Timber Companies spraying Roundup??…

 

forest weed spraying

forest weed spraying

FH6

We were talking the other day about what is taking place on the coastal regions of Oregon and Washington. The timber companies have decide to spray the newly logged off hillsides with pesticides (similar to “Roundup”). You know the one!? Most Americans use it to kill off weeds on the sidewalks, driveways and patios. Yes that Roundup.

So of course the reasoning is that the underbrush that grows up, after a hillside is logged off, is competing too much with newly planted trees and so must be hindered. Brush like blackberries, grass, foxglove, young alder saplings, and other low growth. These pesticides (herbicides) don’t just fall from the delivery system they use they get picked up and drift with the wind. The intention is to spray on a newly planted hillside, BUT….   Where do you think it drifts to and what other animal and plant life get sprayed as well.

elk

elk

The elk herds in southwest Washington have hoof rot. Wonder what is causing that? Oregon and Washington are big states for the save the Salmon bunch and lots and lots of money has already been spent to help increase the salmon runs in all of the creeks and rivers that flow to the ocean. Gee, I wonder if more money will be spent to save the salmon for another 40 or 50 years. Looks like they will have to because now they have to study the salmon to see if they are being dwarfed, mutated and not spawning, or unable to.  And now the fish and wildlife people get to get money to study the elk to see why the hoof rot is happening. They will find mutations and other health problems with the wildlife.

What ever happened to, its illegal to spray dangerous herbicides and pesticides. With over-spray or wind drift, what is happening with the water supply? The water supply feeds water for human consumption as well as wildlife including bear, raccoon, squirrel, chipmunk, deer, elk, lynx, bobcat, mouse, salamander, frogs, bald eagle, osprey, salmon, trout,  beaver, moles, voles, the spotted owl (for gods sake), banana slug, snail, blue heron, woodpecker, Murrelet, Peregrine falcon, turtle,  goose, crane, Blue jay, hummingbirds, red tail hawk, goshawks, harrier hawk,  grouse,  wolves, coyote,  weasel,  mink, Bees, ferret plover, rabbit and many numerous insects. Look at this list and then compare it to the endangered species list and you will find quite a few on there. The eagle is a protected specie which carries an enormous fine but do they think of what the spray is doing to them? What about the precious wetland?

When did it become okay to spray something more dangerous than DDT???

seal with pups

seal with pups

 

 

owl

owl

lynx

lynx

 

 

http://www.oregonlive.com/environment/index.ssf/2015/05/whistleblower_videos_reveal_he.html

https://www.organicconsumers.org/news/oregon-helicopters-spray-weed-killers-near-people-under-west-coasts-weakest-protections

 

 

This is happening internationally also! What will other countries do about this?

 

I am adding some information about roundup and what it is doing to people and wildlife. The effects on the forage or food source for wildlife DOES have adverse affects. The timber companies spraying t5his toxic chemical in order to allow trees to grow better and stronger is a myth. Please read the following articles about the dangers of glysophate (Roundup).

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/07/30/glyphosate-toxicity.aspx

http://healthimpactnews.com/2014/is-glyphosate-responsible-for-your-health-problems/

http://foeeurope.org/sites/default/files/press_releases/foee_5_environmental_impacts_glyphosate.pdf

http://www.gmo-free-regions.org/conference2010/press.html

Berkley Pit, the EPA and the Columbia River…

A little brief history for those of you that do not know of the Berkeley Pit and the effects on the Columbia River.

I thought it was bad enough that the Army Corps of Engineers wanted to dredge the river and dump the spoils on the crab grounds outside of the mouth of the Columbia River.

Living in and around the mouth of the Columbia River we were victims of the save salmon bunch, who by the way is implementing the Agenda 21 charter, I saw the fervor and nasty fighting about the health and welfare of the river itself and the fish. Oh by the way it is never really about the fish or animals or insect or plants,it is about big money. Not just at the highest corporate level, it is also, about the one on the ground, that is paid by grant money.

You see, the way government moneys work “if you don’t use it, you lose it”. This means that if you acquired a grant for $10 dollars you best use all $10 or the next grant cycle you will get less. That also means the one person hired specifically with the grant money will also lose their job, because the money will not be there for them to work.

The NGO (non-governmental organization)work on the Columbia River has been working for nearly 20 years with this idea in mind. You use it or lose it then you lose a paid employee. Then those with the money no longer spend money in the community. Then those people need to move to find another job in their expertise. Boy sounds bad considering these are the same people who think small communities need to have their lively hoods taken away in order to save the what ever.

berkeley pit

Now we look at the Berkeley pit. You ask how does the pit related to the Columbia River? Very good question, especially since it is located in Butte, Montana. The Berkeley pit is a big pit created by mining operations that date back to 1955. There was mining on the hill dating back to 1864 first gold then silver and the big money-maker copper. The pit is a mile wide by 1/2 mile long and 1780 feet deep. The soil has been leaching minerals for years into the water in the pit. The water that is heavily acidic (2.5 pH), about the acidity of cola or lemon juice. As a result, the pit is laden with heavy metals and dangerous chemicals that leach from the rock, including copper, arsenic, cadmium, zinc, and sulfuric acid.

Keep in mind if the pit spills it’s water, where will it go??

Now enter the EPA. The Columbia river has been one of the main rivers on the EPA and UN radar. It is a big river and is a main source for electricity for the northwest. It supports large shipping in and out to the world. What has taken place at the mouth of the river is a fervor to make the river as pristine as it was when Lewis and Clark lay on the logs during a long winter storm. The EPA has given every regulation that is needed to take land, clean land push out the nominal land owners in the name of cleaning the environment.

EPA and the Berkeley pit is a conundrum. The EPA has announced that the water in the Pit will not be pumped out and cleaned until  The water level is at 5319 the critical water level is 5410 above sea level. The critical water level number means this is when they(whoever they are) will start-up the water treatment plant to empty the pit or at least reduce the water level. The treated water will be released into Silver Bow Creek that empties into the Clark fork that empties into Lake Pendoreille that then empties into THE Columbia river.

The problem with this is the potential for sloughing kind of like calving with an iceberg. The soil surrounding the pit becomes unstable due to weather and other man-made conditions and it sloughs off falling into the pit. The water displacement is at a potential enough level to spill out of the pit. Kind of like sticking your hand in a full bucket of water, what happens to that water?

In the mean time they are telling the people of Butte that the water treatment is not needed until 2023.  BUT preparations to bring the plant online will start in 2019, at which time they will reevaluate the situation in case new technology is available to implement.

What I think and other experts have also stated is that the water cannot be treated enough to bring it up to drinking standards and EPA really doesn’t know what to do. So the smoke and mirrors have been giving them time to maybe come up with a process to actually treat the water.

The areas in and around Butte, Montana have been the largest Superfund sight in the country for 30 years. Much of the soil cleanup is nearing completion. This means the many employed working on the soil cleanup will have to move on. The next phase of work is the water treatment. Currently the EPA is waiting, why? Could it be they have no idea how to treat the water? Could it be they really do not want to spend the money on water treatment? Or could it be the simple “Use it or Lose it” theory. Let the water contaminate the creeks and rivers, the soils and the people. All of a sudden it becomes the biggest Superfund sight again. The money flows and every who might have lost their job are now on for another 30 years. Yay win win right?

Ask yourself what will happen to the Columbia River, Clark Fork, Lake Pondereille if in fact the water from the Berkeley pit begins to flow into these waterways. For 30 years these water ways have been being cleaned. The money that has been spent to mitigate fish, wetlands and big business has been in the billions. Frankly if they let the water flow they(NGO’s, Army Corp of Engineers, Fish and Wildlife and others) need to give us back our farm and compensate us for  the grief of losing it to them in the first place. The cleaned rivers and soils will need to be cleaned again. More land taken for habitat and more land mitigated for fish, wildlife and plant life. (More land taken) and for what because they(EPA) couldn’t see the snowball effect dealing with a Superfund sight or maybe they actually did see it?

columbia river at sunset

Relax everyone BP is in charge, 50 thousand barrels a day for weeks spewing into the gulf, when asked about it “its a big ocean I’m going sailing” the BP CEO Tony Hayward. And of course our top CEO in charge of the EPA is golfing. All is well.

 

 

Trade off…

Anytime there is a controversial plan for something related to energy the ecology groups and earth-firsters come out in droves. They will create an environment of controversy enough for the different companies to bend a little. They (big companies) have their own requirements when doing any project. The biggest one is their mitigation plan. In plain English how much land will they set aside to offset the amount of land that they use for their project along with how much land will be affected by doing business. If they don’t buy land outright to put into conservation themselves they may donate the money to a mitigation bank that is being steward’s by a trust (i.e. non-profit). Mitigation banking was established in the early 90’s, to satisfy a U.N. policyon environment. Makes it real easy for big business to satisfy EPA policy just pour some money into a NGO that stewards land???

I saw this take place live on the Columbia River. This issue started with need for the Columbia river to be dredged. The Columbia River normally gets dredged for maintenance. This time was different, they said that the river needed to be dredged deeper than ever before. Now why would it have to be dredged deeper. Then the announcement was made, if 4200 acres of ditched a diked flood plain was returned to the lower Columbia estuary, then it would be safe to dredge the river.

The 4200 acres was to save the salmon. The purchasing of land for salmon recovery took off like a rocket. This would make it sustainable for salmon. (see the word sustainable).  For the next 5 years NGO’s working with GO’s started every project they could dig up, to save the salmon. They also bought land like crazy, (only if they could buy it for nothing) even with unethical business practices, to get it.

With save the salmon moneys 4200 acres did not have to be purchased, as long as 4200 acres of floodplain were returned to the lower Columbia estuary. Often times this meant buying a piece of land and creating a flood plain that also flooded other Peoples land.  This accomplished big business moved in and announced the building of a Liquid Natural Gas terminal(for the loading and discharging LNG in bulk). The LNG ships needed the river to be deeper. The land that was flooded all on the Washington side of the river. And FERC (Federal Energy Regulatory Commission)chose the location on the Oregon side , for the terminal. Trade off, Trade off, Trade off.

The mitigation plan complete for the LNG terminal and how much land would be affected by the LNG ships as well as the operation of business at the terminal. All is safe for the fish and everything is then sustainable.

Watch out Montanans here it comes…takings

The recent controversy over the sage grouse. Yes Montana will finally feel the effects of takings. Taking land. Just like the Spotted owl and the salmon, all land that even shows an inkling of evidence, that the bird has been or is on your land, will make your land a target to take. I know first hand how the NGO’s will take this information and run with it, leaving you, the land owner, holding the bag. These organizations will use the policies against any land owner to bully, shove and kick you off of your land in order to accomplish the “greater good”.

If you are a nominal rancher/farmer you are the first target. As I said before the nominal ranch/farm is one that is under 100 acres. The environmental groups like: The Nature conservancy, The Columbia Land Trust,Wild Rockies Alliance, American Wild Lands, Clark Fork Coalitions, Wild Rockies, Five Valleys Land Trust, Montana Land Reliance, and many others. These organizations started out with good intentions yet the ultimate goal is to tell people what they can and cannot do on their own land. If you, as a land owner walk to your own drum, they will dog you and fight you with everything they have at their disposal until you give in. These organizations fight dirty, they will value you off your land (one way) they will tax you off your land (two) or they will policy and fine you off your land.

Yes these types of policies will cost you and cost you dearly.

The ultimate goal is to take everyone but the real, real big boys off the land. The world wide agenda. “Get them off their land” one way or another.

If you the land owner don’t think this will happen, go ahead jump in bed with them, Don’t complain when they come and tell you that your 200 head of cattle cannot graze on the federal land anymore. “After all you want to save the sage grouse habitat don’t you?” If this is not enough of a warning to you then you need to read principle 6, 7 and 8 of Agenda 21 from the UN Earth Summit in RIO http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_Declaration_on_Environment_and_Development

Agenda 21 is  the world organization method of moving people from their land in order for sustainable development. After all who gives a hoot about lifestyles and generational ownership, history, facts and the American way of life, as long as what they do is in line with the UN charter of sustainable development, sustainable resources, sustainable agriculture,sustainable biology, sustainable science, anything that meats the needs of Agenda 21

http://billingsgazette.com/news/state-and-regional/montana/economy-environment-at-stake-in-fate-of-endangered-sage-grouse/article_b4f9036d-ed08-51de-a84d-7d6b437f13f0.html

Many farmers and ranchers have had knowledge of how best to take care of the land, passed on to them by their previous generations. The different government and non government organizations need to listen to them. The one thing that keeps them from listening is the generational knowledge is never in the textbooks and it is not on the sustainable development lists. The science is different now.? Really, is it? Maybe with all the new technology  and junk science on global warming and climate change it is different but does it really work? Ask yourself what really works?

More untouchable subject…

The ecology groups do not want you to know that your tax dollars are being used to extricate people from the land. The Agenda 21 project all over the country is just their, (meaning the US ecology groups), way of implementing the UN charter of saving the planet and doing sustainable development. The plan is to educate everyone right down to, children in preschool, on how we must put land in conservation. Get the common man off the land so  the greater good can save the planet. The greater good is only known by these people getting government grants to accomplish the goal.

During the Clinton administration the largest Endangered species act (ESA)ever was passed. It was for the fish. Salmon specifically.  This opened up lots of taxpayer money. The money crosses lots of projects, air quality, water quality, parks and recreation, habitat restoration, habitat conservation, biologic diversity, sustainable development, forest quality, regulations, pollution control the tax dollar fingers go along way. I am sure I have missed some but you get the idea.

More than a century ago the  Columbia river  was a primary fishing venue, shipping salmon to San Fransisco.  There were  barns, on sand bars, in the middle of the river. During salmon season they would drag nets with the horses. The salmon would be  4 feet long a 80 pounder was not uncommon. Old stories of the amount of returning fish, state that you could walk across the river on the fish.

The Fish Hatchery spoof…

I wrote for a local paper at the time I was covering a meeting  about the closing of a horse camp. The camp was used to park horse trailers and ride into the willapa hills from.  The dirt road to the camp was along a creek.  The agenda of the meeting was to talk about the reason for the closure of the camp. The consensus of the GO’s and NGO”S was, the silting in the creek was being caused by the vehicle traffic. This silting was endangering the spawning salmon.

The monies for the endangered species act had just cut loose. The attendees were, US fish & wildlife (USFW), WA Dept of fish &wildlife (WDFW), army corp of engineers, duck unlimited, Wa. Parks and recreation, Dept of natural resources (DNR), Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board (LCREF) and Columbia Land Trust. There were probably more organizations representation at this meeting, than there were citizen concerned about leaving it open.  All of these people in one way or another were paid by taxpayer dollars

At one point, a statement from one of these organizational people told the attendees,  there were no salmon in the Willapa Bay estuary. Unbelievable, Willapa bay estuary is a primary salmon estuary.  Even more unbelievable, when a citizen spoke up and asked why then were they “cattle prodding them” as we speak.

The cattle prodding was not the only thing they were doing. They would prod them and then use a baseball bat on them. They could not let the clipped fin fish spawn. When the clipped fin fish came up the river they became wild fish The returning salmon numbers went up. These numbers then show that the fish hatchery program is working. If the hatchery program is working then money starts to dry up for the studies and acquisitions and anything extra.

These people doing the killing of these fish are the same people teaching children that a commercial fishermen is a murderer.

A commercial fisherman cannot keep a non-clipped wild stock salmon. If they do catch them they have to revive them and set them free. If a commercial boat is caught by the officials with a wild native non-clipped salmon they are fined big time and or jailed.

Salmon released from a fish hatchery are clipped. The Adipose fin is clipped, in order to identify a returning hatchery fish. This will allow them to count them and show that the hatchery program is or is not successful at restoring fish numbers.

The flip side to this, they can’t let the hatchery fish spawn. If the hatchery fish spawn, the young salmonids become wild salmon. You say that’s good. Yep it is good, but, they say it is “NOT good the numbers of wild salmon go up the money for restoration goes down. When it comes to government money “use it or lose it”. The next round of grant money won’t look as good. In their eyes, the need for the hatchery program could dwindle if wild salmon start to return in ever increasing numbers.

Today you have fish hatcheries, on the tributaries of the Columbia. Migration to Sea – The newly emerged fry immediately begin downstream migration to marine waters. When the fry first enter saltwater they assemble in small schools and reside close to shore to avoid predators. As the young fish grow, they gradually move to deeper waters and generally migrate towards open ocean waters. Mortality during this early marine life period are primarily the result of predation by birds and other fish species. http://wdfw.wa.gov/fishing/salmon/chum/life_history/index.html

At the hatchery the fry have been fed by human hand. (top fed) The easiest way is to throw the feed into the pond.   The fry get  conditioned to the shadow on the surface and the appearance of food.    Once they are released, they follow a shadow on the surface and shoot for the surface.  Out in the Columbia there are two islands (Rice and Sand Islands) that were created by dredge spoils from the shipping channel in the river. This island has the biggest  colonies of Caspian terns and double-crested cormorants in the world. The terns eat salmonids. They fly down on the surface and create a shadow. This shadow is similar to the feed flying thru the air. The fry (salmonid) expecting feed , swim right up and land right in the mouth of a tern. Flocks of terns gobble up the salmonid. Few make it out to sea to survive the migration around the pacific rim and back to their home in Washington.

I think the people who thought it would be smart to throw the food to the salmonid did not think of the predator waiting to gobble up the salmon.

Us non educated shall not point out the fallacy in this kind of thinking.   After all they are the educated, they are the one’s that know better how to take care of the planet. They are the biologist that learned how to do this. They read it in a book, they even saw it on the internet, maybe even Facebook. Lets not point out the common sense in restoring salmon, that was born in a fish hatchery, that feeding from above might just set these salmonids up for peril.

http://www.birdresearchnw.org/Project-Info/Study-Area/Columbia-Basin/East-Sand-Island/default.aspx

http://www.birdresearchnw.org/Project-Info/Study-Area/Columbia-Basin/Rice-Island/default.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cattle_prod