(YouTube caption)   Taken 7-17-12 at the mouth of Anderson Creek the outlet into Lake Whatcom which is the point Bellingham water districts diversion enters Lake Whatcom.   Bellingham was pumping as this video is taken.  See for yourself what it looks like on the other videos posted the same day.   Or look for yourself.  It’s easy to see along the Parks Road just above Mirror Lake.

(Again, here's a link to the whole group of videos.)

As for what's allowable, we've learned that there actually are regulations that apply, even to government:

   "...if the receiving water is a Section 303 (d) impaired water, the COCs that impair the water must also be monitored..."    (COC = contaminants of concern)
 
     "...you can find the standards at the following URL:  
                         http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/swqs/index.html

    "...This URL also discusses the “antidegradation” policy, which means no matter what the source, you cannot impact the water quality of the “receiving water” 


     "Bottom line, per the water quality codes, no human can impact the water quality of a surface water feature ..."



We'll keep sharing what we learn.   Here's to science, reason, and truth.

We were tipped off recently that a series of videos on YouTube show massive plumes of sediment-laden water (containing who-knows-what)  gushing from the Nooksack River through Mirror Lake, then on by way of Anderson Creek into the south end of Lake Whatcom.   The official line may be to call this "maintenance," which would be exempt as a NPDES (pollution discharge) violation, but WE can't help but wonder what affect this sediment has on the lake's health.   Check out a few of the key videos:

(YouTube caption)  View of water pumped by the City of Bellingham at the outlet pipe just above Mirror Lake from the road. This is river water pumped to supply the City of Bellingham. The water flows from this point into Mirror Lake and on to Lake Whatcom. Does this water look like it contains sediment?

While extreme measures have been demanded by the City of Bellingham, Washington Ecology and the EPA for years to "restore" the lake and maintain it as a reservoir, you can see that a huge amount of turbid water is being flushed into "Bellingham's vital water supply."   Has this been routine?   Is this tested and measured?   How long has this been going on?  And, do the panicky studies and reports about water degradation reflect the whole truth about stormwater, landslides, human impacts, and forestry in the watershed?   We have every right to know.

WE will report all we can as facts surface.  For now, go and watch all the videos.  These are short (and current).   Then ask yourself - what goes?

At this writing, the dominoes seem lined up and ready to fall for Conservation Northwest's pushy demand for the transfer ("reconveyance") of over 8,000 acres of land from productive DNR management to the county - when everybody knows (including our Executive and council) that there's no real need to double parkland here.   The City and proponents #1 selling point is that this will be a "clean water preserve."   Have the City and ecology camps been aware of this sediment purging?   It's likely they don't care.  Heaven forbid truth about anything should get in their way.

                                       General location of these plumes, water flow, etc.

WE can only imagine the sort of Orwellian GroupThink reaction followers of a blog like Get Whatcom Planning might suffer at the sight of a cartoon like this:   "Oh those @!*!! property rights freaks over  at the Whatcom Excavator!   Wolves and lambs?  Indeed."

The good folks down in San Juan County are in the fight of their lives (like our Skagit neighbors are) trying to hold onto what civil rights they can.   Ordinary citizens are facing one battle after another with domineering planning departments hellbent to dictate what citizens are "permitted" to do.   Dare to farm?  Submit a plan.  Grow a garden?  Submit a plan.   Operate a home business?   Better watch your P's and Q's.   It's hard to believe, but if whatever you want to do with your land wasn't an activity of record in your neighborhood in 1990 - forget it.   [The irony is, the eco-freak planner types consider this kind of retro-control "progressive."   What an oxymoronic handle.]

The proposed San Juan CAO ordinance declares the whole county either protected shoreline or a critical area.   And the BLM has thrown its nasty spider web over the islands.

Of course we're basically in the same boat - only here we're facing runaway claims about wetlands, shorelines and watersheds plus constant demands for more open space and "resource protection" of OUR property.  Futurewise is on a tear, pushing our elected officials into corners.  Parks, trails and habitat corridors are weaving the works together.   Pay your taxes and do what you're told.   Is this about "property rights"?  Heck no.

Property doesn't have rights, people do -- or should we say, people DID.    This cartoon isn't amusing - it's too accurate.    Honor is due to San Juan CAPR for trying to keep a sense of humor.

WE caught some pretty good commentary about this eye-popping federal report at "Rage Against the Kakistocracy," a local site with similar concerns about where our country is headed.

While the Excavator makes a point to focus on local issues, the inconvenient truth is that our own cities and county are in serious planning partnership with groups deeply devoted to globalism.   Virtually every program unfolding right now, like the Ag Plan which is now tied to the Natural Resources Marketplace, are driven by zealous dogma promoted in playbooks like this, and ICLEI's.

Despite disclaimers to the contrary in this report, it unabashedly reveals what our current government is working on.   Read on.

One World Government
from "Rage Against The Kakistocracy"
by Karl Uppiano, July 14, 2012

A couple of posts back, I said that President Obama was scheming against the interests of America and its citizens. To prove that I am not some tinfoil hat fringe lunatic (well, maybe I am, but not because of this), I provide this link to a document by the Obama regime (our government until we change it in November, God willing).

While you're waiting for the 2.24 megabyte PDF to download, I'll describe the highlights. The document is entitled, "Global Governance 2025: at a Critical Juncture". If the title doesn't give you chills, maybe the first paragraph of the Preface will:

     "The United States’ National Intelligence Council (NIC) and the European Union’s Institute for Security Studies (EUISS) have joined forces to produce this assessment of the long-term prospects for global governance frameworks. This exercise builds on the experience of the two institutions in identifying the key trends shaping the future international system. Since the mid 1990s, the NIC has produced four editions of its landmark Global Trends report. The most recent one, Global Trends 2025: A Transformed World, published in late 2008, noted that momentous change was ahead, with the gap between increasing disorder and weakening governance structures widening. The EUISS produced the first EU-level report on the factors affecting the evolution of the international system in 2006, The New Global Puzzle. What World for the EU in 2025? The report stressed that a multipolar system is emerging and that matching the new distribution of power with new rules and institutions will be critical to preserving international peace and stability."

The idea that peace and stability comes from global governance is as laughable as it is spooky. I suppose a centralized government that was sufficiently domineering could suppress human nature. Humans have always had their differences. That is why we have separate religions, separate states, separate political systems and so on. It is human nature to compete, to invent, to form groups that include some and exclude others. Our founders understood that any government that attempts to govern against natural law (including human nature) is bound to fail, as we saw with the old USSR, to name just one.

Then there's this, from Chapter 1:

     "Climate change has trespassed the boundaries of environmental politics to become the subject of the global political, economic, and security debate and a new focus of multilateral cooperation cutting across these and other domains."

...spoken with all the usual 'progressive' assertiveness that Anthropogenic Global Warming is a foregone conclusion. Despite the fact that the AGW hypothesis is not predictably reproducible (i.e., it's untestable, and therefore unscientific by definition) -- and despite mounting evidence to the contrary, it is essential to the 'progressive' agenda.

The biggest problem that I see with global government is a lack of diversity. Today, if I want to be oppressed, there are plenty of countries where I can go to be oppressed, especially in the Middle East. If I want to be free, there are plenty... no wait... The United States... no wait... not anymore -- although the US is still one of the freest nations in the world, which explains why we have an illegal immigration problem (as opposed to an illegal emigration problem, like the old Soviet Union and Cuba).

The last time I checked, the United States was a sovereign nation as defined by The Constitution. I do not appreciate presumptuous 'progressives' taking liberties with my liberty, and nullifying our constitutional sovereignty without the consent of the governed. And I'll be damned if I'll give my consent.