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 blog archivesfor the day Thursday, May 18th, 2017.

Yreka Tea Party Patriots meet 5-23-17

TEA Party

Yreka Tea Party Patriots

Meeting for Tuesday, May 23rd

6:30 PM at the Covenant Chapel Church

200 Greenhorn Rd.   Yreka 


Elizabeth Nielsen

Natural Resources Policy Specialist

County of Siskiyou

Learn how the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act will affect your lives here in Siskiyou County


Free….no membership.  Doors open at 6PM, come early to socialize with like minded people.


Contact Louise @ 530-842-5443


No Comments

Tribes call for agreement termination

Karuk Tribe on Klamath, KBRA or KHSA, Klamath River & Dams

Herald and News.com

May 18, 2017

After mediation failed to find a solution to sustain the Upper Klamath Basin Comprehensive Agreement (UKBCA), Klamath Tribes and Upper Basin irrigators differ on the future of the agreement.

In an April 26 letter, Klamath Tribes Chairman Don Gentry asked U.S. Department of the Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke for the UKBCA’s termination through issuing a “Negative Notice,” citing unmet stipulations in the agreement and termination of the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement (KBRA).

Gentry recently visited with U.S. Sens. Ron Wyden and Jeff Merkley, both Oregon Democrats, as well as U.S. Rep. Greg Walden (R-OR) in Washington, D.C. and Department of Interior staff regarding the UKBCA.

“We provided a status of the Upper Basin agreement, and our intentions to continue the Negative Notice,” Gentry said.

“It was centered on trying to resolve litigation over water,” Gentry said of the UKBCA. “It was never intended to be a stand-alone agreement. In fact, it really couldn’t survive without the KBRA.”

Agreement request

Upper Klamath Basin irrigators submitted an April 28 letter asking Zinke to keep the agreement in place, via attorney Dominic M. Carollo on behalf of Fort Klamath Critical Habitat Landowners, Sprague River Resource Foundation and the Modoc Point Irrigation District. Upper Basin irrigators continue seek a solution to keep the agreement intact.

“Terminating the UKBCA at this time, just as the irrigation season commences, would have devastating consequences for livestock producers in the Upper Klamath Basin by subjecting them to calls for fulfillment of Tribal in-stream water rights at their full levels as opposed to the reduced levels negotiated under the UKBCA,” Carollo said in the letter.

The Klamath Tribes met with Oregon representatives, land owner entities and Interior officials Oct. 3, 2016 to find a way forward following termination of the KBRA. Attempts for a solution failed.

“The Klamath Tribes determined that the parties could not cure the losses incurred by the termination of the KBRA or address the issues listed in our Notice, as these programs were inextricably tied to KBRA funding sources,” Gentry wrote in the letter to Zinke.

Mediation efforts

Following that determination by Gentry in October 2016, he and other Tribal members continued to seek a solution through mediation. On Feb. 23, Gentry met with a select group of landowners, officials from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior’s Office of the Solicitor and the Department of Justice, as is required by the Upper Basin agreement.

Mediator Susan Driver, who led the mediation, concluded parties were unable to reach a solution, according to the letter to the Interior.

“The expiration of the KBRA is too big to overcome to successfully implement the UKBCA,” Gentry wrote in the letter to the Interior. “…The overall benefits the KBRA was designed to provide to the Klamath Tribes cannot be accomplished through the UKBCA alone.

“When the Klamath Tribes and the other parties negotiated the Klamath Basin Restoration Agreement, it was envisioned that they were going to try to bring as many parties that were battling over water together to reach a solution that would work for all,” Gentry added.

The KBRA terminated Jan. 31, 2015.



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

Save the FFA — call Assemblyman Brian Dahle and Senator Ted Gaines


Contact Your Legislators to Save Career Technical Education

Governor Jerry Brown released his 2017-18 budget which proposes the complete elimination of funding for Career Technical Education (CTE) programs, including the complete defunding of organizations like FFA.

The budget proposal will go before a key vote on Tuesday, May 23.
Your legislators need to hear from you NOW!

The proposal would allocate $48 million dollars in available CTE funds ENTIRELY to the California Community College Chancellor’s Office to supplement other workforce development funds already in existence.  Specifically, this cuts the $15 million that used to flow to California Department of Education, which will lead to the ELIMINATION of funding to the following:

  • Career Technical Student Organizations, such as FFA.

  • Professional Development Activities for CTE Instructors, including agriculture teachers.

  • Partnership Academy Programs, which have proven to be highly effective models for engaging students in focused learning groups centered on themes and majors of interest.

  • The University of California Curriculum Institute, which assists CTE courses and programs in gaining UC/CSU recognition for admission purposes in meeting A-G course requirements.

These cuts would ultimately lead to the decimation of CTE programs. Contact your legislator immediately to express your concern regarding this proposal! Be sure to personalize the pre-drafted letter with your own CTE experiences.

No Comments

Congress acts on monuments

Dept. of INTERIOR, Federal gov & land grabs, PRES. TRUMP, President Trump and officials

wlj, 05-15-2017 » Page 1

Western Livestock Journal.com

— Review of monuments created from 1996 begins

The Department of Interior has begun its review of national monuments designated under the Antiquities Act of 1906. On Friday, May 5, Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke released a list of 27 monuments designated or expanded since 1996 that he will be reviewing. He also announced the opening of the “first-ever” formal public comment period for those monuments.

The release follows an executive order by President Donald Trump in April, Order 13792, which directs the secretary to look at monuments designated or expanded after 1996 that were: a) 100,000 acres or more, or b) done “without adequate public outreach and coordination with relevant stakeholders.”

Among other considerations, the president’s order directs Zinke to determine whether the monuments meet the requirements and original objectives of the Antiquities Act, including the act’s requirement that reservations of land not exceed “the smallest area compatible with the proper care and management of the objects to be protected.” He is also directed to consider the effects of the designation on multiple-use activities, as well as the concerns of affected state, local and tribal governments.

As part of the review, the secretary is to come up with recommendations for action—either by the president or by Congress.

As for the public comment period being opened for the 27 monuments, Zinke recognized that a comment period is not required by law for monument designations, which have typically been created unilaterally by standing presidents. However, Zinke and President Trump “both strongly believe that local input is a critical compo nent of federal land management,” says Zinke’s announcement.

The monuments now subject to comment include, in alphabetical order by state: Arizona’s Grand Canyon-Parashant, Ironwood Forest, Sonoran Desert and Vermilion Cliffs; California’s Berryessa Snow Mountain, Carrizo Plain, Cascade-Siskiyou (also in Oregon), Giant Sequoia, Mojave Trails, Sand to Snow and San Gabriel Mountains; Colorado’s Canyons of the Ancients; Idaho’s Craters of the Moon; Maine’s Katahdin Woods and Waters; Montana’s Upper Missouri River Breaks; Nevada’s Basin and Range, and Gold Butte; New Mexico’s Organ Mountains-Desert Peaks and Rio Grande del Norte; Utah’s Bear Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante; and Washington’s Hanford Beach.

Five marine monuments are also under review. WLJ spoke with Ray Haupt, an elected supervisor from Siskiyou County, CA. Having formerly served as a U.S. Forest Service supervisor, he said it’s important that comments be “substantive.”

“For example, don’t just say, ‘I oppose the monument’,” he said. “You need to explain why, preferably in a way that shows direct impacts to you.”

Comments may be submitted at www.regulations.gov using the Docket ID DOI-2017-0002-0001, or by mail to: Monument Review, MS-1530, U.S. Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street NW, Washington, DC 20240. Comments regarding Utah’s Bear Ears Monument must be submitted by May 26. All others are due July 10.

Haupt said county governments will likely be focusing their comments largely on the economic and safety impacts of the designations. Many monuments prohibit or limit fuel-reducing actions such as logging and grazing, he said, two actions that are also important cultural and economic drivers in many rural areas.

He pointed to a November 2016 letter submitted by Siskiyou County to former- Interior Secretary Sally Jewell regarding the proposed expansion of the Cascade Siskiyou monument.

The letter states that proposed road closures could “severely hamper” activities such as firefighting and fire prevention; search-and-rescue efforts; recreation; and access to range allotments.

Despite the protests of all affected counties, former- President Barack Obama proceeded to expand the Cascade Siskiyou monument, originally designated by former President Bill Clinton in 2000.

Negative economic and cultural effects of special designations have been well documented. For example, according to 2013 congressional testimony by Public Lands Council’s (PLC) Dave Eliason, the Grand Staircase-Escalante monument designation has hit ranching particularly hard. After Clinton designated it in 1996, eight grazing allotments were fully or partially closed. This accounted for roughly 6,000 lost animal unit months (AUMs), Eliason said. More closures were being considered when he gave his testimony.

According to a Carbon County commissioner who also testified in the 2013 hearing, the designation also resulted in the lockingup of $2 billion-worth of mineral lease royalties, as well as 60 percent of Utah’s known coal reserves.

“This blatant political move [President Clinton’s designation] has subsequently devastated the economies of Kane and Garfield Counties and lifestyles of the people who live there,” testified Commissioner John Jones, “greatly damaged the reputation of my beloved Democratic party in rural Utah, and has demolished the Department of Interior’s credibility in a state in which they are the majority landowner.”

Some legislators on Capitol Hill are hoping to prevent the creation or expansion of future monuments that lack local support. Rep. Raúl Labrador (R-ID-1) introduced on May 2 the National Monument Designation Transparency and Accountability Act, H.R. 2284.

The bill would amend the Antiquities Act to require that both state and national-level legislation be enacted before a monument may be designated. It also calls for designations to be preceded by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) process, including environmental and economic analysis; local government coordination; and formal public comment.

Labrador’s bill is a companion bill to S. 132, introduced by Sen. Mike Crapo (R-ID) in January. A similar bill, S. 33, was also introduced in January by Sen. Lisa Murkowski (R-AK).

“I commend President Trump for highlighting excessive presidential power that ignores the states and the people closest to the land,” Labrador said in a press release. “But we must change the law to achieve lasting reform. My bill requires public input and approval by lawmakers in the states and in Congress before putting more of our lands off limits.” — Theodora Johnson, WLJ correspondent

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