www.behindmyback.org
Comments-Objections to Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem “RESTORATION” Project (PSNERP)
I strongly oppose the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem “RESTORATION” Project (PSNERP) and, in my opinion, it should be irrevocably terminated immediately.
IT’S FEDERAL, IT’S STATE, IT’S OUR MONEY
AND, IT’S THE ENTIRE PUGET SOUND
THE FOLLOWING ARE WRITTEN PUBLIC COMMENTS/OBJECTIONS ON PUGET SOUND NEARSHORE ECOSYSTEM RESTORATION PROJECT (PSNERP)
————————————————————————————
Subject: FW: Skagit CAPR Chapter: FW: submittal of PSNERP written comment
From: Kathy Mitchell
Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2015 at 6:13 PM
To: <nearshore@usace.army.mil>
Subject: PSNERP Projects Comment
——————————————————
From: Roger Mitchell
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 2:56 PM
To: Nearshore@usace.army.mil
Subject: submittal of PSNERP written comment
——————————————————————————
Subject: FW: submittal For Clallam County PSNERP written objection
From: Pearl Rains Hewett
Sent: Thursday, January 09, 2015
To: Nearshore@usace.army.mil
Subject: submittal of PSNERP Clallam County written objection
——————————————————————————————
My PSNERP written public comments and objections PLUS…..
The fact that these ideas were churned out by the Puget Sound Partnership and by the Envisioning people at OSU, is no surprise.
—————————————————————————-
My written comment on the SHADY? history of the Puget Sound Partnership
In May 2010, auditors found the partnership “circumvented state contracting laws, exceeded its purchasing authority and made unallowable purchases with public funds,” incurring “costs without clear public benefit.”
scroll down for more
——————————————————————-
My written comments on RESTORATION….. period
Behind My Back | RED FLAG WARNING Page 2
www.behindmyback.org/category/
Apr 9, 2014 – EPA RESTORATION OF PUGET SOUND … the cost of an unfunded WA STATE RESTORATION “RAIN TAX” TO CLEAN UP PUGET SOUND? ….. Goggle behindmyback.org for the full text of “Sue and Settle Sucks”
—————————————————————————————-
Behind My Back | The “RESTORATION” Shell Game
www.behindmyback.org/2014/06/
Jun 9, 2014 – A highly convoluted “GAME OF RESTORATION” that is involving the … HOW MANY NUTS CAN YOU GET UNDER ONE RESTORATION SHELL?
———————————————————————————-
Behind My Back | $14.8 Billion for Restoration
www.behindmyback.org/2014/06/
Jun 10, 2014 – http://apwa-wa.org/Uploads/
———————————————————————–
Behind My Back | Bang for their buck? Restoration
www.behindmyback.org/category/
Dec 3, 2014 – www.behindmyback.org/2013/07/
————————————————————————-
INDEED, while we’re RESTORING
While we’re in the “RESTORATION” business I’d like a few things restored, too:
Behind My Back | American Restoration of Law and Order
www.behindmyback.org/2014/…/
Jun 11, 2014 – American Restoration of Law and Order? OF OUR CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT TO DOMESTIC TRANQUILITY IN AMERICA?
——————————
Behind My Back | Senate Hearings on EPA
Sep 1, 2014 – GIVE “STATE’S SOVEREIGNTY” BACK TO THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA! … http://heartland.org/policy-
————————————————————————–
THE HISTORY OF PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP 2007-2010
read the complete text at
Behind My Back | The Bad News On Kilmer
www.behindmyback.org/2013/08/
Aug 31, 2013 – US. Reps Kilmer and Heck promise to continue the work of Norm Dicks on behalf of WETLANDS, SHORELINES By ROB CARSON — Staff writer …
“Everyone was scratching everyone’s back with this PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP,” said Republican state Sen. Mark Schoesler, who has been a vocal critic of the partnership. “They were banking on daddy Dicks to bring money home, and then his son squandered it.
”PUGET SOUND PARTNERSHIP” May 2010
In May 2010, auditors found the partnership “circumvented state contracting laws, exceeded its purchasing authority and made unallowable purchases with public funds,” incurring “costs without clear public benefit.”
———————————————————————————
I Pearl Rains Hewett, submit and concur, with the following PSNERP Projects comments.
—————————————————————————————
From: Kathy Mitchell
Date: Wednesday, January 7, 2015 at 6:13 PM
To: <nearshore@usace.army.mil>
Subject: PSNERP Projects Comment
C/O: Nancy C. Gleason
USACOE
CENWS-EN-ER
POB 3755
Seattle, WA 98124-3755
The PSNERP projects, especially those for Skagit County, must be abandoned; the enormous waste of tax dollars for these ill-conceived and harmful projects to precious farmland under the guise of flimsy reasoning and faulty assumptions is wrong.
The fact that the concept for these unneeded and unnecessary projects got this far, especially with such an outrageous price tag, is a disgrace. These proposed projects would necessarily cause ruination of thousands of acres farmland, and more than likely cause unforeseen and unintended consequences to those and adjacent lands.
Furthermore, in my opinion, the fact that these ideas were churned out by the Puget Sound Partnership and by the Envisioning people at OSU, is no surprise; both groups are well known for their inferior, ideology-based recommendations rather than sound work based on pertinent, fact-based science, on appropriate field work, and on site-specific work. Since when do they ‘know all’ and ‘see all’ about what restoration really means for areas they really know nothing about? As a classically trained geologist, I do know that the land is in a constant state of flux and that these people’s notions of exactly what ‘snapshot in time’ to use as this golden state of restoration is laughable. Do we go back 30 years? Go back 300 years? Go back 3,000 years? Go back 3 Million years? Erosion, sedimentation, and associated processes are dynamic – the land will change over time.
Finally, I am appalled and quite dismayed that the Army Corps of Engineers has had anything to do with this wasteful boondoggle.
Sincerely,
Kathy Mitchell
1155 Chuckanut Ridge Drive
Bow, WA 98232
——————————————————————————-
From: Roger Mitchell
Sent: Thursday, January 08, 2015 2:56 PM
To: Nearshore@usace.army.mil
Subject: submittal of PSNERP written comment
Written Comment on Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project (PSNERP)
Roger H. Mitchell, Bow, Washington
I strongly oppose the Puget Sound Nearshore Ecosystem Restoration Project (PSNERP) and, in my opinion, it should be irrevocably terminated immediately.
Opinion:
The entire premise for PSNERP is scientifically flawed, ideologically driven, and just another veiled attempt to socially engineer and control the lives of private property owners. At it’s best, PSNERP is a government make-work program; at it’s worst PSNERP is merely another chapter in irresponsible environmentalism run amok.
Procedurally, this proposed project has been seriously flawed. There are significant inconsistencies and discrepancies between pugetsoundnearshore.org’s website and the website at nws.usace.army.mil. Discrepancies include different numbers of affected acres and in cost projections. If the goal was to confuse the public then, for once, government has succeeded. Why are we just getting to comment now on something that has been proceeding for years ? Why and how are we now being “steamrollered” into supporting this proposal in what appears to be a predetermined outcome that, once gain, bears little resemblance to the “consent of the governed?
The proposed project is at odds with RCW 36.70A – the Growth Management Act (GMA). PSNERP will cause destruction and loss of farmland and rural business that is contrary to GMA mandates. Some ideologues have relentlessly made it more and more difficult for farmers to grow the crops that feed the rest of us. Why let PSNERP add to the decline of farmland, farming, and farmers ? Any PSNERP proposed project must show, in detail, how it complies with the GMA. Thus far, that demonstration of compliance has been disregarded, overlooked, or intentionally omitted in PSNERP proposals.
Among the many problems with PSNERP and its many clones is that the instigators are never held accountable for their mistakes and failures. They play with other people’s money or, in this case, other people’s properties. Essentially they have no “skin in the game”. Ten years from now, when PSNERP has failed to do anything positive, and has had numerous, negative, unintended consequences, do you think the current PSNERPers are going to say, “Gee; I’m sorry ‘bout that PSNERP thing and wasting that Billion dollars. Do you want your refund in cash or a check ?”
Actions:
The EIS should be withdrawn. My preference would be to abandon this proposal and not waste another taxpayer dollar on it.
There needs to be a true cost/benefit analysis. We’re talking about potential misappropriation and misapplication of taxpayer dollars. Without an honest cost benefit study, the public cannot properly determine whether the proposed project is acceptable or worthy of full funding, partial funding, or, my personal favorite, no funding at all.
Let’s have a little chat about “restoration” and unanswered questions:
re·store
rəˈstôr/
verb: return (someone or something) to a former condition, place, or position.
res·to·ra·tion
ˌrestəˈrāSH(ə)n/
noun: the action of returning something to a former owner, place, or condition
So, I ask you, where are the answers to the following “restoration” questions ?
1. Apparently there is a specific time and condition to which we should presumptively “restore”. How do we know that that chosen time and condition was, in fact, optimal or better in any way relative to the current time and condition ?
2. Who actually knows the details and dynamics of that presumptively chosen optimal time and condition to which PSNERPers would have us restore to from current conditions ?
3. Who gets to make the determination of what time and condition we are restoring to ?
4. Even if the PSNERP proposal could be determined to be either good or bad, who has decreed who has the authority to decide for all of the rest of us whether the proposal is good?
5. The issue is “restoration” projects; these projects do not exist in a vacuum — they affect other people, locations, and conditions as well. Worldviews, movements, and projects — these things all have consequences. What are PSNERP’s costs in resources (time & taxpayer dollars) and what other possible projects and programs will PSNERP preclude ?
6. What are the unintended consequences of the proposed PSNERP projects ? Forces result from interactions. The proposed PSNERP projects are interactive forces. Newton’s Third Law of Motions reminds us that For every action, there is an opposite and equal reaction. When you poke the balloon in one place it pops out in another. When PSNERP projects “poke” the balloon of status quo, what is going to pop out elsewhere as a result ?
7. Does anyone at PSNERP realize that the earth’s geology, biology, and ecology have been in a constant state of change since their very inceptions and will continue to change for infinity ? How incredibly arrogant, condescending, and egocentric of some to think they can determine exactly what is “best” in terms of time or condition for any of these dynamic, natural processes.
8. By what criteria has someone determined that current conditions are not “best” and has chosen the particular, proposed, “restore to” slice of time and conditions as better or optimal?
9. Purportedly, PSNERP is, like detrimental instream flow rules, all about salmon. Why are some people so wrapped up in attempting to “protect” one particular species (salmonids) to the detriment of others ? Who chose salmonids over other worthy species (including humans) who are left to compete, unassisted and unprotected, in the Darwinian battle with the rest of us ? We call it, “life”.
PSNERP proposals have not provided good or acceptable answers to any of the above questions.
Fallacies:
PSNERP is yet another exercise in governmental fallacious reasoning. Fallacies can be divided into categories according to the epistemological factors that cause the error:
The reasoning is invalid but is presented as if it were a valid argument
- The argument has an unjustified premise
- Some relevant evidence has been ignored or suppressed
The PSNERP proposal has all of these fallacies. But, just be sure, PSNERP also has the types of fallacies listed below:
False Dilemma
A proposal that unfairly presents too few choices and then implies that a choice must be made among this short menu of choices
False Cause
Improperly concluding that one thing is a cause of another.
Reversing Causation
Drawing an improper conclusion about causation due to a causal assumption that reverses cause and effect.
Unfalsifiability (Untestability)
This error in explanation occurs when the explanation contains a claim that is not falsifiable, because there is no way to check on the claim. That is, there would be no way to show the claim to be false if it were false. There is no null hypothesis.
And the environmentalist ideologue’s perennial favorite:
Scare Tactic
Terrorizing people in order to give them a reason for believing that you are correct.
By the way, while we’re “restoring”:
While we’re in the “restoration” business I’d like a few things restored, too:
I’d like my inherent, natural property rights restored.
- I’d like my pursuit of happiness restored by not being constantly barraged with yet another manic, trumped up, Chicken Little environmental “crisis” that needs to be “mitigated”.
- I’d like my Washington State government restored to what the state’s founders intended in
that calls for “consent of the governed”.
Will it help if I ask nicely ?
Please ! Stop wasting our time, money, and goodwill. PSNERP is wrong for many, may reasons; it should be irrevocably terminated immediately.