Subject: Letter To The Editor
Coos County Veteran Service Officer, CCVSO, is moving to Oregon Coast Community Action, ORCCA, Building, in Coos Bay, four days a week, remain in VSO office in Coquille one day a week. 

The move, recommended by  Eric, the County Vet Rep, and supported by John Sweet, County Commissioner, includes $90.00 a month office. A large community reception area and check in desk,  where our Veterans will have to wait for appointments and assistance due them for Service to our Country, along with families waiting for free government services that ORCCA administers

At the time of hiring this new CCVSO, John Sweet was new as a Commissioner, and decided to move the CCVSO to North Bend, County Health, under the Mental Health Department. Word got out, he was advised that Vets, seeking services from the Veteran Administration, VA, were not mental and did not like the broad brush of Veterans having mental issues. 

Veterans seeking services from the VA, do not seek hand outs, nor ask for more than they were promised for their duty and service to their country.  

Again, the broad brush, Veterans, seeking Services will have to go to the Community hand out center, in a waiting room with non Vets to seek VA services. 

The Coos County Commissioners need to Man/Woman up. The County Veteran Service Officer was hired to work out of the County Veteran's Office in Coquille Oregon, Vets now, will be forced to go to ORCCA, in Coos Bay for Veteran services. 

Veteran Denny Powell

Related Posts:
Letter to Editor---BOC Gave 84.3 Miles of #CoosCounty Roads to Coquille Indian Tribe
BOC---Vote to Add Portion of County Roads to Coquille Indian Tribe Inventory System
Commissioner Sweet has Public Perception Problem with Campaign Donations  
BOC---County Road Master Responds to Concerns About Tribal Road Proposal
Commissioner Sweet Responds to Constituent on Coquille Tribal Road Proposal
Letter to Editor---BOC Has Major Discrepancy with the Coquille Tribal Road Proposal
MGX---County Assessor has Real Disconnect on Community Enhancement Plan
#Coquille & #MyrtlePoint School Districts Among Worst at Utilizing Public Funding
Letter to Editor---Open Question to Coos County Head of Road's Department
BOC Meeting Bandon mosquitoes, Coquille Indian Tribe Road Proposal July 15, 2014
Letter to Editor---Shocked at Vote By Coos BOC in Support of AmeriCorps
Letter to Editor---Open Question to Commission Sweet About SCCF
BOC---County Meeting to Hire AmreiCorp, Discuss SCCF Tuesday July 1, 2014
City of #coosbay Hiding Documents on the South Coast Community Foundation
BOC---Enterprise Zone Agreement for Jordan Cove Energy Project LP in a Resolution 
BOC---Cowardly, Commissioners Cribbins & Sweet Betray the Voters of Coos County

On October 20, 2014, OWEB will accept Restoration, Land Acquisition,Technical Assistance, Monitoring and Outreach applications. These grants support voluntary efforts by Oregonians to protect and restore healthy watersheds, including actions in support of the Oregon Plan for Salmon and Watersheds and the Oregon Comprehensive Wildlife Conservation Strategy.

Important Information for Restoration Applications

The Regular Grant Program offers responsive grants across the state for competitive proposals based on local ecological priorities. We’re proud that Oregon is a recipient of significant 2014 Pacific Coastal Salmon Recovery Funds (PCSRF) dollars. This is a testament to the great work completed in support of salmon and steelhead habitat in Oregon. NOAA’s top priority for PCSRF dollars, and OWEB’s grant award in support of that priority, is to fund on-the-ground restoration for salmon and steelhead habitat.

OWEB encourages applications to restore and enhance upland habitat, native wildlife habitat, water quality, and native fish habitat. Watershed restoration from ridge-top to ridge-top is an important component of OWEB’s mission.  While there is no OWEB preference for salmon and steelhead restoration projects, we have a unique opportunity to increase the investment in salmon and steelhead habitat projects this year because of the increased amount of PCSRF grant funds.

OWEB Applicants and Partners:

Thank you for your dedication to improving Oregon’s watersheds and natural areas. For the April 2014 grant cycle OWEB received 153 applications requesting more than $16 million. The Regional Review Teams (RRT) spent many hours evaluating applications. OWEB staff considered RRT recommendations together with funding availability and developed staff recommendations for the Board.

OWEB previously provided applicants with hard copies of all evaluations for their regions. We are now moving fully to paperless distribution of evaluations. Below are instructions for accessing electronic copies of evaluations.

Written comments are due to OWEB by 5:00 p.m. on October 10, 2014. Fax letters to 503-986-0199 or email to oweb.grant.pgm@state.or.us. Please include the assigned number of the application being referenced.  The Board will take public comments and make award decisions at its October 28-29th meeting in Grants Pass. 

For questions about the RRT review of your application, contact your Regional Program Representative http://www.oregon.gov/OWEB/docs/RPRmap_new.pdf. For questions about staff funding recommendations, contact me at 503-986-0047 or lauri.g.aunan@state.or.us.

Lauri Aunan
OWEB Grant Program Manager

To Access Application Evaluations:

1. Access OGMS

http://apps.wrd.state.or.us/apps/oweb/fiscal/nologin.aspx

• If prompted to enter a Log-in ID and Password please use:

Log-in ID: grantee
Password: oweb

• If you already have an OGMS Log-In and Password that will also work.

2. Under ‘OGMS Menu’ choose “Current Application Evaluations and Recommendations”

3. Select the Region you wish to view by clicking.

4. Click the ‘Evaluation’ link to the right of the project name to view the evaluation.

Questions? Contact Ashley Liggett at 503-986-0056 or ashley.c.liggett@state.or.us.

Related Posts:
NOAA Official Responds to Public Request for Answers on NMS Nomination Process
Letter to Editor---To Officials of Bandon, Discuss Coordination on the Marine Reserve 
BLM, USFWS, USFS, Using ESA to Intimidate, Bully & Threaten Citizens Rights 
Letter to Editor---Facts to Dispense with Reckless Claims of Local Paper on Sanctuary 
Federal Legislation To Protect Oceans from Executive Overreach H.R. 4988 
Alarming Article on the Encroachment of the National Marine Sanctuary
The Port Orford Reorganized Fishermen Association Opposes Marine Sanctuary 
NOAA---Implementing Presidents Ocean Zoning Plan & Expanding Marine Sanctuary
NOAA---Updates Nominating Process for New National Marine Sanctuaries 
NOAA Official Responds to Public Request for Answers on NMS Nomination Process
Wrangling Over Water~The Story of the Johnson Creek Damn in #CoosCounty 
OWEB---Taxpayers Need to Comment on Annual Customer Service Survey
OWEB---Gave Away $12 Million of Public Money Partly for Wetland Restoration
OWEB---Public Meetings in Coos County Discussing Local Projects April 28-30
OWEB---Public Comment on Rules for Watershed Council Grants by March 31, 2014
OWEB---Updating the Watershed Council Map
OWEB---Streamlined Budget Categories for Grant Applications 
OWEB---Whole Watershed Restoration Initiative RFP Released & Scheduling‏
OWEB Grant Request by The Nature Conservancy 2013
OWEB---Public Meeting Focused on Winter Lake Restoration  August 29, 2013
OWEB---Seeking public comment on now expired Salmon Season State of Emergency
OWEB---Long-Term Investment Strategy for Conservation‏
OWEB---Watershed Council Support Update‏
OWEB---Restoration, Water Acquisition and Technical Assistance applications
OWEB---Proposed Direction for OWEB's Long-Term Investment Strategy for Conservation‏
OWEB---Post Listening-Session Survey Available‏

August 28, 2014 by magix

The Oregonian has published another in its series about the Jordan Cove LNG project. The article focuses upon the controversial use of eminent domain to acquire rights to private property presumably for the “public good.” What qualifies as a public benefit is a matter of contention with the federal regulators viewing the high costs to small rural communities being outweighed by the modest benefits to the country as a whole.

Gas exports will provide a small “net benefit” over time, some studies conclude. Those benefits are concentrated in gas producing states and other locales along the supply chain, including Coos Bay. So the U.S. Department of Energy has determined that Jordan Cove is “not inconsistent with the public interest.”

But the local toll may be a heavy price to pay for a ‘small “net benefit”‘.

Along its 230-mile path, contractors would clear-cut public and private forests, tunnel under hundreds of rivers and streams and plow across more than 400 parcels of privately owned land.

The projects backers say they can accomplish all this in a fair and equitable manner, while minimizing environmental and property damages. They say eminent domain is a last resort, used only if it’s impossible to reach a mutually agreeable deal with a landowner, and only after an impartial arbitrator determines a fair price for easements and damage.

Yet the threat of condemnation is the company’s silent partner in any negotiation. And many landowners want nothing to do with the project.

Read it here

Related Posts:
DEQ---Extends Public Comment to August 28 for Proposed Air Quality Permitting  
DEQ---Public Comments by July 31, 2014 Proposed Revisions Air Quality Permitting
EPA---Public Comments on Proposed Water Rule to Make Federal Land Grabs Easier 
EPA---Public Comment on Disapproval of OR Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control 
SCOTUS---Did EPA Overstep on Global Warming 
EPA---Public Comments on New Stricter Performance Standards for wood heaters
Federal Legislative Action Alert:  Vote YES on S.890 to Protect Private Property
The Natural Resources Report---Two Stories Showing Cause and Effect
EPA---Article in the Western Mining Alliance Newsletter on Oregon Spotted Frog
EPA---Victims of Government: The Case of Steve Lathrop, Sounds Familiar
Port Orford---Government Ownership equals Poverty and hungry children
The Nature Conservancy---Contact the Oregon Leadership Team 
The Nature Conservancy---Oregon Grasslands: Crucial for Wildlife Survival‏
The Bandon Marsh  Mosquito Farm
USFWS---Public Responses to the Bandon Marsh Mosquito Invasion
Letter to Mr. Lowe of the USFWS about the Bandon Marsh Mosquitoe  Problem
Department of Interior---Land Buy-Back Program for Tribal Nations AKA The Coquilles

 July 7, 2014

Yes to LNG, No to the CEP

Since the inevitability of the Jordan Cove Project is becoming apparent, many in the community are excited at the proposal of the real, and the perceived economic activity this facility will generate.  With the expectation of promises and change, support for the LNG has grown. 

However, a good percentage of the taxpayers have a serious problem with the way the Port of Coos Bay, the cities of Coos Bay and North Bend, and the Coos County Board of Commissioners are going to divvy up the property taxes between the groups involved with the Community Enhancement Plan. 

The most valuable part of the project for the LNG is in an Enterprise Zone and the local officials are going to allow the owners of the company to keep all the property taxes for "almost" 20 years.  In-turn, the business is going to charge the people of Coos County interest to give that money back to the community through a process of fees, so the political elite can put it into a nonprofit they and their cronies have control over. 

The governor appointed politicians on the Port of Coos Bay are doing this as a way to circumvent the equalization process that back-fills the money lost from the school district to the Enterprise Zone.  The state coffers per the student compensate school districts and by law must have the budget to allot for every student.

In the private market, businesses and individuals would face fines and jail time for trying to rig the property tax system.  Today, that is the standard practice of business for local governments.  It still amounts to a way to take advantage of a flawed process and game the system, no matter how the political class explains the formula.

In a regular property tax structure, most of the funding would revert to several other taxing districts, which the district would designate to the basic, necessary, services that everyone in the county uses.  These districts will have to raise property taxes when the districts need to replace the funding to provide for the influx of people who will demand these services. 

The Coos Bay fire department, the county Sheriff’s Department, and the county itself are just a few taxing districts that would normally feed off the money provided by the property taxes collected from the Jordan Cove Project.  Unless, the politicians devise a way of corralling the money to a centralized, unsecured, nonprofit, which will be used for stockpiling discretionary funding to serve as a petty cash drawer for the politically connected. 

The Community Enhancement Plan might be good for Coos County’s In-Crowd, but once implemented, those on the out will be in the cold.  

Keep up-to-date on this issue and more at
www.CoosCountyWatchdog.com.

Sincerely,
Rob Taylor 

Originally Published:
April 3, 2014, 

USFWS Admits Fault for the Bandon Mosquito Infestation 

The US Fish and Wildlife Service released the anxiously anticipated Draft Plan and Environmental Assessment for Mosquito Control for The Bandon Marsh National Wildlife Refuge on March 11, 2014, which was followed-up a week later with an open house in Bandon on March 18, 2014. 

The 209-page document was a thorough evaluation of the mosquito infestation with The USFWS repeatedly and rightfully admitting to the agency’s guilt as sole perpetrator of this biological disaster.  Nevertheless, The Service, already having issues with public relations due to their unsophisticated handling of the Bandon Marsh expansion, now has trouble with their credibility starting on page one of the Environmental Assessment. 

The report states, “In summer 2012, refuge staff noted an increase in mosquito numbers within the newly restored salt marsh habitat and received several telephone calls and one letter describing increased mosquito numbers from landowners directly across the river from the Ni-les’tun Unit.”  It continues on to make the claim that, “In the fall of 2012, refuge staff began coordinating with Coos County Public Health (CCPH) concerning the complaints of increased mosquito numbers.”  It is evident that The Service did very little to nothing to coordinate with the CCPH, when The Public Health Director, Nikki Zogg, was not aware of the problem until mid-summer of 2013.   

The Service contends that due to a large bank of viable eggs left on the Refuge, mosquito populations are likely to remain high indefinitely unless actively managed.  They are developing an Integrated Marsh Management approach to create a long-term solution of modifying the restoration site.  Until then, the agency plans to apply larvicide directly to the infested ponds as one part of a multi-tier solution.  In conjunction, The Service will continue to dig tidal channels to cause more hydrological flow in the marsh, so there will be no more breeding pools remaining.  They theorize that the mosquitos will not be able to lay eggs in the increased turbidity, thus eliminating the insect’s ability to mature into adults. 

However, removing tide gates, digging ditches, and increasing hydrology, is exactly what caused the problem in the first place and the agency’s own vector control experts do not know if these steps will solve the problem.  The USFWS makes no guarantee at all that any of these measures will stop the mosquitoes.  In contrast, most of the professionals and many environmentalists agree that replacing the original tide gates and draining the swamp would be the perfect solution, because it would eliminate the mosquitoes without having to use insecticides once or twice a year.  The main reason for the expansion of the marsh was to promote healthier water qualities, but the threat of adding harsh chemicals to control the infestation would be counterintuitive to the original intent of the expansion.  Diking the marsh would also take away a need to institute a Vector Abatement District, which is a taxing district. 

Just imagine the size of the infestation if The USFWS had begun the 4,500-acre expansion, pulled more tidal gates, and dug more channels further up the Coquille Valley.

The original price tag for the 1000-acre restoration project was $4 million dollars.  It has inflated to $10 million plus and could have grown upwards of $100 million dollars if it were not for the temporary suspension of the marsh expansion this past September.

Considering the enormity of the budget, it is hard to believe that The Service failed to locate outside funding for the inventorying and monitoring of mosquitos, when they were willing to spend so much of our tax dollars on land acquisitions.  The agency’s prioritization of the situation demonstrates their willingness to elevate wildlife over the lives of humans. 

James Lunders is the Manager and Biologist of the Jackson County Vector Control District and The North Pacific Director of the American Mosquito Control Association.  During the first week of February, he gave a presentation at the AMCA Annual Conference in Seattle, Washington, which he cleverly titled, “USFWS Bandon Marsh Wetland Restoration Project-failure to plan is planning to fail!”  Lunders’ presentation is an explanation of how The Service failed to learn the history of the area before beginning the largest wetland restoration project in the state.  He explains how the agency failed to learn from their own mistakes with wetland restoration projects on the east coast.  Many in our community believe the entire infestation was a planned event as a way to coerce property owners into becoming “willing sellers,” thus eliminating the main obstacle to the marsh expansion. 

It was very disappointing that Coos County Commissioner John Sweet procrastinated on convening a citizen committee to analyze the situation and review the actions of The USFWS.  He is the commissioner in charge of this issue.  Sweet’s delayed response and indecisiveness may cause voters to lose confidence in his ability to lead, which may hurt his bid for reelection. 

The USFWS released the EA the same week applicants for the county’s Mosquito Committee received the notification letter.  The lapse in time will make it difficult for this group to have any influence in the final solution to the mosquito problem.  More disturbingly, Commissioner Sweet ignored the advice of the former Public Health Director and did not choose the Director’s recommendations for the committee, instead opting for a more politically correct panel as a way to placate The Service. 

Rob Taylor is the founder of www.CoosCountyWatchdog.com a network of individual government watchdogs.

HAMILTON, Bermuda -- Resource Finance & Investment Limited ("RFI") (OTCBB:RFIVF) is pleased to report that its wholly owned subsidiary Oregon Resources Corporation (ORC) and Teck Cominco American Incorporated (TCAI) have agreed to restructure the terms of a Letter of Intent relating to the 28.44 acre industrial property in Coos Bay, Oregon, previously announced, into a Lease/Purchase agreement.

The terms of the agreement provide for the payment of a $200,000 security deposit and twelve monthly payments of $25,000. At the end of the 12 month period ORC has the option to purchase the property or extend the lease on a monthly basis. The security deposit and the monthly payments will be credited as part of the total purchase consideration. The security deposit and first months lease payment have been paid to TCAI.

The Lease/Purchase agreement provides ORC with immediate access to the site for the construction and commissioning of a 10tph mineral processing pilot plant which ORC acquired in 2005 and had been de commissioned and made ready for transporting to the Coos Bay site. The pilot plant will assist with the determination of the flow sheet for the 400,000 tpa larger scale plant as envisaged in the company's feasibility and operating plan.

The property has a ship loading dock, storage silo and water treatment facility and is divided by a rail spur. It has access to the main interstate routes, natural gas supply and is in close proximity to ORC's heavy mineral sand deposits.

Cominco American Inc Jump to: Case Listings | Ownership Maps

Cominco American Inc is one of 92,125 beneficiaries of a 132-year-old federal mining law that gives away precious metals, minerals, and even the title to the land itself for less than $10 an acre. Cominco American Inc owns the minerals under an estimated 20,453 acres of claimed land, and has submitted mining plans and notices that encompass 21 acres of BLM-managed land, not including the acreages of mines they may operate on Forest Service land. giving Cominco American Inc more total land holdings (claims and patents) than over 99.5% of all other mining interests.

Headquarters 15918 E Euclid Ave
Spokane, WA 99216

Parent Companies 100% by Teck Cominco

Partners Include
Pennaroya Utah Inc,
Resource Assoc of Alaska,
Jerry Oak,
Metaline Contact Mns,
Nerco Inc,
Buckhorn Mines Company

Information on subsidiaries and parent companies shown here represents our best estimate of corporate structure at the time of this website release, and are drawn from various publicly available sources. Please report any noted omissions and errors to EWG with a credible source or citation. Thank you.

Overview of Ownership   Claims Patents Mining Plans & Notices Number 990 0 15 Estimated Acreage 20,453 0 21 States Find these features on a map.

Source: EWG analysis of US BLM data.

Examples of Mines These mines are owned by Cominco American Inc, its subsidiaries, or its parent company.

Name of Mine Location of Mine Mine Status Metal Mined Map Link Jerritt Canyon Mine Elko County, NV Open Gold map Red Dog Mine Northwest Arctic Borough County, AK Open Lead and Zinc - Pogo Southeast Fairbanks Census Are County, AK Proposed Gold - Source: EWG analysis.

Claims Like all U.S. claimholders, Cominco American Inc acquired ownership of precious metals and minerals on U.S. public land for about $2 per acre, and maintains possession of the claim with a small per-acre fee, typically $5 each year. Cominco American Inc pays no royalties to the federal government for metals and minerals mined from this land.

For Cominco American Inc:

• Ranking among U.S. claimholders: 28,406 for total acreage claimed (along with 63,712 others) of 28,405 total claimholders.
• Current claimed land holdings exceed total claimed acreage for: -224.3% of all other claimants
• Total acres of public lands claimed: 0 acres

Claims by State.
State Number of Claims Estimated Acreage
Date(s)
Arizona 508 10,495 2000 - 2003
Washington 379 7,830 1896 - 2000
Nevada 94 1,942 1985 - 2002
Utah 9 186 1906 - 1961
U.S. Total 990 20,453 1896 - 2003 Find these features on the map.

Source: EWG analysis of US BLM data.

Mining Plans & Notices on BLM Land Cominco American Inc is one of the 3,323 mine operators in the U.S. with mining plans and notices on BLM land listed as currently active in government records, operating under laws that allow mining interests to extract and sell precious metals and minerals previously held by the public. Cominco American Inc may also operate mines on Forest Service lands, which are not contained in the LR2000 database that is the backbone of this website. Because the government often fails to promptly close out records for mines no longer active, active mining may be completed for some of the operations represented by plans and notices in this website. The government frequently fails to promptly close out records for plans and notices no longer active. But regardless of the status of mining operations on a particular site, filings of plans and notices are indicative of mining on the property - whether past, present, or planned. Mining operations led by Cominco American Inc may well have left behind permanent pollution. In 2001 mines generated 45 percent of all pollution in EPA's Toxic Release Reporting system while accounting for just 0.36 percent of all industrial facilities.

For Cominco American Inc:

• Ranking among U.S. mine operators for total land encompassed by operation plans on BLM land: 3,323 of 3,323 U.S. mine operators.
• Mining plans include 11 notices for mines disturbing no more than five acres and 4 surface management plans for larger mines.

Plans and Notices on BLM land by State.

State Number of Plans and Notices on BLM land Estimated Acreage Date(s)
Montana 1 11 1985
Nevada 13 5 1983 - 1999
Arizona 1 5 2003
U.S. Total 15 21 1983 - 2003 Find these features on the map.

Source: EWG analysis of US BLM data.

Source: EWG analysis of Bureau of Land Management's Land and Mineral Records 2000 (LR2000) data system. For claims, acreages are estimated based on maximum allowable size of claims. For patents, acreages are taken directly from the LR2000 database where available, and are estimated based on maximum allowable size of claim that preceded the patent where acreages are not noted in LR2000. All notices are assumed to be five acres in size, and the size of plans are calculated directly as the size of the land represented by the legal land description in the LR2000 database. The acreages we estimate through these methods would tend to overestimate the actual amount. We welcome corrections here, and would welcome a federal data management system that included the acreages involved in these important federal land transactions.

Related Posts:
Letter from Fred Kirby to the BOC on the ORC Lease

Citations:

• MLA style: "Wrangling over water.." The Free Library. 2007 The Register Guard 18 Aug. 2014 http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Wrangling+over+water.-a0168860264
• Chicago style: The Free Library. S.v. Wrangling over water.." Retrieved Aug 18 2014 from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Wrangling+over+water.-a0168860264
• APA style: Wrangling over water.. (n.d.) >The Free Library. (2014). Retrieved Aug 18 2014 from http://www.thefreelibrary.com/Wrangling+over+water.-a0168860264

Good morning,

This is to notify everyone that Commissioner John Sweet and challenger Don Gurney will square off at a candidate forum on October 8,
beginning at 7PM in the Coquille Community Center - Small conference room. The candidates will be answering questions from the audience and one of the top issues will be the privatization of public funds aka the Community Enhancement Plan.

--
Mary Geddry
MGx.com
Twitter: @magixarc

EPW Republicans release in-depth environmental collusion report, “The Chain of Environmental Command:
How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama’s EPA”

July 30, 2014

U.S Environment and Public Works Committee Republicans released a report today highlighting the collusion between environmental activists, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and billionaires using large sums of money to influence environmental public policy.

The Chain of Environmental Command: How a Club of Billionaires and Their Foundations Control the Environmental Movement and Obama's EPA

The report uncovers the sophisticated practice of how wealthy donors, referred to in the report as the "Billionaire's Club," funnel money to far-left environmental activists through public charities. It also shows that current leadership at the EPA is very much an active partner in the far-left environmental movement, and even sponsors their efforts through grants to environmental activists.

Key points from the report:

• The "Billionaire's Club," an exclusive group of wealthy individuals, directs the far-left environmental movement. The members of this elite liberal club funnel their fortunes through private foundations to execute their personal political agenda, which is centered around restricting the use of fossil fuels in the United States.

• Public charities attempt to provide the maximum amount of control to their donors through fiscal sponsorships, which are a legally suspect innovation unique to the left, whereby the charity essentially sells its nonprofit status to a group for a fee.

• Public charity activist groups discussed in this report propagate the false notion that they are independent, citizen-funded groups working altruistically. In reality, they work in tandem with wealthy donors to maximize the value of the donors' tax deductible donations and leverage their combined resources to influence elections and policy outcomes, with a focus on the EPA.

• Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) is a place where wealthy donors meet and coordinate the distribution of grants to advance the environmental movement. It is a secretive organization, refusing to disclose their membership list to Congress.

• The Obama Administration has installed an audacious green-revolving door among senior officials at EPA, which has become a valuable asset for the environmental movement and its wealthy donors.

• Former environmentalists working at EPA funnel government money through grants to their former employers and colleagues.

• Under President Obama, EPA has given more than $27 million in taxpayer-funded grants to major environmental groups. Notably, the Natural Resources Defense Council and Environmental Defense Fund - two key activists groups with significant ties to senior EPA officials - have collected more than $1 million in funding each.

• EPA also gives grants to lesser-known groups. For example, the Louisiana Bucket Brigade received hundreds of thousands of grants under former Administrator Lisa Jackson despite challenges by state regulators over the use of such grants.

• In New York and Colorado, a pseudo grassroots effort to attack hydraulic fracturing has germinated from massive amounts of funding by the NY-based Park Foundation, as well as CA-based Schmidt Family Foundation and Tides Foundation.

• Bold Nebraska is another example of faux grassroots where a purportedly local organization is, in fact, an arm of the Billionaire's Club. It is a shield for wealthy and distant non-Nebraskan interests who seek to advance a political agenda without drawing attention to the fact that they have little connection to the state.

• The circumstances surrounding the flow of money from 501(c)(3) and 501(c)(4) groups, and the likelihood of lax oversight, raises questions as to whether 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundations and charities are indirectly funding political activities.

• 501(c)(4) Green Tech Action Fund receives millions of dollars from green 501(c)(3) organizations, then distributes the funds to other 501(c)(4) groups that donate to political campaigns.

• The Billionaire's Club knowingly collaborates with questionable offshore funders to maximize support for the far-left environmental movement.

Related Posts:
SCOTUS---Supremes Refused to Hear Legal Challenges to the NDAA 
NDAA---Lane County BOC Public Hearing & Comments on RCGI April 15, 2014
Oath Keepers Public Meeting in Coos Bay February 22, 2014
TEA Party---Video of Brookings TEA Party January 18, 2014
RCGI---Time to Support Oath Keepers & Make a Public Comment to The World
RCGI---Open Letter to OR State Representative Wayne Krieger
RCGI---Douglas and Lane County Lobby our Senators against NDAA
RCGI---The Jim Bice Radio Show with Stewart Rhodes founder of Oath Keepers 
ATF---It’s time to submit comments on proposed NFA rule changes!
RCGR----The New NDAA will cost YOU $5,700
RCGR---Legislative Defense Manual
If You Value Your Liberties, Stay Out of Coos Bay, Oregon!
RCGR---Coos Bay City Council Rejects Promise of Federalism and Oath
City of Coos Bay---City Council Meeting Votes to adopt RCGR September 17, 2013
RCG Resolution Against the NDAA 2012----Updated 9/7/2013
Obama administration hiding info on targeted killings of Americans - senator
THE U.N. & LOCAL AGENDA 21
THE U.N. & AGENDA 21:

Action Alert
Thursday, August 14, 2014  

Comments on EPA Worker Protection Standard Changes 
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is currently updating the Federal Worker Protection Standards (WPS) in regards to pesticides and it's important that they hear from you. 

Comments on the proposed changes are due next Monday, August 18.

You can submit your comments and find more information about the proposed changes HERE.

Proposed changes include:

1. Changing the WPS training requirement from every 5 years to every year.
2. Expansion of restricted areas around applications
3. Strengthening of notification requirements 
4. Many others

 

Important points to remember in your comments:

• We all agree that protecting workers who operate with and around pesticides is important, but some of the proposed changes create a burden that greatly outweighs the benefits.

• Reducing the training interval from 5 years to 1 fails to recognize the workers' existing experience and previous training, the nature of the duties of the workers and whether changes in duties have occurred since the last training. A good alternative would be to have periodic in-depth training supplemented by more frequent "refresher" training.

• Expanding re-entry intervals (REI) and areas could have unintended consequences for some operations. For example if farmworker housing is near a field, the REI could keep workers out of their homes unnecessarily.

• ODA has the plant scientists expertise to determine if additional Oregon specific regulations are needed.

• In the past, oral notification to workers has been sufficient for most applications, with written notification being a supplement. The proposed changes would up the standard in many situations to require written notification and sign posting. The timeline surrounding the sign posting would be particularly onerous as applications often change based on weather or other conditions and posting is not allowed more than 24hrs in advance.  
  

If you have any questions please call Paulette or Scott at (503) 370-8092

Watch out if it ever get's wet!

EPA's proposed rule to drop the word "navigable" and redefine the "waters of the United States" (WOTUS) to include every occasionally damp ditch and puddle in the nation is a land grab of epic proportions.

Ron Arnold has fresh details at CFACT.org.

EPA thought it could slip this one by. 
WOTUS? What's that?  Water?  Does that affect me?

Unfortunately for the big government crowd, people are catching on a lot faster than EPA would like.  Farm Bureaus and organizations like CFACT have been working hard to get the word out. 

Tens of thousands of people have signed and circulated CFACT's statement to the EPA.  If you haven't had a chance yet, sign on today and circulate it to others.  The public's chance to offer public comment closes in October.

Ron writes, "dumbfounding as WOTUS is, that’s not what makes this horror extraordinary. The fury ignited by WOTUS — an entry in the Federal Register that could easily be ignored as just another technical bureaucratic maneuver — is what’s remarkable: Where the rule says “water,” a substantial public correctly hears “land.” They get it. They really get it."

Obama's EPA has forgotten how our system works.  Congress writes the laws.  EPA's job is to faithfully administer them. 

If our would-be bureaucratic masters never learned about "checks and balances" in school, it's up to you and me to teach them.   

For nature and people too,
  Craig Rucker
Executive Director

In the last legislative session, Kitzhaber and his cronies in the legislature attempted to pass a bill that would have required that you ask the permission of the State Police before giving a gun to your oldest and best friend.  You might very well not be allowed to lend a handgun to your girlfriend without the consent of the state, while you were out of town on business.



See the whole story here.

www.fs.usda.gov/goto/BlueMtnsPlanRevision

You can email, but it may not have the impact of a letter...
http://www.fs.usda,gov/goto/BlueMountainForestPlanRevisionComments 
or you can fax at 541-523-6392

CCAP (Coos County Alliance for Progress) co-founder John Knutson has contributed $2,000 from his towboat company to incumbent John Sweet’s reelection campaign. Knutson Towboat, if you recall, was the prime beneficiary of a controversial “towboat bill” that effectively put Captain Charlie Yates out of business. The CCAP contributed $5,000 to the Hillsboro state senator, one Bruce Starr, who introduced the towboat provision into a bill that later passed the legislature. Sweet has publicly expressed his support for the Jordan Cove LNG export terminal and the CEP (Community Enhancement Plan) which stand to concentrate future property tax revenue funding on the waterfront at the expense of the county. Expect more contributions from the usual suspects that haunt the Bay Area.

On another note, Sweet and challenger Don Gurney have agreed to participate in the first ever Yāhoo Candidate Forum to be held on October 6, beginning at 7PM at the Coquille Community Center – Small Auditorium. The forum is hosted by the Yāhoos of Coos County and everyone is welcome. Questions will submitted from the audience. Forum rules for both attendants and candidates will be posted in the near future.

Hey Folks,

Another Economic Development/"Corporate Welfare" project paid for by the people of Coos Bay,  The Central Planners on the city's Urban Renewal Agency are going to use public monies for the purpose of developing a piece of UR property, so an Indian Tribe can build a high end hotel to compliment the new Indian Casino that will be built in the same area....  As well, The Casino is going to be built on land in a trust and it will not be taxed.  Oregonians cannot own a Casino, becasue it is unconstitutional, so why should we subsidize another groups Casino? 

In the following files is one edition of the Agreement between the city's Urban Renewal Agency and the Confederate Tribes.  There may be future modifications to the contract.  The American Indians have been fighting for Tribal sovereignty for decades and they demand to be treated like any independent Nation, so why is this tribe asking for the city to foot the bill of developing one of their projects? 

Would the people of Coos Bay be happy to have China or Russia use our public money to fund one of their country's development projects, especially one that promoted a vice?.  Vices are not crimes and should not be criminalized, but in the same vein, they should not be promoted either.....Rob T. 

Editor,

Just another silly 'did you know' question.

On August 5th Commissioners Cribbins, Sweet, and Main gave 84.3 miles of our Coos County Roads into the Coquille Indian Tribe Transportation Inventory.

Approximately 23 different roads are impacted. The exact multiple locations on each road were requested several times, verbally and in writing, since July 1st. The requests were summarily ignored. And don't bother to look in the BOC August 5th Agenda or on the BOC Coos County web site because the information, including the list of road areas and the agreement, is not there. You can, however find the MOU (Memorandum of Understanding) and the list of road names with their mileage in the July 1st Commissioner Meeting Agenda pages 18-21.

Why the multiple small areas of road locations are needed specifically by the Tribe for their school buses and getting to work (per the MOU) was not explained. What 'up-grades' (that the county would be required to maintain) and 'economic development' federal funds (per the MOU) they would then be qualified to apply for was additionally not addressed.

What will the Bureau of Indian Affairs with Indian trust lands rules be?

How many Tribal laws, (such as no firearms) and federal strings would then be in effect?

The question of why the good-condition, asphalted 8 continuous miles of the Fairview
Road are needed was ignored.

No answers, no explanations, and no commissioner discussion followed. Just the aye, aye, aye vote.

This is not about the Tribe. It is about the infrastructure and finances of Coos County being used to divide our community into special interest groups against each other.

Divide and Conquer?

Why are the commissioner-signed agreements such as this agreement, the ORC (Oregon Resources Corp.) open ended agreement, the Bay Area Enterprise Zone Agreement, the CEP Agreement, disposal of the solid waste facility agreement, etc, etc not on the County site for the citizens to see, both before and after they sign? There are many very experienced knowledgeable retired citizens in Coos County who can, viewing past
history, read these agreements much better than the establishment few. 

Vote for the “Voice of the Voters” Home Rule Charter in November and bring some
common sense and stability back to Coos County.

Jaye Bell
Coquille, Oregon 97423

Related Posts:
News with Views Editor Special Guest Speaker for Patriots Gathering July 19, 2014 
Letter to Editor---Curry County Charter does not equal Coos County Charter
BOC---Shared State-County Services and Mosquito Abatement
Letter to Editor---Jordon Cove Expects Tax Relief 
Agenda 21---Sustainable Development & Regionalism
Community Vs. Collectivism
Regionalism - The Blueprint for Your Serfdom
Letter to Editor---WHY DID THE CHARTER BALLOT MEASURE 6-143 NOT PASS?
BOC---Regulatory Streamlining and why they want an Administrator
MGX---a few links to some very informative articles from Mary Geddry
City of Bandon---Votes on the renewal of City Manager's Contract
MGX---"Change the title of the administrator to 'director' and the problem is solved."
BOC---Regulatory Streamlining and why they want an Administrator
Letter to Editor------Feckless or Hypocritical
MGX---Spinmeisters at The World newspaper.....
Audit report 2012-17‏
MGX---plans underway to dismantle county government‏
Jackson County regional planning gets green light---Regionalization coming to Coos
News with Views Editor Special Guest 

Please, folks, look at this attachment.  It is the best response to the further closures that the Fed.'s have planned for the Wallowa Whitman, Umatilla and Malheur National Forest.  This response was worked up by FAFA (Forest Access For All ) They were the main reason that this was held off last go'round.  I just received the information from the USFS of the whole plan in their 'legaleeze'.  Had to go to W.W. Dist Office.  They had ONE copy that I could 'read' in the office - none on hand.  This monster is 1400 pages and 9 pounds big!  You can also go to http://www.fs.usda.gov/goto/BlueMtnsPlanRevision to overwhelm yourselves.  Another 'planned overwhelm' in effort to baffle us with their brilliant B.S.!!!  The idea is to restrict our Sundays drives in the mountains, motorized access, just as they have done with wilderness.  This is their attempt to extend the wilderness non-access areas, slowly add more areas to semi-wilderness (soon to become wilderness) and then to restrict travel in the 'what's left' of the general forest.  If they have their way, you will be restricted, in time, to only certain roads and only 20 to 300 feet off those roads over time, even in general forest non-wilderness.  Many of the roads you now enjoy will be gated or blocked to traffic.  This will not happen all in one swoop, but will slowly be implemented over time and they hope you will not notice or object if they take from you little bites.....  Designated roads = limiting passage = WARNING!

Forest Access For All is doing above and beyond the call - trying to wake up the general population as to the seriousness of the takings of our rights to our national forests.  They are holding meetings all over the impacted areas (see their site). There is more at stake than Sunday drives here.  Loss of potential jobs, loss of access for fire protection, loss and restriction of hunting and fishing, mushrooming, woodcutting, and loss of the natural pure enjoyments found in our forests and much, much more.  They do not want you on 'their land' even though you pay for it and it is part of your heritage.  Wake up folks and get with the program, this is for real and forever!!!  The loss will be felt for generations through all of our communities.

You have until Aug. 15th to get your response into their hands. Please, do not wait until Aug. 15th to post.  You can get the 9lb. copy of your own from the main office near Wildhorse Casino (so I was told).  Not sure of that address.  Or you can call them at 541-523-1246 or 541-523-1302 or dist. offices (since, dist. offices may have none on hand to give out -  order your own 9lbs through them.)  Don't let them put you off, insist and stick to it.  Their job is to dissuade you - their real job is to serve you.  Their idea of a good response from you is NO RESPONSE.  If nothing else, copy this attachment and go through it and write in your own words your objections somewhat item by item.  If there is a group of you, you have to do it as individuals or it will only count as one person.  We need to protect our rights to our forest - they have taken enough from us without our awareness - you want to give them more???!!!.  When you write, please be somewhat specific.  Generalities won't cut it. pol Be polite and politely firm!  Send your responses to Blue Mountain Plan Revision, P.O.Box 907, Baker City, Oregon, 97814.  You can email, but it may not have the impact of a letter... http://www.fs.usda,gov/goto/BlueMountainForestPlanRevisionComments  or you can fax at 541-523-6392.  Now, the work has been done for you...you can sit and do nothing...you can think on it until time is passed and hope that the 'some one else's' will have made the impact or you can get off you butts and join in the fight to save your heritage and your freedoms...at last!!!  We need your help!  FAFA needs your help! Anyone that depends on or enjoys the forests needs to deal with this now - politely and firmly!!!   Sorry for yelling, but geeze folks what does it take???  You can go to the Forest Access For All site at www.FAFA.org for tons more information.

Please spread this around to all you know, to groups that use the forest, to anyone and everyone.  Law of averages is that a small portion will take action - shame on you if you don't! Make copies with my e-mail whit explains how to use the rebuttal of it, for businesses that may be impacted....gun shops and clubs, snowmobilers, 4X4 groups, you get my drift.  Ask them to forward it.  Be bold and creative.  All that is needed is for good men to be silent!  O.K. now that I have thrashed you, thanks for your time, my friends... 
Jan Craig,  Milton-Freewater, Oregon TPP

DeFazio to Host 20 Town Hall Meetings Aug 1, 2014

Press Release Washington, DC- Rep. Peter DeFazio (OR-04) announced his town hall schedule for the August 2014 recess. Rep. DeFazio will travel the district to meet with constituents to discuss jobs and transportation legislation, the federal budget, Social Security, Medicare, port dredging and other issues relevant to Oregon’s Fourth Congressional District. The town hall meetings also give constituents an opportunity to share their opinions and have Rep. DeFazio answer their questions about federal issues.

Meetings are open to members of the public as well as the media. Rep. DeFazio kicked off his town hall series with a telephone town hall on July 21.

The rest of the schedule is as follows:

Related Posts:
Commissioner Sweet has Public Perception Problem with Campaign Donations  
BOC---County Road Master Responds to Concerns About Tribal Road Proposal
Commissioner Sweet Responds to Constituent on Coquille Tribal Road Proposal
Letter to Editor---BOC Has Major Discrepancy with the Coquille Tribal Road Proposal
MGX---County Assessor has Real Disconnect on Community Enhancement Plan
#Coquille & #MyrtlePoint School Districts Among Worst at Utilizing Public Funding
Letter to Editor---Open Question to Coos County Head of Road's Department
BOC Meeting Bandon mosquitoes, Coquille Indian Tribe Road Proposal July 15, 2014
Letter to Editor---Shocked at Vote By Coos BOC in Support of AmeriCorps
Letter to Editor---Open Question to Commission Sweet About SCCF
BOC---County Meeting to Hire AmreiCorp, Discuss SCCF Tuesday July 1, 2014
City of #coosbay Hiding Documents on the South Coast Community Foundation
BOC---Enterprise Zone Agreement for Jordan Cove Energy Project LP in a Resolution 
BOC---Cowardly, Commissioners Cribbins & Sweet Betray the Voters of Coos County
Unanswered Questions about the South Coast Community Foundation
MGX---CEP/SCCF will Impact ALL of Oregon
AFP---Information on the CEP/SCCF Presentation at the Red Lion on May 1, 2014
Letter to Editor---SCCF Should pay for Coos Bay Sewer Upgrades
Letter to Editor---Promises in the Dark with the Jordan Cove Project
BOC---Public Meetings Coos County Planning Changing Land Use Laws
Letter to Editor---County Politicians Keeping Public in the Dark on SCCF
RPCC---Republican Monthly Meeting "Candidate Forum" April 24, 2014
Critique of the BOC Town Hall in Bandon---"PUT IT ON THE BALLOT"
BOC---Public Meetings on South Coast Community Foundation "Put it on the Ballot"
BOC---Public Meeting for Vote on South Coast Community Foundation April 1, 2014

On 7/17/2014 10:58 AM, Rob Taylor wrote:
Hello,

Could you please send me the report concerning the nominating of Cape Blanco Oregon  for a National Marine Sanctuary?  It was written by a Dr. Wooninck concerning the nomination process. 

Wooninck was in Port Orford on May 28, 2014 to hold a public meeting.  

Also, please send me any other reports concerning the nomination of Cape Blanco, Oregon for a National Marine Sanctuary?

Then would you please put my email obetewic@msn.com on any list that NOAA sends out about the National Marine Sanctuary, especially anything concerning the Southern Oregon Coast.  Meetings, press releases, and reports I request they be sent to my email. 

Please let me know if I need to fill out any official forms? 

Sincerely,
Rob Taylor

Dear Mr. Taylor:

Attached is the only report we have that pertains to your request.  Typically, NOAA National Marine Sanctuaries' staff produce brief summaries of important activities which are then submitted to our headquarters.  The attached report is what she produced and submitted after her visit to the Port Orford Community in late May 2014.  These reports are characteristically brief; Dr. Wooninck did give me an extensive briefing after her trip, including the level of support, the types of questions community members had, the level of opposition and (her understanding of) the reasons for that opposition.  Dr. Wooninck travelled to southern Oregon in response to an invitation by community members.  We are not proponents of any particular position or nomination; our role is to provide the facts about what a national marine sanctuary could mean to a community.  As such, if any nomination comes forward for a sanctuary, off Cape Blanco or any where in the country, it will be the community members preparing and submitting that, not me, my staff or my office.

You may want to review the website NOAA has prepared regarding nominations for national marine sanctuaries (See  http://www.nominate.noaa.gov/). You can find the final rule that was published and the criteria and process that will be used to review any nomination.  We have not received any nominations to date from anywhere in Oregon. 

We do not have a list serve nor are we planning to develop one related to national marine sanctuaries in Oregon. But I will retain your email address in the event we determine a list serve is necessary.  Our public affairs office may have a list serve for general information about national marine sanctuaries. If you are amenable, I will forward it to them and ask that you be added to that list serve.

Best regards, Bill

Related Post
Letter to Editor---To Officials of Bandon, Discuss Coordination on the Marine Reserve 
BLM, USFWS, USFS, Using ESA to Intimidate, Bully & Threaten Citizens Rights 
Letter to Editor---Facts to Dispense with Reckless Claims of Local Paper on Sanctuary 
Federal Legislation To Protect Oceans from Executive Overreach H.R. 4988 
Alarming Article on the Encroachment of the National Marine Sanctuary
The Port Orford Reorganized Fishermen Association Opposes Marine Sanctuary 
NOAA---Implementing Presidents Ocean Zoning Plan & Expanding Marine Sanctuary
NOAA---Updates Nominating Process for New National Marine Sanctuaries 
Letter to Editor---Ph.D. Misinforms People of Port Orford About Marine Sanctuary  
Honest Critique of NOAA Meeting in Port Orford 
Why does the Government Own & Hoard Resources?
Local Resolutions Against Marine Sanctuary Off the Coast of Southern Oregon
Natural Resources Committee Approves Legislation to Improve Nation's Fisheries
Port Orford "Action Alert" Environmental Extremist Pushing National Marine Sanctuary 
Support Local Hatcheries Protest Native Fish Society April 11, 2014
Port Orford---Residents Get Closer to Recalling the Mayor for Bad Decision Making 
EPA---Public Comment on Disapproval of OR Coastal Nonpoint Pollution Control 
City of Port Orford---Argument for the recall of the Mayor 
Senator Whitsett---Oregon: Transfer public lands from feds?
Natural Resources Committee--State Forests Management Superior to Federal Forests
Federal Register taking comments on hunting in The Bandon Marsh

Fish and Wildlife Commission sends ODFW budget to Governor Bird and fishing regulations for upcoming seasons also set
August 1, 2014

SALEM, Ore.—The Oregon Fish and Wildlife Commission today approved a $357 million budget proposal for the Department of Fish and Wildlife for the 2015-17 biennium that includes a combination of program cuts, adjustments to licenses and fees, and proposals to shift some programs from license fees to state general funds.

With Commission approval, the proposed budget will be submitted to the Governor for his consideration. Final determination of the ODFW budget would come from the 2015 Oregon State Legislature. Changes to license fees, if approved, would take effect in 2016.

The Commission first considered the 2015-2017 agency budget in June. The budget adopted today includes some changes made in response to Commission and public comment, including:

• Restoration of four assistant district fish biologists in field offices;
• Funding for increased hatchery production called for in the Coastal Multi-Species Conservation and Management Plan, and
• Restoration of some positions in the Western Oregon Stream Restoration Program.

Other Commission business:

2014 Coastal Salmon Seasons/2015 Sport Fishing Regulations
The Commission set the 2014 coastal Chinook and coho salmon seasons, which are very similar to the 2013 seasons. For Chinook, there are more liberal seasonal bag limits on the Siletz and Yaquina rivers, and slightly more restrictive bags on the Chetco. Also on the Siletz, the Chinook angling deadline will shift further upriver in October. The Winchuck River will be closed to fishing in 2014 based on recent and projected Chinook returns.

For coho, bag limits and open fishing periods will be identical to the 2013 season, except for a reduced quota on the Umpqua River and minor date changes. In 2014 most coho fisheries will be conducted based on conservative bag limits and seasons; only three fisheries (Beaver Creek, Umpqua River and Floras River) will have harvest quotas.

The 2014 coastal fall salmon seasons are available on the ODFW web page.

The Commission also adopted the 2015 Sport Fishing Regulations that will take effect in January. Most of the changes for 2015 are housekeeping actions related to corrections, formatting changes and simplification.

Other regulation changes for 2015 include:

• Permanent extension of the spring Chinook season in Three Rivers to July 15 (NW Zone).
• More restrictive bag limits and gear restrictions on the Chetco and Winchuck rivers (SW Zone) to protect wild fall Chinook.
• An increase in the steelhead daily bag limit to four in the Santiam Basin (Willamette Zone).
• A permanent fall Chinook fishery on the lower Deschutes (Central Zone).
• Changing the smallmouth bass regulations on the John Day River (NE Zone), changing back to the zone regulations.

2014-15 Upland and Migratory Bird Hunting Seasons:
Based on waterfowl population surveys and federal season frameworks, the Commission approved another liberal 107-day duck season that will open concurrently in duck zones 1 and 2 on Oct. 11. Pheasant, chukar/Hungarian partridge, and eastern Oregon quail seasons will also open Oct. 11.

Other changes to migratory game bird hunting for the 2014-15 season:.

• The cackling and Aleutian Canada goose bag limit restrictions have been removed in both the NW general and NW permit Oregon goose zones. The bag limit will be four Canada geese per day, except for dusky Canada geese in the NW Permit Zone.
• The white-fronted goose bag limit will increase from six to 10 per day except in Lake County where the bag limit will remain one per day.
• Late-winter white-fronted and white goose seasons have been added in Lake and Harney Counties, similar to those in already held in Klamath and Malheur counties.  Summer Lake Wildlife Area and Malheur National Wildlife Refuge will be closed during the late-winter hunt timeframe (Jan. 26 – March 10).
• Bag limit of 20 white geese per day during late-winter hunts in Klamath, Lake, and Harney counties.
• The bag limit for Canada geese will increase from four to six per day during the entire season in the South Coast Zone.
• The bag limit for mourning doves will increase from 10 to 15 per day and the mourning dove season will increase in length from 30 to 60 days.
• The opening date for the NW Permit and General goose zones has been shifted forward by two weeks so the season would open on Oct. 18, similar to seasons prior to 2011.
• The overall dusky Canada goose quota in the NW Permit Zone has increased from 90 to 165 geese for the season.
• The area of the Columbia River (from the railroad bridge at Celilo to Arlington), previously closed, will be open to game bird hunting.
• NW Goose Permit Zone hunters will be allowed to check in at any check station.

.
Though the change wouldn’t take effect until 2015, the Commission also approved changing the eastside reservation system at Sauvie Island Wildlife Area from first-come, first served to a random draw. This is to allow all hunters to have an equal chance to hunt in their preferred area.

2015-20 Upland Game Bird Framework:
The Commission also decided on a regulatory framework for the 2015-20 upland game bird seasons. Upland bird season frameworks are adopted on a five-year basis to provide consistency to wildlife managers and bird hunters. The following changes will take effect Sept. 1, 2015:

• Quail, chukar, Hungarian partridge seasons will extend until Jan. 31 in Umatilla and Morrow counties (currently close Dec. 31).
• Eastern Oregon forest grouse season will extend until Jan. 31 (currently closes Dec. 31).
• Spring turkey season bag limit increased to three (from two) statewide; daily bag limit will remain at one.
• Retention of fully-feathered head OR wing for identification in the field (previously only head allowed).

Changes to wildlife management areas
Finally, the Commission consolidated wildlife management area and public river access rules into one OAR Division 008 (from four different places in rule and regulation) and added some ODFW managed lands not called out in current regulations into the rules. Proposed changes to parking permit regulations were postponed.

The Fish and Wildlife Commission is the policy-making body for fish and wildlife issues in Oregon. It usually meets monthly. The next meeting is Sept. 5 in Joseph, Ore.

###

Contact:
Jessica Sall
Oregon Fish and Wildlife
(503) 931-6858