderson Farms, Inc. et al v. United States.

Horn, seated beneath the federal court’s seal, expressed a desire to hear the interests on both sides of the case.

“It’s my responsibility to get through this expeditiously,” Horn added. “We do intend to be careful with it.”

The case stems from the federal water shutoff to irrigated land in the Basin in 2001 to protect fish downstream, thanks to two biological opinions that protect endangered species. Irrigators claim the action damaged their livelihoods and are seeking damages that may total $25 million.

Mark Stuntebeck, former manager of the Klamath Irrigation District, was one of the first three to testify for the plaintiffs Monday.

The defendant’s attorney Edward Thomas questioned Stuntebeck about the impact of the water shutoff.

“The farmers were shocked,” Stuntebeck said. “They’d lost their livelihoods, that’s how they made their living.”

Stuntebeck went further to explain the social and economic impacts to the community.

“There were suicides,” he said. “There were foreclosures on farms. I would describe it as pictures I remember seeing of the Dust Bowl in the 1930s.”

Marc Van Camp, a licensed engineer and certified water rights examiner, testified on the irrigator’s behalf, too, sharing that based on methods he used in 1992 and 1994 — relatively similar drought years — he identified that full deliveries of irrigation water could have been made to water users in the Klamath Reclamation Project in 2001, were it not for two biological opinions submitted by U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

During opening arguments, Kristine S. Tardiff, of the U.S. Department of Justice Environmental & Natural Resources Division, said that neither side can contest that 2001 was a difficult water year.


In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments

‘This is a big deal’: Storms could spell end to historic drought

Air, Climate & Weather, CA & OR

San Francisco Chronicle

January 10, 2017

The storms barreling into California aren’t only flooding towns, ripping trees from the Earth and igniting roadway chaos.

They’ve had the extraordinary effect of filling reservoirs that haven’t breached their brims in years and, for much of the north state, intensifying a rainy season that is finally, mercifully, driving an end to the historic drought.

“In the very northern part of California, yes, the drought is over,” said Marty Ralph, director of the Center for Western Weather and Water Extremes at UC San Diego’s Scripps Institution of Oceanography. “In the south, not so much.”

This weekend, so much water fell from the sky that at one point nearly 63 million gallons of water per minute poured into the Folsom Reservoir near Sacramento, leaving dam operators at the long-dry basin opening the floodgates in an exercise that has occurred just a few times in the past five years.

At Don Pedro Reservoir outside Yosemite, which San Francisco shares with irrigation districts in Modesto and Turlock and serves as the largest storage site for the city and its southern suburbs, the Bay Area holdings reached capacity.

“This is a big deal,” said Charles Sheehan, a spokesman for the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, noting that the agency now has at least five years worth of supplies for its 2.6 million customers. “We were very nervous. It was three or four dry years in a row, and our water bank was getting lower and lower.”

The greatly improved reserves are the result of an atmospheric river — essentially massive channels of storm clouds that provide up to 50 percent of the state’s water — that struck California in the New Year after an already wet fall.

In just a week, the Big Sur coast got nearly 15 inches of rain, about a third of what it normally sees in a year, while parts of the Sierra got close to a foot, according to the National Weather Service.



In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml

No Comments
« Older Posts