CAPR's blog

Living with Wildlife is not as easy as some may wish. Living with wildlife in a large metropolis may mean a property owner will be confronted with raccoons, rats and mice, and several rambunctious squirrels. Living with wildlife outside of a city has a greater impact. That impact increases exponentially as people in the landscape become fewer. Just outside an urban area, and beyond, property owners will be interacting with a greater a variety of ordinary and endangered species and face more of a financial burden. Preventing interaction with species ranges from how to store refuse to how much of a property is restricted due to county, state, and federal policies. Some people see these additional burdens and restrictions as a simple price for others to pay in order to say they live in a state that they may share with such species.

The Cattlemen's Association is correct in saying the removal of sheep from privately held land is not a solution to wolves killing sheep. “Preventing the legitimate use of private land to meet political goals is always unacceptable,” A misunderstanding of the role of the legislature and the rule of law has led Corporate Environmentalists Center for Biological Diversity and seven other conservation groups to file an appeal to Washington Gov. Jay Inslee to block efforts to kill wolves from the pack. In their blind desire for diversity, they fail to recognize that a hands off approach to environmentalism is exactly what does threaten that diversity. There must be thoughtful credit given to the benefits of grazing in preventing wildfire that harms all species. Hancock Timber must be aware of that benefit or would not have private grazing contracts on their lands.

Thanks to the Skagit Republicans for sharing this article from their September Newsletter. This monthly Newsletter can be seen here: http://skagitrepublicans.com/newsletter/skagit-county-republican-party-newsletter The Great Central Washington Chinook Salmon Massacre The following is from Mike Newman, Mt Vernon realtor and former SCRP Chairman. Mike is a local expert on water issues. His expertise extends to the other side of the Cascades as well. He owns land in Okanagan County and keeps informed of county and dike district affairs in that locale. One of the more inexplicable events that our state government was responsible for was the mass slaughter of endangered Chinook salmon, starting in the late 1980’s or 1990’s and continuing to this year when the program ended.

The US Forest Service, an arm of the US Department of Agriculture has been attempting to control land and water in ways that over-reach legislative authority, this article explores the clear intent of the Forest Service to exert control over water in ways it is not authorized to do in spite of clear instruction from the Supreme Court to remain within the parameters of law. Systematic Efforts by the U.S. Forest Service to Take Control of Private Water Rights http://survivalblog.com/systematic-efforts-by-the-u-s-forest-service-to-take-control-of-private-water-rights-by-w-w/ The article contains important links to FS documents, Task Force Studies, and Court Decisions, as well as attempts made by legislators to halt this abuse of authority.

Throughout the State of Washington Land Use is being controlled through the In Stream Flow Rules of the Department of Ecology. In Skagit County this lead to a retired couple being denied building permits. The process is so convoluted and is such an affront to justice for not only this couple but also for nearly 500 homeowners and 5,500 landowners within the Skagit Watershed who do not have legal access to water in Ecology’s legal opinion. The retired couple is now in court seeking justice in their case. Fox vs Skagit County is a case which may have far reaching impact for many citizens of this state. This is an important case that is worth following and worth support from property owners across the state. Many of these property owners are not aware of the precarious position they are in due to the DOE opinion of water rights.

On August 8th, the Governor appointed WDFW commission heard testimony regarding the proposed HPA rule-making changes. Common projects requiring approval under the state’s hydraulic rules include work on bulkheads, culverts, piers and docks. http://wdfw.wa.gov/commission/meetings/2014/08/aug0814_10_summary.pdf Due to overwhelming public comment regarding the methods, science, and reach of the HPA rules, the WDFW has expanded the comment period to September 15, 2014. This decision was made after public testimony on August 8th before the WDFW Commission.

After reading the jaw-dropping report https://www.cfact.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/Senate-report-chain-of-environmental-command.pdf reading this book, “The Blueprint:How the Democrats Won Colorado”, by Adam Schrager and Bob Witwer will give additional insight into the games played that often have a chilling effect on the will of the voting public.

United Property Owners of Montana will offer 2 days of presenters discussing such hot topics as PLF's Paul Beard on the Koontz vs St Johns River Water Management District. Also on the list of topics are advice on defending your property against public access, the imposition of free roaming Bison, private/public land exchange and access issues, William Perry Pendley on property rights and abandoned government easements, eminent domain, sage grouse and the ESA, the EPA and the Waters of the United States rule, and the Flathead Water Compact.

The Federal Government plays rough. Following the Drakes Bay Oyster Company case, one can see why sharing lands with the federal government is not sharing at all. What began as a land agreement with California State and the Drakes Bay Oyster Company and the Federal Government, the National Park Service evolved over the years into a taking. The National Park Service owns the land under the cannery and says the estero should be protected by the 1964 Wilderness Act, as "an area … untrammeled … where man himself is a visitor who does not remain." Is it any wonder that people are worried about the National Park Service and National Heritage Areas Designations when these types of situations happen under NPS management?