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 archives for June, 2017.

EPA Poised to Undo Obama’s Federal Power Grab

Clean Water ACT - EPA, Water rights, Water, Resources & Quality

A highly controversial rule from the Obama administration may finally be on its way out.

On Tuesday, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it is going to put an end to the Obama administration’s federal power grab known as the “Waters of the United States” (WOTUS) rule.

Specifically, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers are proposing to rescind the rule and, for the interim until a new rule is developed, recodify the regulations prior to the WOTUS rule.

The Trump administration should be commended for taking this critical action. The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers, through the Clean Water Act, were seeking to regulate almost every water imaginable.

For example, under the rule, federal agencies could have regulated certain man-made ditches and even dry land that may hold some water only a few days of the year after major rains.

The rule was so broad and subjective, property owners would have had a very difficult time even knowing what was subject to regulation. For that matter, the level of subjectivity was so great that even government officials enforcing the rule wouldn’t have been able to agree on whether specific waters could be regulated.

By trying to regulate almost every water, the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers would have been forcing property owners to secure far more permits, including for normal activities such as farming.

The EPA and Army Corps now appear to recognize that protecting the environment doesn’t have to come at the expense of property rights and the rule of law. Critics will inevitably use scare tactics to say that getting rid of the WOTUS rule will harm the environment. The opposite is the case.

Getting rid of the rule now allows both the EPA and Army Corps of Engineers to develop a new rule that is both clear and objective.

This will help property owners and improve compliance—and it will help the EPA and the Army Corps by providing them clarity and direction in their enforcement of the law. It will also, if properly drafted, allow states to play the primary role that was envisioned under the Clean Water Act, which explicitly recognized “the primary responsibilities and rights of states to prevent, reduce, and eliminate pollution.”

This is likely to provide greater environmental protection, since states are in a far better position to identify and address the unique environmental needs of their waters than the federal government.

The EPA and Army Corps of Engineers’ new rule will hopefully properly define “waters of the United States.” For now, though, rescinding the WOTUS rule is the necessary start to that process.

http://dailysignal.com/2017/06/28/epa-poised-undo-obamas-federal-power-grab/?utm_source=TDS_Email&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=MorningBell&mkt_tok=eyJpIjoiWmpjMFptVXlOemd5TjJGaSIsInQiOiJ0alV1cmY2MjJsd0YzT3M4VlQ2ejc2dlNIbm1WRTdLRFpXUDZsSndwTllQNUNJd28ya3VyeGd1UFVqSVpORmZRYXZpTVcxNUZHaERMQktuRmJ2WUxZaXNRY1NvNFRuWWFRNmZRUGl1NHQyTFpwcjRJMGhzTHpyVFhUTGxLaVNNaSJ9

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: Federal Judge Grants Request to Stay Enforcement of California’s Magazine Ban

2nd Amendment rights, Constitution, Courts

NRA News

June 29, 2017

Today, attorneys for the California Rifle & Pistol Association, supported by the National Rifle Association, obtained an important injunction in the case of Duncan v. Becerra, a federal lawsuit challenging California’s restrictions against standard capacity magazines. The injunction prevents California from enforcing the recently enacted ban against the mere possession of magazines capable of holding more than ten rounds, while the case is pending. The ban was set to take effect on July 1—less than 2 days from today.

In granting the injunction, Judge Benitez explained that Plaintiffs are likely to succeed in this lawsuit because “public safety interest may not eviscerate the Second Amendment.”

Filed in May of this year, Duncan is the second in a series of carefully planned lawsuits challenging the package of gun control laws passed last year that have collectively become known as “gunmageddon” in addition to the anti-gun Proposition 63. The case challenges California’s restrictions on standard capacity magazines on the grounds that it violates the Second Amendment, due process clause, and takings clause of the United States Constitution.

As a result of the injunction, California gun owners will not be required to surrender or permanently alter their lawfully owned property by July 1. Instead, the injunction preserves the “status quo” while the constitutionality of the law is decided by the court.

To stay up to date on NRA’s legal efforts in California along with other important issues surrounding your second amendment rights be sure to subscribe to NRA-ILA alerts, check your inbox and the California Stand and Fight webpage . To help contribute to NRA’s legal efforts in California click here.

No Comments

Federal judge blocks California ban on high-capacity magazines

2nd Amendment rights, Constitution, Courts

Sac Bee.com

June 29, 2017

A federal judge has temporarily blocked a voter-approved California law that would have forced gun owners to get rid of high-capacity ammunition magazines by this Saturday.

U.S. District Judge Roger Benitez, who is based in San Diego, issued a preliminary injunction Thursday that found the law was likely unconstitutional because it prevented people from using firearms that employed “whatever common magazine size he or she judges best suits the situation.” The law would have barred people from possessing magazines containing more than 10 bullets.

“The State of California’s desire to criminalize simple possession of a firearm magazine able to hold more than 10 rounds is precisely the type of policy choice that the Constitution takes off the table,” the injunction read.

Benitez added that “a final decision will take too long to offer relief, and because the statute will soon visit irrevocable harm on Plaintiffs and all those similarly situated a state-wide preliminary injunction is necessary and justified to maintain the status quo.”

The judge granted the request of attorneys from the National Rifle Association-affiliated California Rifle & Pistol Association to temporarily block the law.

In the days leading up to the ban, some California gun owners, pro-gun sheriffs and sellers have been reluctant to give up their magazines. Some gun owners have previously said that they were hoping pending court challenges would block the ban.

“We’re not going to be knocking on anybody’s door looking for them,” said Shasta County Sheriff Tom Bosenko in an earlier interview with The Bee. “We’re essentially making law-abiding citizens into criminals with this new law.”

The ban is part of Proposition 63, approved with 63 percent of votes in November, that required background checks for people buying ammunition and instituted other firearms restrictions.

In a statement, California Attorney General Xavier Becerra said that the proposition aims to prevent further mass shootings by those who own high-capacity magazines.

“Proposition 63 was overwhelmingly approved by voters to increase public safety and enhance security in a sensible and constitutional way,” Becerra said in the statement. “Restricting large capacity magazines and preventing them from ending up in the wrong hands is critical for the well-being of our communities.”

To get rid of magazines in compliance with the approved law, California gun owners would have been allowed to move them out of state, sell them to a licensed dealer, destroy them or hand them over to law enforcement.

Alexandra Yoon-Hendricks: 916-321-1418, @ayoonhendricks

Read more here:

http://www.sacbee.com/news/state/article158965184.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

No Comments

Did a mistake by the Army Corps of Engineers lead to the Kings River flooding?

California Rivers, California water, Federal gov & land grabs

PNP comment: Gee, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers could have been wrong? Yep, very likely! — Editor Liz Bowen

Fresno Bee

Flooding along the lower Kings River might have been avoided if the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers had not miscalculated the rush of snowmelt into Pine Flat Lake during the triple-digit heat wave.

Fresno County Supervisor Buddy Mendes, whose district includes parts of the river, said the corps was slow to boost releases when the heat wave started.

Did a mistake by the Army Corps of Engineers lead to the Kings River flooding?

No Comments

LaVoy Finicum shooting: FBI agent indicted for alleged false statements

Bundy Battle - Nevada, Bureau of Land Management, Constitution, CORRUPTION, Courts, CRIMINAL, LaVoy Finicum, LAWS or law, Lawsuits, Liberty
No Comments

Endangered Species Act: Weaponizing law to crush industry, property rights

Endangered Species Act

Free Ranch Report

June 26, 2017

Jonathon Wood

Investor’s Business Daily

Protect Workers, Property Owners From Endangered Species Act Abuses

President Trump campaigned on a promise to repeal 70% of federal regulations, eliminating red tape to promote job growth and economic development. Any regulatory reform effort should initially focus on the low-hanging fruit — those regulations which are needlessly costly and counterproductive. Based on that, regulatory abuses under the Endangered Species Act should be the first scrutinized.

The Endangered Species Act, thanks to its crippling “take” prohibition, has been incredibly disruptive to rural communities, including many of those that supported Trump. For decades, that statute has encouraged environmental special interests to push for ever more species to be listed, to shut down economic activity they dislike. And, although countless jobs have been lost as a result, the statute has reaped only mediocre benefits, including a less than 2% recovery rate for listed species.

The Endangered Species Act is a powerful weapon for environmental groups because it forbids the “take” of any listed species, which prohibits essentially any activity that adversely affects a single member of a species or its habitat. This prohibition deprives owners of private property of the rights that most of us take for granted in owning land.

Consider, for instance, the people of southwestern Utah who cannot build homes, start businesses or protect the airport and cemetery from a local rodent because the rodent in question, the Utah prairie dog, is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.

Representing those residents — who formed the organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Property Owners — Pacific Legal Foundation is challenging the constitutionality of this regulation as exceeding the federal government’s power under the Commerce Clause.

In 2015, a federal court agreed that this constitutional power does not permit the federal government to forbid noneconomic activity affecting a species with no connection to interstate commerce. That decision is now on appeal to the 10th Circuit Court. As the case continues, the Trump administration will have to decide whether to defend this unconstitutional and burdensome regulation.

The incoming administration’s regulatory reform effort should also focus on empowering states to protect the environment in ways more sensitive to the adverse impacts on their residents.

The Utah prairie dog case provides a good blueprint. After the federal regulation was struck down as unconstitutional, the state stepped in and protected the species while accommodating property owners’ concerns, chiefly by moving prairie dogs from backyards, airports and cemeteries to public lands where they could be permanently protected.

The groundwork has already been laid for the Trump administration to reduce the Endangered Species Act’s unnecessary burdens. Last year, Pacific Legal Foundation, representing the National Federation of Independent Business and Washington Cattlemen’s Association, petitioned to repeal a federal regulation that illegally extends the statute’s broad take prohibition to “threatened” species — those facing the least threat.

The president’s appointees can immediately repeal the regulation, which would benefit both property owners and species. In addition to the myriad policy problems, the regulation is illegal. Congress consciously chose to limit this burdensome prohibition to those species facing the greatest threats.

As then Sen. John Tunney put it when advocating for the statute’s adoption, this “stringent prohibition” should “be absolutely enforced only for those species on the brink of extinction.”

Repealing this illegal regulation would also benefit property owners and the economy. Many of the most significant impacts of the Endangered Species Act have been a result of this regulation. For instance, when the northern spotted owl was listed as threatened, the regulation decimated the timber industry in the northeast. Many other rural communities have similar war stories.

Businesses and property owners are not the only ones who would benefit from repealing this regulation. Endangered and threatened species will also benefit. This regulation is counterproductive. By treating species the same, regardless of the seriousness of their threats, it undermines incentives for conservation. Repealing it would encourage conservation through the promise that successful efforts to recover endangered species would be rewarded with the lifting of burdensome regulations.

Although any effort to reduce overregulation will be met with howls from those special interests who benefit from it. By focusing the initial reform efforts on burdensome and counterproductive regulations like this, the Trump administration can blunt the inevitable criticism by claiming the environmental high ground. It should.

Endangered Species Act: Weaponizing law to crush industry, property rights

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

Protect Our Water meets 6-29-17

POW

Scott Valley Protect Our Water

will meet

Thursday, June 29, 2017

7 p.m.

Fort Jones Community Center

Agenda:

Ray Haupt, Siskyou Co. Supervisor Dist. 5

Richard Marshall, President Siskiyou Co. Water Users Asoc.

Erin Ryan, representing Congressman Doug LaMalfa

 

No Comments

EPA moves to kill Waters of the U.S. rule

Clean Water ACT - EPA

The Washington Times –

Tuesday, June 27, 2017

The Trump administration on Tuesday began the process of formally rescinding the highly controversial “Waters of the U.S.” rule, an Obama-era regulation that gave Washington broad powers over streams and other small bodies of water across the country.

The rule, put forth in 2015 but subsequently stayed by the Supreme Court before going into effect, was one of EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt’s top targets when he took the helm at the agency. President Trump earlier this year signed an executive order directing Mr. Pruitt to review the rule, and with Tuesday’s action, the EPA says it’s finalized that review and will move to permanently strike the regulation from the books.

“We are taking significant action to return power to the states and provide regulatory certainty to our nation’s farmers and businesses,” Mr. Pruitt said in a statement. “This is the first step in the two-step process to redefine ‘waters of the U.S.’ and we are committed to moving through this re-evaluation to quickly provide regulatory certainty, in a way that is thoughtful, transparent and collaborative with other agencies and the public.”

The action would return EPA authority over waterways to where it stood prior to the Waters of the U.S. rule. Under the Clean Water Act, the agency has jurisdiction over “navigable” waters.

Supporters of the rule have said that definition wasn’t specific enough, and allowed for pollution to run from streams and other small waters into larger bodies that supply drinking water.

But critics, including agriculture, business, and virtually all conservatives Washington and across the country, said the regulation was yet another power grab by the EPA.

MORE

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/jun/27/epa-moves-kill-waters-us-rule/

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

Road closures in Klamath National Forest

Forestry & USFS

YREKA, Calif.; June 27, 2017 – For Immediate Release – Summer is here and in full swing on the Klamath National Forest.  With the many beautiful camping and recreation destinations throughout the forest road access may be limited, due to winter storm damage.

Roads currently closed;
Canyon Creek (44N45)
Grider Creek Campground (46N24X)
Clear Creek/No Mans Campground (15N32)
China Point River access (16N16)
Lake Mountain (46N65) Slide at the 5 mile marker
Tom Walker Road (46N64)
West Branch Campground (18N31)
Cherry Creek (40N33)

Please use caution and always be prepared while driving.  Check your tires and keep safety equipment in your vehicle such as a shovel and water in case of an emergency.  Let people know where you are going.

No Comments

Lightning ignites small fires throughout Klamath National Forest

FIRES, Forestry & USFS

YREKA, Calif.; June 27, 2017 – For Immediate Release – As a result of several thunderstorms moving through the area Sunday and Monday evenings there were a total of 14 fires detected on the Klamath National Forest. The Goosenest Ranger District reported one fire, while the Happy Camp Ranger District reported 11.  Two fires were reported on the Salmon-Scott Ranger District.

The largest of these fires is the Thompson 2 fire near Happy Camp which is at five acres with 35 fire personnel currently on the scene.  All other fires are contained or in patrol status with the exception of a new fire reported in the Marble Mountain Wilderness near Lake of the Island.

Please be careful traveling forest roads and be mindful of changing weather conditions.  If you’ll be using a campfire extinguish the fire with water and a shovel using the drown, stir, and feel method.

No Comments
« Older Posts