ON THE RANCH

H.R. 2421 and S. 1870

These designations refer to The Clean Water Restoration Act, which is being introduced into the House and Senate of the United States and will authorize federal jurisdiction over every drop of water in the country.

Why should you care? Do you own property or do you live on property owned by someone else? The answer is most likely yes. What these bills do is give the federal government the ability to regulate anything you do on your own or your rented property that might have an impact on any type of water, whether it is a mud puddle, a tire track filled by water briefly during a rain storm, or a navigable river.

So what is different or unusual about these two bills? It is an attempt by the federal government to wrest control of water away from the states the water is located in and put it under their own control. Up until now, the power to make decisions about water use and rules pertaining to how it is treated has been the exclusive domain of the states. Putting water rules under federal control means, for those of us in the West, that people on the other side of the country will be able to make determinations that do not necessarily take into account the reality on the ground, scientifically referred to as “ground-truthing.”

I was concerned to hear the other day on the news an anchorwoman asking a reporter on the ground at one of the California fires whether rain was expected to help put the fire out. Most television companies are headquartered in New York and it follows that their primary personnel are also from that area. This means that those people do not know what weather in California, particularly Southern California, is like this time of year. If they did, such questions would not be asked. Likewise, we cannot afford to have legislators who are equally ignorant about our state having control of our water supplies. Please call, email or write your legislators if you, too, are concerned.

 

Our Environment

Or is it? Every day articles are printed in magazines and newspapers touting this new environmental success or that. We’ve defeated a project that would put a wind farm off the coast of Martha’s Vineyard right in front of the Kennedy compound. We’ve made sure that we won’t be looking at more oil platforms in the Santa Barbara Channel. And, most recently, we’ve made sure that U.S. supplies of liquefied natural gas will not be brought to our local shores, thereby requiring us to use gas not produced in this country. Huh? What kind of madness is this?

The companion stories should be about how San Francisco is going to turn off all of their lights for 24 hours to “save” electricity. Los Angeles has periodic “brown-outs” due to electrical overloads and development companies are all building communities which depend on people walking or bicycling wherever they go --  eliminating as potential residents anyone who cannot walk or bicycle. Sounds kind of discriminatory to me, doesn’t it to you? What happened to all of our anti-discrimination laws?

So we haven’t been able to drill for oil anywhere, we can’t build new refineries and nuclear power isn’t acceptable either because it’s too dangerous. And why, you might ask, is all of this happening? One answer pretty much covers all in this case. Environmental organizations have systematically sued public agencies to stop these activities, claiming that they are all harmful to the environment.

Even though the population has continued to grow, for the past thirty years we have been unable to keep up with the needed infrastructure of power for electricity and fuel. Recently in Los Angeles, a city councilwoman has stopped the oil drilling for a year on a site which was established at the turn of the century (1899-1900) because neighborhood activists surrounding the area built long after the oil field was developed complained that it was noisy and stank. Does this sound like the homeowners who bought houses around LAX and then complained about the noise? So how can the lawmakers justify this extreme lack of responsible planning? Do they really think the public has been fooled into thinking it is “good” for them to sacrifice their comfort needlessly? Or have they?

I have a theory, and it perhaps shows that I am a bit jaded. I am seriously beginning to wonder if this is a purposeful exercise on the part of an elite group of people who want to know just how far they can go in depriving people of their creature comforts, such as electricity, before people will begin to complain.

Or is this a way to make the United States a less powerful nation, one more Third World country with intermittent power and water, one where citizens are not as independent as they are today. Independent people, after all, are not as easy to control as those who are dependent on their government for everything.

Granted  this theory is perhaps a bit “out there,” but, depending on how long this scenario goes on, it has the possibility of becoming real.

I don’t know how long people will continue to allow their “representatives” to behave in such an irresponsible fashion, but it will, hopefully, not last much longer. Californians have been at the forefront of this environmental mess, which, at this point, is not, to my mind, something to be proud of. Why do we have to be at the mercy of people who want nothing more than to kill or convert us all to their way of thinking for our energy, when we have a huge reservoir on our doorstep?

What possible sense is there in importing all of our food from countries where we cannot control how it is produced? Why can we not make our own toys for our children free of harmful chemicals? Why have we become dependent on the government to provide for us when we are quite capable of taking care of ourselves with the proper opportunities? How long will we allow ourselves to be at the mercy of the environmental organizations that are bleeding this country dry? And why are we allowing the various unions to make us unable to compete in the world market? When will we take back control so we can produce and do what we know we can do better than most of the rest of the world because we champion the ability and opportunity of the individual?

 

Agriculture Preserve Committee

You may have noticed a news brief last week that mentioned that the board of supervisors has made some changes in how members of the APC are chosen. Because the BOS usually accepts the recommendations of this committee, charges were made that members on it could somehow benefit illegally from the decisions they made, and it would appear, because of the consistency, that it was somehow more than advisory. It was argued that people who had Williamson Act contracts would be allowed as advisors but not as members in the future.

This seems really absurd to me. Just like the architectural advisory committees of the County have architects on them, as they are the ones who understand best the issues, so, too, Williamson Act contract holders are about the only people who actually know what that means and how it works. It is hard for me to understand how a contract holder could directly “profit” from a contract holder next door, at least not in the same direct way that an architect on a county committee could. Where is the common sense here? Could you advise the BOS on Ag preserve contract issues?

 

Repeat It

It seems to me that the more often something is repeated, the more it is taken as fact. I am distressed with the amount of misinformation and disinformation spread by certain segments of our society through the mainstream media that is completely and utterly false, either on its face or because of what is left unreported.

A major network last week had a program on re-telling the story of a so-called undercover agent of the United States government. This story has been told numerous times with numerous different spins on it, and I think the only reason it is being rehashed again is to try to make one of their versions stick. What this network never tells you are the actual facts, only that individual’s version of it. As it turns out, this was essentially a book publication promotion by a sister company publisher. Pathetic to pass this off as news.

I believe that not only is the American public being deceived by this tactic, but that locally people with the same agenda are doing precisely the same thing. Some in our community feel that it is all right to continue to promote falsehoods in order to convince us of their truth. Calling people names and playing on guilt feelings seems to be the modus operandi of the day. I would suggest that pitting one part of the community against the other, or at least trying to, is not going to be successful.

In the meantime, efforts are systematically being made to radically change our valley and our county to look just like areas many of us have come from. Government is supposed to be transparent, so that anyone who wishes to understand a process or know what is being planned can do so. Instead, what do we find? Usually nothing, ever-changing plans, hidden documents or secret deals in which even those sworn to uphold the law are participants in. It is pretty shocking when you discover that people you thought were making decisions with your community’s interests at heart have, in fact, been doing deals which only benefited themselves and their partners. Additionally, these efforts are directly in contradiction to the express desire of the community involved. Exposure of these schemes is something that I am dedicated to doing in a timely fashion. Stay tuned!

 

HAPPY HALLOWEEN!