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.
Scott Valley Protect Our Water – POW – in Siskiyou County, California
May 11, 2012
PNP comment: Too bad that no one wants to be “a first!” The “romance” must give way to “reality”. — Editor Liz Bowen
By John Bowman
Siskiyou Daily News
May 11, 2012
Yreka, Calif. — “These are not nice animals,” Leo Bergeron told the Siskiyou County Board of Supervisors at its meeting on Tuesday when he presented an ordinance to outlaw gray wolves within the county.
For now, any gray wolves that find themselves in Siskiyou County will be safe from county sanctioned destruction as the Board of Supervisors on Tuesday declined to pass the proposed ordinance outlawing wolves’ presence and authorizing county officials to kill them.
The ordinance was drafted and submitted by Bergeron and the Siskiyou Pomona Grange Association. Bergeron said he was proposing the ordinance because it is the grange’s responsibility to protect agriculture, though he acknowledged that only 10-15 percent of grange members actively vote on such issues.
Bergeron was accompanied by his wife Kathy and fellow grange member Anthony Intiso. Their presentation to the board included statistics about the effect of wolves on elk populations in other areas of the American west, photos of dogs, deer and elk allegedly killed by wolves, and one photo of a child waiting for the school bus in a cage-like enclosure in New Mexico.
Kathy Bergeron also read a statement to the board written by property and mining rights advocate James Foley of Klamath River.
Foley’s statement called the idea of gray wolves being endangered anywhere “bogus” and “a myth propagated by animal rights organizations and empowered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, both of which are under the influence of anti-American agendas.”
Foley’s statement also compared introducing wolves in Siskiyou County to the idea of introducing tigers to the area.
“You might say that tigers are not suited for this geographical area … but wolves are not suited either and the proof of this is the fact that they no longer exist here,” Foley’s statement declared.
After the presentation by the grange representatives, Scott Valley resident Anne Marsh offered her opposition to the ordinance. She told the board that packs of dogs sometime kill livestock, too.
“Are we next going to get rid of every dog in Siskiyou County?” Marsh asked.
County resident Mike Adams also offered comments on the subject. He said the landscape has changed in Siskiyou County since wolves once inhabited the area.
“They were originally eliminated out of Siskiyou County for a reason and that reason hasn’t changed,” Adams said.
District 5 Supervisor Marcia Armstrong said she is also very concerned about the dangers to people, pets and livestock that she believes wolves present.
“I don’t want to go work out in my garden and wonder if there is a pair of eyes on me. People shouldn’t have to live like that,” Armstrong said.
Later in the meeting she said she believes gray wolves are much larger and more dangerous than the wolves that once existed in the state.
However, District 2 Supervisor Ed Valenzuela pointed out that 62 percent of the land in Siskiyou County is federal forest land, including several wilderness areas.
“I just don’t think this is a practical way to deal with the situation. It’s just part of the nature of living in a rural area,” Valenzuela said, pointing out that he’s heard of packs of dogs killing livestock, too.
Siskiyou County Natural Resource Policy Specialist Ric Costales said that in his opinion, none of the wildlife agencies in any of the states with wolf populations is able to adequately manage them.
Costales also said that, “politically, the people of California are unwilling to manage the top end of the food chain.”
County Counsel Tom Guarino advised the board that “there are statutes on the books, there are regulations in these areas and I think the ESA is problematic” in regard to conflicts with the ordinance.
He said it would require enormous resources to fight against those laws.
After the discussion, the board declined to vote on the proposed ordinance but passed a motion to direct county staff to further investigate the issue and find ways to address the issue in a “proactive” way.
“I feel that you are grossly in error,” Bergeron told the board. “You have no power with any of these agencies on what you’re doing. You’re just a pawn. You’re just a ploy and they’re just gonna push us around and push us around like they have been doing for the last 15 years, that I am privy to.”