Home

OSHA Drops Fatality Data, Science Suppression Tracker and More

2 Comments

SEJ WatchDog is a very interesting website, and I encourage you to read their articles. – Debbie

Source:  Society of Environmental Journalists

By Joseph A. Davis, WatchDog TipSheet Editor

1. OSHA Deep-Sixes On-the-Job Fatality Data

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration used to publish on its website a list of U.S. workers who died on the job. No more. Within days of a new Trump pick taking top office in August, much of it was gone.

OSHA fatality statistics matter to environmental reporters because the deaths sometimes result from exposure to toxic substances or other environmental hazards. For example, the toxic solvent methylene chloride is subject to EPA’s risk assessment program. It has also killed workers who use it.

During the Obama administration, OSHA published the fullest possible list of worker fatalities and related data. In August 2017, shortly after the Trump administration installed Loren Sweatt on a political appointment to a top leadership slot, OSHA started cutting back the worker fatality information it automatically published. That cutback had been requested by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.

Under the Trump data regime, workplace fatalities are listed only if the incident resulted in a citation (which causes a listing delay of about six months) and the workers’ names are not included. Moreover, OSHA only lists fatalities in states where OSHA oversees workplace safety (about half of the states do this for themselves). OSHA publishes the more limited listing of worker fatality information in a less prominent place on its website.

OSHA under Trump has also cut way back on issuing press releases noting OSHA enforcement actions.

Read the entire article HERE.

Advertisements

Control the Water, Control the Land—A Two-fer!

7 Comments

new-logo25by W. R. McAfee, Sr.

______________________________________________________________

The banker’s end game is to nullify the Constitution using bureaucratic agencies like the EPA to seize private property and other rights with agency “rules and regulations”—all of which are illegal under the Constitution. 

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

Good EPA “laws” (read: “rules”, “regulations”) are long extinct, but if you had to pick one it would be the 1972 Clean Water Act (CWA) passed by congress four years after the Cuyahoga River in Ohio caught fire (Images for cuyahoga river fire burning—it wasn’t the first time) because of the pollution in it.
The Act authorized the clean-up of this kind of mess in America’s navigable lakes, rivers, and streams, and prohibited further dumping of dangerous industrial chemicals, waste, and other byproducts into these bodies of waters. It also allowed states to manage the clean-up of their own waters under the Clean Water Act (CWA), and enabled federal and state officials to work together to get the job done, .
Fast forward and we find today the EPA has redefined Congress’s intent and definition of navigable waters to now include all waters found in America and by fiat, the land it’s on, meaning the EPA now has “control” of all American farms, ranches, and private property, including
►Dry arroyos, coulees, and washes
►Man-made drainage ditches
►Directional sheet flow
►Isolated wet meadows
►Storm sewers and culverts
►Drain tiles in fields
► “Point sources” such as pipes, ditches, channels, and conduits
►Sewage treatment plants
►Waterworks appurtenances such as mains, pipes, hydrants, machinery, and buildings.
►100 year flood plains
►Channels and streams with intermittent or ephemeral flows (but not seasonal flows),
►Nonnavigable, isolated, intrastate waters, including rainwaters, and hundreds of others

At the direction of their handlers (socialist bankers who control the Fed and the government) the EPA, and the president’s EO (that isn’t law) set in motion a crippling set of “rules” and “regulatory” proposals contradicting Congress’s intent of the CWA (which is law), that will expand the EPA’s authority over all waters (including subsurface “connecting” waters), its use, the land it’s used on, and any land it drains from or across.

Meaning if it rains on a piece of land, that land and water and/or its run-off will be under EPA authority.
Meaning if a dry ditch, pot hole, creek, or dirt tank on a rancher’s or farmers land stands water a few days after a heavy rain or rise, the EPA’s Waters of the United States (WOTUS) proposals gives the EPA “authority” over that normally dry ditch, pot hole, creek, or tank.
Meaning dry land drainages that aren’t navigable, boatable, fishable, or swimmable, and that defy jurisdictional need under the CWA, can now be “regulated”.

Control the water, control the land

This is the largest, illegal, private property land grab in U.S. history. Not only does it give the EPA control of the water on private property, it also requires EPA/Corps of Engineer permits if the agricultural industry wants to cut brush, clear land, root plow, burn-off, repair (field) tiles, drill a water well, spread fertilizer, lay pipe, spray cattle and hundreds of other ordinary, necessary, and routine tasks tied to any agricultural operation; all to be permitted, fee’d (charged), and “enforced” by the same unelected, unaccountable, federally paid envirocrats who wrote the proposals; who have no concept why these tasks have to be performed; whose job will be to act as land and water “police”—like the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) acts on behalf of the EPA for “endangered plants and animals”— and issue permits or levy “fines” for “violators” who get caught spraying a pen of cattle without one.
Takers taxing makers.

This EPA scheme is a deliberate shakedown of property owners with forced fees and permits requiring unnecessary time and money.

Like the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the EPA’s model bait-and-switch “oops-you just-lost-control-of-your-land” conservation easements that were monikered as “. . .saving endangered plants and animals and preserving land for future generations”, so to was WOTUS sold as “clean, healthy water for all.”

Pigs fly, too.

WOTUS is about taking control of private property, driving the market value of that land down, and its owners out of business and off that land. “Cleaner water” is the public’s straw man, the excuse. WOTUS rules are purposely vague to give the EPA wide swath with its ax. So much so that interpretations by the EPA’s own employees are contradictory.

Lawsuits will follow but few can afford them. Family ranchers and farmers will be presumed guilty for unpermitted WOTUS “violations” decreed by a federal agency (the EPA) using unconstitutional federal administrative “law”(read: proposals), written and approved by federal bureaucrats and forced unconstitutionally on private citizens (with a presidential EO) who will be forced to defend themselves out-of-pocket in a federal court against federal (contract) lawyers before a federal judge—all of whom are paid from the same federal pot.

A centralized stacked federal deck.

FACTOID: Congress has the Constitutional mandate to pass America’s laws. Legislation is passed by Congress and either signed into law or vetoed by the sitting president. Courts then decide whether or not that law is Constitutional or un-Constitutional if the law is challenged. The presidential EO authorizing the EPA to use a set of vague. illegal, unlawful proposals giving the agency authority over all waters and by fiat, land, in defiance of a 40-year old established law, written and legislated by Congress and signed into law by a sitting president, defies credulity when both Houses of Congress voted against WOTUS, and the Clean Water Act was challenged twice, upheld twice, and twice ruled Constitutional by the Supreme Court.

EPA bureaucrats and the president have neither the power, authority, nor Constitutional right to force these restrictive WOTUS proposals on Americans.

This land and water grab by the EPA is reminiscent of how Bolshevik communists who, after gaining control of the Russian revolution by forcing a numerical majority of their confederates into key positions in the Duma, and placing ‘czars’ in charge of agencies (with decreed powers like those just handed the EPA) took over and controlled the Russian population. That plus the fear of spontaneous Bolshevik-directed genocides in which an estimated 60 million mostly white Russia Christians were either murdered or imprisoned in the Soviet’s Gulags as “enemies (read: terrorists) of the state.”
Communists knew the importance of controlling the land and the individuals on it, and what private (right to own) property would do to their failed, centralized, attempt at governing. That’s why fist-fights between hardline communists and right-to-own Russian property advocates broke out when this subject came up in Russia’s Duma during the lead-up to, and following, the so-called fall of communism.
An excellent summary of this fight over the right to own private property in Russia is a 2001 article by Leon Aron, “Land Privatization”

Ironically, what the Russians were fighting for, Washington just gave to the EPA to regulate.
The first EPA attempt to take over America’s land and water.

The first time the EPA tried grab control of America’s waters, the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision against them when they attempted to cite the Migratory Bird Rule as authority for stopping a consortium of Chicago municipalities from using an abandoned sand and gravel pit for a solid waste disposal site; invoking the Commerce Clause—the only power given Congress by the founders with which to overrule state law.

EPA lawyers argued that migratory birds were interstate commerce generating revenue “ . . . of very nearly the first magnitude…that millions of people spent over a billion dollars annually on recreational pursuits relating to migratory birds, and that the ducks needed the water that had seeped into the gravel pits. . .”

This maneuver is called the Commerce Clause gambit that the EPA attempts to use when trying to override state sovereignty and law.

The Court didn’t buy it, saying: “…we find nothing approaching a clear statement from Congress it intended the (sic Clean Water Act) to reach an abandoned sand and gravel pit…to claim federal jurisdiction over ponds and mud flats falling within the “Migratory Bird Rule” would result in significant impingement of the state’s traditional and primary power over land and water use.”

The Second EPA Attempt to Take Over the Waters of America

Next they tried skirting the “navigational” water definition in Rapanos v United States . John A. Rapanos back-filled a portion of his 54 acres in Michigan prior to development. The nearest body of navigable water was up to 20 miles away. The EPA informed Mr. Rapanos that his “. . . saturated fields were waters of the United States that could not be filled without a permit.”

Again, the Supreme Court ruled 5-4 the EPA had no authority under the Clean Water Act to regulate:
(1) Truly isolated, non-navigable, intrastate water bodies,
(2) Any area merely because it has a hydrological connection with downstream navigable-in-fact waters,
(3) Remote drains and ditches with insubstantial flows, and
(4) That federal jurisdiction under the Scalia majority (5-4 plurality) ruling in the case was that the Clean Water Act ends at “. . .those relatively permanent, standing, or continuously flowing bodies of water … that are described in ordinary parlance as ‘streams, oceans, rivers, lakes’” and their wetlands. . .”—waters covered under the Clean Water Act’s definition of navigable waters.

Failing in Congress and in the Courts, the EPA and the president, seeing their proposals had no legality, turned to the EO

Obama’s EO granted the EPA this unlawful and unconstitutional power that’s designed to further erode private property rights—an attempt right out of a rogue king’s, war lord’s, dictator’s, despot’s or Bolshevik’s playbook.

Whatever we say, goes.

This is why the founders wrote our Constitution. It’s not a “living document” as The City and their controlled propaganda outlets (MSM) blare at the public;

to be shredded every few years by gluttonous bankers bent on controlling earth’s resources and people. It was written to keep government and its go-fers out of America’s living rooms, back yards, and off our lands. The banker’s end game is to nullify the Constitution using bureaucratic agencies like the EPA to seize private property and other rights with agency “rules and regulations”—all of which are illegal under the Constitution.

Absent the right to own property and rule of law, you’re left with an “ism”—fascism, socialism, communism—and a central control system for everything, including land and water, that benefits only a handful of psychopathic financial criminals at the top.

How is it the EPA and the president can ignore constitutionally established Congressional and Supreme Court law?

Here’s how and why it’s illegal
Copyright© 2015 by W. R. McAfee. All Rights Reserved.

Waste Water from Oil Fracking Injected into Clean Aquifers

2 Comments

strip bannernew-logo25 Debbie Coffey   V.P. Wild Horse Freedom Federation

_________________________________________

I repeat, wild horses being driven to extinction by the BLM is the canary in the coal mine of what is happening on America’s public lands and to America’s water.  –  Debbie Coffey

_____________________________________________

 Texan Cowboy Man Seated Backwards on a Steer, The Reins Tied to the Tail Clipart

SOURCE:  nbcbayarea.com

In a time when California faces an historic drought, the NBC Bay Area Investigative Unit has uncovered that state officials allowed oil and gas companies to pump billions of gallons of waste water into protected aquifers. Investigative Reporter Stephen Stock reports in a story that aired on November 14, 2014.

State officials allowed oil and gas companies to pump nearly three billion gallons of waste water into underground aquifers that could have been used for drinking water or irrigation.

Those aquifers are supposed to be off-limits to that kind of activity, protected by the EPA.

“It’s inexcusable,” said Hollin Kretzmann, at the Center for Biological Diversity in San Francisco. “At (a) time when California is experiencing one of the worst droughts in history, we’re allowing oil companies to contaminate what could otherwise be very useful ground water resources for irrigation and for drinking. It’s possible these aquifers are now contaminated irreparably.”

California’s Department of Conservation’s Chief Deputy Director, Jason Marshall, told NBC Bay Area, “In multiple different places of the permitting process an error could have been made.”

“There have been past issues where permits were issued to operators that they shouldn’t be injecting into those zones and so we’re fixing that,” Marshall added.

In “fracking” or hydraulic fracturing operations, oil and gas companies use massive amounts of water to force the release of underground fossil fuels. The practice produces large amounts of waste water that must then be disposed of. More

UNDER THE RADAR: THE TROUT ERADICATION PROGRAM-SAVE THE FISH

4 Comments

strip banner
new-logo25   Chuck Frank           2014

http://lightofthenation.us

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

“The forest service spends all that time and money to eradicate trout from 7 lakes to save a frog while there are, to this day, zero frogs in those lakes. Now, that’s real progress. Ching, ching, those are your tax dollars still at work.”

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

fish 1While under the radar, in 2008, a huge trout eradication program began in Eldorado National Forest to save a frog. With the exception of a few people who read a newspaper that actually responded to the plan, there were no public hearings back then for the yellow legged frog. The public comment process was practically null in 2008 and the forest service didn’t make a lot of noise either, less the public be outraged at such an undertaking.
In my recent conversation with Eldorado National Forest fish biologist, Sarah Muskoph, she shared with me that tadpole eating Brook trout in 7 lakes were the reason for an eradication program which had already been completed in 2011 and 2012. Those high mountain lakes affected are located in Desolation Wilderness above the Echo Lake Resort which are Ralston, Tamarack, Cagwin, Margery, Lucille, Le Conte, and Jabu lakes.

To date there is still insufficient evidence that connects frog decline to the eating of tadpoles by trout yet the forest service clings to this assumption. In my discussion with Sarah I asked her if any yellow legged frogs had yet been found in or around those lakes since the eradication and she said, with the exception of a few frogs that had been found in a pond, there were none.  This is consistent with these findings here; More

How the EPA separates landowners from their properties

6 Comments

strip banner
new-logo25W. R. McAfee

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
On April 7, 2001, the U.S. Bureau of Reclamation ignored state and federal law in the name of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and stopped water to more than 200,000 acres and some 1,400 canal-irrigated family farms near Klamath Falls, Oregon, plunging the community toward bankruptcy and devastating families.
Why? Because the bureau said two species of bottom-feeding suckerfish and a Coho salmon, in a reservoir the farmers depended upon might be “affected” if water was released during the current drought.

35600_1thmThe ESA had already been used to cut off water to a group of California farmers, causing their crops to dry up.
In Colorado, the forest service threatened another agricultural operation with a by-pass flow that would have resulted in an 80-percent loss of the dry-year water supply from a key reservoir, with a direct economic loss of between $5 and $17 million.
They also attempted to impose a “by-pass flow” that would have taken some 50 percent of the dry-year water supply provided from a Colorado municipal water storage facility.

In Idaho, a federal permittee was told he would have to bypass water to protect aquatic species or obtain an alternate source of water at a cost of $120,000.
In Arizona, where state law requires water rights be held by the person making the beneficial use of the water, the regional forester had demanded that water rights owned by grazing permittees be transferred to the feds – rights long established under state law for livestock purposes.

Federal agencies—at the direction of the EPA—are using the ESA nationwide to try and override established water rights, state laws, and the McCarran Act.
Under the Water Rights Act of 1952 (McCarran Amendment) it’s illegal for anyone – federal agency or citizen, without exception – to force water bypasses or withhold water along natural flowing streams, rivers, and their tributaries. More

Are We Still Free? REFLECTIONS ON INDEPENDENCE AND THE DECLARATION THEREOF

Leave a comment

strip banner

new-logo25

Don Jans, Author and Speaker

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

“The EPA is telling landowners they the EPA are prosecutor, defender, jury and judge where property is concerned.  If you for instance have an indentation in the land and water would accumulate while it was raining, the EPA has and will exercise complete jurisdiction of that property.   The EPA has taken the position they are ultimate owner of all property and the title holders rights are subject to the wishes of the EPA.”

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

REFLECTIONS ON INDEPENDENCE AND THE DECLARATION THEREOF

From the Declaration of Independence:

“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to affect their Safety and Happiness.”

1441183_401318466665654_1752838926_nWe were, according to the Declaration of Independence granted certain rights by the creator that are unalienable rights.  Amongst these unalienable rights are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.  It is important to note that these unalienable rights are not restricted to these three, but these three are included in the total.  Unalienable rights are rights not given by the government or men but are from the creator.  Therefore these rights are not be taken from us or restricted by the government or men in any way.  Included in the total of the unalienable rights would be many of the rights reserved for the people in the Bill of Rights.  These are rights such as freedom of speech, freedom of religion not freedom from religion, freedom to bear arms, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly and so forth.  These rights are essential in a free society.  In every totalitarian state, it is these rights that are restricted and limited first.

Our founding fathers told us, when any government becomes destructive of these rights, we are to alter or abolish that government and form a new one.  This is a very serious charge we were given.  As we look at the happenings and events in recent history, the question we must ask is have we reached such a time?  Doing a quick exam, I would suggest we are coming closer and closer to that time if it has in fact not been reached.  At the very least we must have an open and honest discussion that transcends spin and political correctness. More

Civilian national Security force: Another name for the growing police state

9 Comments

strip banner

new-logo25Marti Oakley   © copyright 2014 All rights reserved

______________________________________________________________________

“We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives that we’ve set. We’ve got to have a civilian national security force that’s just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.” –Barack Obama,Obama’s Civilian National Security Force

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Domestic terrorism by domestic agencies

The civilian national security force was never intended to be populated by private citizens, but rather, by hired citizens who could be convinced to violate the constitution, and your rights simply by virtue of wearing a tin badge and told they were not constrained by anything as marginal as the law.34043_1thm

By now it should have become obvious, that rather than just using our military to attack us in-country, it is far more effective to militarize various federal and state agencies and have them do the attacking under cover of the agency. Claiming they are defending the law, upholding statutes and regulations, military style swat teams from numerous federal agencies have been steadily attacking, threatening and harassing private citizens. These attacks are nothing less than acts of war perpetrated by the federal agencies on behalf of the federal government.

That terrorist you are so afraid of is your neighbor

“If you see something…Say Something”…I would like to report that the terrorists we need to fear are inside the gates.

They were our neighbors, our family members; now unrecognizable as the transformation from ordinary citizen to badge heavy, agency employed, domestic terrorist takes place. And these people are domestic terrorists by any definition. They do not work for “we the people”, but rather, for corporate interests both foreign and domestic. They will willingly violate the laws you are required to comply with, without blinking an eye. The constitution? Your rights? Not even a consideration.

The Civilian National Security force that Obama was speaking about was created under the fake food safety bill passed in 2010, via “Dirty Harry” Reid’s infamous, unanimous and singular vote. Without objection! Every one of the remaining 99 Senators voluntarily vacated the senate chamber to facilitate “Dirty Harry’s” one unanimous vote. Every other Democrat and Republican senator was in on the deal.

And here’s how “Dirty Harry” pulled off the hostile takeover of agriculture By Fred Kelly Grant | December 21, 2010

Then, on the floor of the Senate in the late afternoon, early evening of Sunday, December 19, Senator Reid called the Recycling bill for a vote and there was no objection from the two other Senators who were on the floor. So by unanimous consent HR 2751 was passed. Then Senator Reid moved for reconsideration with the vote to be tabled. This was granted by the same unanimous consent because there was no other Senator on the floor. Then Senator Reid offered without objection amendment number 4890 which substituted S. 510 the Food Safety Bill for the Recycling Bill. Without objection, then the amendment was passed and the Food Safety Bill had been substituted for the Recycling Bill. Reid moved that the bill be read for the third time and asked for the question. Without objection, the bill passed, and the Food Safety Bill was on the way back to the House.

The result? The militarization of federal agencies in preparation for the coming assaults on family and independent food producers and on private property rights. This bill had little to do with food safety and much to do with assembling the in-country attack units now employed by USDA, FDA, EPA and the notoriously corrupt BLM. More

Older Entries

%d bloggers like this: