Home

BLM overlooks arsenic & mercury, but gets rid of wild horses

12 Comments

Debbie Coffey     © Copyright 2012  All Rights Reserved.

_______________________________________________________________

BLM overlooks arsenic & mercury, but gets rid of wild horses

In 2010, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) gave the green light to the expansion of a mining project within the Triple B Herd Management Area (HMA) in Nevada, even knowing about mercury in the watershed and higher levels of arsenic in the surface water. Since grazing allotments seem to be in the hydrographic basin with “mercury deposition contributions to the watershed,” this would seem to put human food and health at risk. The BLM turned a blind eye and approved this project, and now they’re falling all over themselves to declare there’s not enough water for the wild horses because of “drought” and they now plan to waste taxpayer dollars on water trapping, and later helicopter roundups, to remove the wild horses.

But you can’t say they’re not rosy optimists. In the 2009 Final Environmental Impact Statement for the Bald Mountain Mine (the mining project given approval to expand operations), under Surface Water, BLM states:

 “In general, established background water quality levels are good with the exception of arsenic, which exceeds the 0.05 mg/l Nevada water quality standard.”

In other words, the water quality is good, except for all the arsenic, which is higher than a safe level. How much does it exceed the Nevada water quality standard?

It kind of makes you wonder if part of the BLM’s hurry to remove wild horses is to avoid having a bunch of horses drop dead in a pile somewhere from water contamination. Not that the BLM would care about the horses, but they wouldn’t want anything to further damage their poor (and continually plummeting) public image.

It seems that BLM’s idea of a “thriving ecological balance” and concern about “degradation to the range” is very selective. The only thing “green” about this is the money that’s being raked in while public lands are being raped. Again, the BLM has asked for public comments, which again, they will ignore. My comment about their latest plan to get rid of the wild horses is: More

SCOTUS & Eric Holder: Its political pimpin’ pimpin’, man!

10 Comments

Marti Oakley    ©     Copyright 2012- All Rights Reserved

Note:  I wrote this article last night in anticipation of what I was sure would be the results of SCOTUS….unfortunatley I was absolutely correct in my predicition on the outcome of Citizens v Obamacare.  The Court voted to uphold this unconstitional assault on America.  Just one more reason this court needs to be rendered defunct.

____________________________________________________________________

For a portion of this afternoon, I flipped back and forth between the tedious and twisted up oral arguments in the Supreme Court for and against Obamacare and the political pimping going on, on MSNBC about the pending vote of [contempt of congress] against Eric Holder, the US Attorney General. MSNBC is of course the lefts’ counter to FAUX News on the right, and these days has about as much credibility.

Those magic black robes!

I doubt there are any of us out here who think or believe that Obamacare is even remotely constitutional. Yet the Supreme’s and the attorney’s talked endlessly about whether or not the penalty tax was really a tax or just a penalty while every one of them knew it was a penalty tax meant to raise revenue and to coerce unwilling individuals into a system they don’t want to be a part of.  Simply put:  It is legislative extortion meant to raise revenue or, involuntary forced compliance which will also raise revenue.

At one point, the argument from the bench was that Social Security was also a tax that everyone had to pay. Only that isn’t really true, and neither is it true in regards to Obamacare. I have no intentions of getting into this any further except to say that Obamacare is a direct assault on individual rights and is clearly unconstitutional from start to finish. Congress knew it when they passed it and the president knew it when he signed it into law. The Supreme’s also know this and I can hardly wait to hear the convoluted rationale to be given to explain why they did not declare the entire mess unconstitutional. But I have no doubt that they will uphold this unconstitutional assault on the public.

I consider this to be Citizens v Obamacare opinion which will rival the Citizens v United for position #1 on the greatest failures of this court to defend and protect the Constitution for the people of the United States.

About those talking heads at MSNBC…. More

%d bloggers like this: