I LOVE Mr. Stoffer bashing someone without "media credentials" reporting the news. Are you kidding me? Legacy media is on its deathbed, and independent blogs and social media are dominating. This is ESPECIALLY true for anyone under 40. I've been in the media since the late 1970's and watched its changing face and the demise of legacy media from within. Watchdog, you are over the target. When someone like Stoffer dismisses your credentials and refuses to engage in debate over the facts, he's already lost that battle.
YES. And Jeff is not just 'cut and paste' - he provides the sources and proof of those facts for his readers. That is something Ozias/media have neglected to do.
Water rights ARE going to and have already reared its ugly head. It is the MOST important fight we will be undertaking. The Tribes have many advantages to engage in this fight, including support by our Commissioners and up coming elections to push in even more people to support them.
All species – plants, animals, and humans – need water to survive. Whoever controls water – the quantity or quality – holds great power.
Washington’s water law is complex. It is based upon state law and INTERPRETED through ADMINISTRATIVE RULES and case law. Each water right’s parameters are unique to its LOCATION, SOURCE, and USE.
In general, there are two sources of water rights—surface water and groundwater rights. If you have the right to divert water from a river, stream, lake, or spring, you have a surface water right. If you have the right to pump water from a well, you have a groundwater right
The Winters Doctrine is used across the county by tribes seeking to solidify their water rights through adjudication.
ADJUDICATION the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation, including legal reasoning set forth by opposing parties or litigants, to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved.
Exactly Billy, "ADJUDICATION the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation, including LEGAL REASONING set forth by opposing parties or litigants, to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved" Legal reasoning is actually INTERPRETATION. Whom ever has the best lawyers (and a Judge/Arbitrator in their pocket) will win.
And another example of the WA State Department of Ecology managing water issues. Why do we even need a single local anything sucking up taxpayer dollars for the same issue?
Jeff is a better journalist than anyone else Stoffer and many of the rest of us reads. Common sense does not require a degree or shingle on the wall. Neither does hard work and investigation. And what credentials make a person work hard, attend these gut-wrenching meetings, and take the time to report it so that the rest of us know? Jeff, you're a saint, even though you may not have angelic placards on your walls.
Credentials. Going back.In 1963 or 1964 in a finance class at U of W a professor asked his students in a class I was in ‘Do you know why companies have people on their boards who know nothing about the business? It’s because they ask questions they ask the right questions. Why are we doing it this way? They have a different perspective. Based on their own common sense. Not because we have always done it this way. Today , in my opinion board affiliation are mostly resume builders. We are so fortunate to have Jeff,Jake and 98% of the readers.
Gosh, it certainly looks like Ozias is in bed with the tribe. I guess he believes the only way to prove that is with 8 X 10 glossies. At the very least when a person in a position of power has gained that power through substantial pledges of money through a particular source (or in this case a tribe) and then said donor shows up at whatever function the donee happens to be at....I don't know, might be a conflict of interest there or it just may be that Ozias has been purchased outright. I'm guessing the latter.
Power lacks moral or principles. It only has interests. —Horacio Castellanos Moya
A small correction if you don’t mind. Ozias started with a $1500 balance and raised only $3500 in the campaign cycle thus making the $1800 contribution by the tribe a much much larger percentage.
I love your certificate, Jeff! There will be more to come in the future. Jim Stoffer is very jealous of you. He craves the attention you are receiving and fumes over the talent you have that he lacks. Many of us have seen this in person. You are a citizen journalist, which is a very sought after source by media outlets. Not only did you create a platform of information, you also allowed people to add to the story, making CCWD invaluable to the community. You have exposed Comm. Ozias' duplicitous intentions. He is elected by the citizens of District 1 and CC, but works only on behalf of his special donor, the Jamestown Tribe. Thank you, Jeff, for all you do and know we are grateful for your dedication.
Jeff, thank you for your continued efforts to bring to light a variety of issues in Clallam County. I really don't know how you manage to publish so much.
This water issue and its impact on small farms hits home for me, all the way down in Lewis County. Thanks to Growth Management and an "Old Boys Club" county, our small farm was rezoned to "Long Term Ag with a minimum parcel size of 20 acres." For context, we do not have water rights for irrigation. Our soil has a significant clay content, which means it is prone to late summer droughts and remains too wet for cattle to graze on year-round. Additionally, we have less than 45 acres of farmable ground.
You may say, 'So what?' and 'How does this relate to your story?' Well, the county worked with the local Port and industrial park during the GMA process to rezone a large (~600-acre) farm, several miles away from the industrial park, with water rights for irrigation to a "Wetland Bank" so that the Port and the Industrial Park could fill in wetlands for added development. Now we are in a place where our land, which was once suitable for rural development, is locked into long-term agriculture, and a place that made sense for long-term agriculture is now a wetland bank, so the wetlands at the industrial park can be filled in. Additionally, consider the approximately 100 or more acres in our valley that WSDOT now owns and has converted out of agricultural use to mitigate the widening of I-5 through Chehalis.
All, done with little to no media attention. And no one in the media was asking hard questions about who, what, and why this was done and if it made sense.
Keep up your good work. And I loved seeing the CC Watchdog signs coming into town yesterday.
Matt, God Thank You! I was hoping people would come forward with their fights concerning water. It's the stories of people, like you, who have faced these issues we need to hear from. The fact that you are responding as a farmer from Lewis County is very encouraging and at the same time alarming. It is ALL of our problems, especially, as you wrote,
"All, done with little to no media attention. And no one in the media was asking hard questions about who, what, and why this was done and if it made sense"
What a plus for us: "And I loved seeing the CC Watchdog signs coming into town yesterday"
Time to face the music, and it seems anyone with a journalism degree around here is incapable of assisting. The fact is we are in a culture war and a religious war with a death cult.
Overturn the perverse Boldt Decision from which the tribal water rights were created. There were no treaty water rights.
Build dams. With the Whooshh Salmon Cannon, the whole argument against dams disappears.
Close the reservations. The President has the power.
The Travesty And Tragedy That Is The Boldt Decision, Part 1
Judge Boldt stacked the deck to get the outcome he desired. I leave it to you to ponder his motive(s). Central to his finding were: (1). The Indians negotiating the treaty were an "unlettered people." Primitive and dependant were also used. (2). The language barrier was unfair. English, which was "unknown to most of the tribal representatives," was used. Translations were "by an interpreter in the service of the United States using Chinook Jargon, which was also unknown to some tribal representatives. Having only about three hundred words in its vocabulary, the Jargon was capable of conveying only rudimentary concepts, but not the sophisticated or implied meaning of treaty provisions about which highly learned jurists and scholars differ."
However, in 1974, the only words in dispute in any treaty provision for Boldt really were "in common." Boldt wrote, "There is no indication that the Indians intended or understood the language "in common with all citizens of the Territory" to limit their right to fish in any way." From other case law, he extracted,(from which I extracted) "... the negotiations for the treaty are conducted, on the part of the United States, an enlightened and powerful nation, by representatives skilled in diplomacy, masters of a written language, understanding the modes and forms of creating the various technical estates known to their law, ..."
The concept of "the commons" is the "sophisticated or implied meaning" and "various technical estates" of concern to Boldt.
Seems to me the concept of The Common was developed by primitive unlettered people that weren't dependent on enlightened nations, representatives skilled in diplomacy, masters of a written language, or understanding modes and forms of creating various technical estates. The Common is an essential part of any group any time in the history of man. When the first people gathered around a fire to cook, share and exchange their food and stories of the hunt and the days adventures, to find a mate, to make friends, etc., there was a common, and there were rules of behavior for all.
Even children understand the concept. They know the difference between mom and dad's bedroom and the kitchen on one hand and the bath, dining, family, and living rooms on the other. When they first are on the playground at school, they learn to share the slide, merry-go-round, and swings in common with the other children. They quickly learn the common has rules. (Did I just uncover the real reason why playgrounds can't have such wonderful things anymore?). Are such children lettered?
The limitations of the Chinook language are too important to Boldt. He does not mention sign language. Have you ever played "Charades" or just watched others. Lots of information can be conveyed. How hard is it to point at everyone present for the treaty and make a big sweeping inclusive motion? Many Indians had seen explorers' ships and even the explorers since 1805 when Lewis and Clark came as far as Astoria. A fort was built there in 1813. There were numerous settlers in Seattle, Olympia, and probably elsewhere years before the treaty was signed in 1855. How much English did some Indians already know? I suspect more than Boldt and the plaintifs want us to believe.
Surely, the Indians must have recognized the fact that the reservation was their designated common area just for them. Shouldn't that make it obvious to them that the rest was the common area for everyone else and them? How difficult is that to see? It follows naturally and logically. I don't see the Indians as so primitive that this would be difficult for them.
Indians always talk about how their elders are wise and how much they honor and respect them. Yet, some 120 years after the signing, some unhappy tribal members were willing and anxious to throw their ancestors under the bus, and Judge Boldt swallowed.
Article 10 of the Point No Point Treaty makes a lie of the whole case. The tribes were desirous of alcohol prohibition on the reservations. This is all the evidence needed to conclude they knew what The Common was and it needed rules to protect it.
Article 9 also has something about The Common shared by all. Two rules for the Indians when on the joint commons: be friendly and respect property.
Clallum.County Commissioners oath to support the U.S. and Washington Constitutions and swear to "perform faithfully ,impartially and honestly the duties of office " Putting any group of people above anyone else giving special privileges ,power ,control over others is elitism and is incompatible with the principles this country was founded on democracy. .Let him who would be the greatest among you be the servant of all .
“Mein Kampf” His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.
I'm assuming the Dungeness River Management Team is ultimately an environmental benefit and kudos to them for that. It is the inequity in the harvesting of Dungeness River's resources that concerns me. I would need statistical verification, but I am confident that those who enjoy sovereign rights are benefitting from a disproportionate amount of those resources. Sovereign rights should only be allowed and exercised exclusively on sovereign, ( reservation ), land. Any commerce outside those sovereignty confines subject to the laws of the land. 50% of the "harvestable" fish has been judged an allowable resource for the sovereign to feed the sovereign. That judgement does not provide for the sovereign to sell their resources to the non sovereign without the same constraints a non-sovereign harvester must meet. Back to the DRMT; do all players get equal benefit ?
Seems the only question left is Ozais benefiting financially from association he has with all the NGOs he is psrt of while serving as a County Commisioner representing the people of the County? If not, more power to him. If so, he needs to be prosected. In thus State with one party rule and unintertsed compliant news sources that isnt likly...unless the US DOJ gets interested.
Just a note on false equivalency - like it or note, Ozias is elected by the public and Tozzer is not. This is a factual difference. I'd say that's a reasonable basis for the PDC to treat his column differently than the CCWD.
I LOVE Mr. Stoffer bashing someone without "media credentials" reporting the news. Are you kidding me? Legacy media is on its deathbed, and independent blogs and social media are dominating. This is ESPECIALLY true for anyone under 40. I've been in the media since the late 1970's and watched its changing face and the demise of legacy media from within. Watchdog, you are over the target. When someone like Stoffer dismisses your credentials and refuses to engage in debate over the facts, he's already lost that battle.
YES. And Jeff is not just 'cut and paste' - he provides the sources and proof of those facts for his readers. That is something Ozias/media have neglected to do.
Facts don't matter to the agenda driven crowd, sadly saying the right words does.
This is how I typically get folks to read the watchdog. Jeff cites sources for every claim and accusation made. Can’t argue with facts.
AMEN!
Love the certificate!
Water rights ARE going to and have already reared its ugly head. It is the MOST important fight we will be undertaking. The Tribes have many advantages to engage in this fight, including support by our Commissioners and up coming elections to push in even more people to support them.
All species – plants, animals, and humans – need water to survive. Whoever controls water – the quantity or quality – holds great power.
Washington’s water law is complex. It is based upon state law and INTERPRETED through ADMINISTRATIVE RULES and case law. Each water right’s parameters are unique to its LOCATION, SOURCE, and USE.
In general, there are two sources of water rights—surface water and groundwater rights. If you have the right to divert water from a river, stream, lake, or spring, you have a surface water right. If you have the right to pump water from a well, you have a groundwater right
Tribes across the United States are increasingly seeking to exert REGULATORY AUTHORITY over their water, often through the establishment of TRIBAL WATER CODES. https://www.californialawreview.org/print/resolving-water-conflicts
The Winters Doctrine: The Foundation of Tribal Water Rights https://celp.org/water-law-tribal-rights/
The Winters Doctrine is used across the county by tribes seeking to solidify their water rights through adjudication.
ADJUDICATION the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation, including legal reasoning set forth by opposing parties or litigants, to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved.
It's coming and it's scaring the hell out of me.
And whose side do you think the Judge will be on? No argument strong enough to shift away from the fact judges are elected too...
Exactly Billy, "ADJUDICATION the legal process by which an arbiter or judge reviews evidence and argumentation, including LEGAL REASONING set forth by opposing parties or litigants, to come to a decision which determines rights and obligations between the parties involved" Legal reasoning is actually INTERPRETATION. Whom ever has the best lawyers (and a Judge/Arbitrator in their pocket) will win.
And another example of the WA State Department of Ecology managing water issues. Why do we even need a single local anything sucking up taxpayer dollars for the same issue?
https://capitalpress.com/2025/10/03/water-running-out-in-yakima-river-basin-for-senior-water-rights/
oh wow I can see why
Susie, it's coming together bit by bit. If the Tribe gets the water rights they want, their dream to take back the Peninsula is in the bag.
Jeff is a better journalist than anyone else Stoffer and many of the rest of us reads. Common sense does not require a degree or shingle on the wall. Neither does hard work and investigation. And what credentials make a person work hard, attend these gut-wrenching meetings, and take the time to report it so that the rest of us know? Jeff, you're a saint, even though you may not have angelic placards on your walls.
Credentials. Going back.In 1963 or 1964 in a finance class at U of W a professor asked his students in a class I was in ‘Do you know why companies have people on their boards who know nothing about the business? It’s because they ask questions they ask the right questions. Why are we doing it this way? They have a different perspective. Based on their own common sense. Not because we have always done it this way. Today , in my opinion board affiliation are mostly resume builders. We are so fortunate to have Jeff,Jake and 98% of the readers.
Gosh, it certainly looks like Ozias is in bed with the tribe. I guess he believes the only way to prove that is with 8 X 10 glossies. At the very least when a person in a position of power has gained that power through substantial pledges of money through a particular source (or in this case a tribe) and then said donor shows up at whatever function the donee happens to be at....I don't know, might be a conflict of interest there or it just may be that Ozias has been purchased outright. I'm guessing the latter.
Power lacks moral or principles. It only has interests. —Horacio Castellanos Moya
If I had the talent, I would create all the credentials Jeff could possibly want to use for his wall decorations.
Curious -you may have mentioned it in the past… but do you know the amount that the tribe has donated to Ozias’ campaigns or committees ?
And I totally agree with Robert who describes Stouffer’s ignorant comments about “media credentials”. He hit it right on the target.
There's direct and indirect contributions. The state PDC website has the direct data.
According to the PDC they donated $500 in 2015 and $1000 in 2019. In 2023 Ozias raised $5,029 and of that $1800 came from the tribe.
A small correction if you don’t mind. Ozias started with a $1500 balance and raised only $3500 in the campaign cycle thus making the $1800 contribution by the tribe a much much larger percentage.
I love your certificate, Jeff! There will be more to come in the future. Jim Stoffer is very jealous of you. He craves the attention you are receiving and fumes over the talent you have that he lacks. Many of us have seen this in person. You are a citizen journalist, which is a very sought after source by media outlets. Not only did you create a platform of information, you also allowed people to add to the story, making CCWD invaluable to the community. You have exposed Comm. Ozias' duplicitous intentions. He is elected by the citizens of District 1 and CC, but works only on behalf of his special donor, the Jamestown Tribe. Thank you, Jeff, for all you do and know we are grateful for your dedication.
Here's a toast! And may CCWD keep on growing XXXOOO Clink Clink
Jeff, thank you for your continued efforts to bring to light a variety of issues in Clallam County. I really don't know how you manage to publish so much.
This water issue and its impact on small farms hits home for me, all the way down in Lewis County. Thanks to Growth Management and an "Old Boys Club" county, our small farm was rezoned to "Long Term Ag with a minimum parcel size of 20 acres." For context, we do not have water rights for irrigation. Our soil has a significant clay content, which means it is prone to late summer droughts and remains too wet for cattle to graze on year-round. Additionally, we have less than 45 acres of farmable ground.
You may say, 'So what?' and 'How does this relate to your story?' Well, the county worked with the local Port and industrial park during the GMA process to rezone a large (~600-acre) farm, several miles away from the industrial park, with water rights for irrigation to a "Wetland Bank" so that the Port and the Industrial Park could fill in wetlands for added development. Now we are in a place where our land, which was once suitable for rural development, is locked into long-term agriculture, and a place that made sense for long-term agriculture is now a wetland bank, so the wetlands at the industrial park can be filled in. Additionally, consider the approximately 100 or more acres in our valley that WSDOT now owns and has converted out of agricultural use to mitigate the widening of I-5 through Chehalis.
All, done with little to no media attention. And no one in the media was asking hard questions about who, what, and why this was done and if it made sense.
Keep up your good work. And I loved seeing the CC Watchdog signs coming into town yesterday.
Matt, God Thank You! I was hoping people would come forward with their fights concerning water. It's the stories of people, like you, who have faced these issues we need to hear from. The fact that you are responding as a farmer from Lewis County is very encouraging and at the same time alarming. It is ALL of our problems, especially, as you wrote,
"All, done with little to no media attention. And no one in the media was asking hard questions about who, what, and why this was done and if it made sense"
What a plus for us: "And I loved seeing the CC Watchdog signs coming into town yesterday"
Time to face the music, and it seems anyone with a journalism degree around here is incapable of assisting. The fact is we are in a culture war and a religious war with a death cult.
Overturn the perverse Boldt Decision from which the tribal water rights were created. There were no treaty water rights.
Build dams. With the Whooshh Salmon Cannon, the whole argument against dams disappears.
Close the reservations. The President has the power.
The Travesty And Tragedy That Is The Boldt Decision, Part 1
Judge Boldt stacked the deck to get the outcome he desired. I leave it to you to ponder his motive(s). Central to his finding were: (1). The Indians negotiating the treaty were an "unlettered people." Primitive and dependant were also used. (2). The language barrier was unfair. English, which was "unknown to most of the tribal representatives," was used. Translations were "by an interpreter in the service of the United States using Chinook Jargon, which was also unknown to some tribal representatives. Having only about three hundred words in its vocabulary, the Jargon was capable of conveying only rudimentary concepts, but not the sophisticated or implied meaning of treaty provisions about which highly learned jurists and scholars differ."
However, in 1974, the only words in dispute in any treaty provision for Boldt really were "in common." Boldt wrote, "There is no indication that the Indians intended or understood the language "in common with all citizens of the Territory" to limit their right to fish in any way." From other case law, he extracted,(from which I extracted) "... the negotiations for the treaty are conducted, on the part of the United States, an enlightened and powerful nation, by representatives skilled in diplomacy, masters of a written language, understanding the modes and forms of creating the various technical estates known to their law, ..."
The concept of "the commons" is the "sophisticated or implied meaning" and "various technical estates" of concern to Boldt.
Seems to me the concept of The Common was developed by primitive unlettered people that weren't dependent on enlightened nations, representatives skilled in diplomacy, masters of a written language, or understanding modes and forms of creating various technical estates. The Common is an essential part of any group any time in the history of man. When the first people gathered around a fire to cook, share and exchange their food and stories of the hunt and the days adventures, to find a mate, to make friends, etc., there was a common, and there were rules of behavior for all.
Even children understand the concept. They know the difference between mom and dad's bedroom and the kitchen on one hand and the bath, dining, family, and living rooms on the other. When they first are on the playground at school, they learn to share the slide, merry-go-round, and swings in common with the other children. They quickly learn the common has rules. (Did I just uncover the real reason why playgrounds can't have such wonderful things anymore?). Are such children lettered?
The limitations of the Chinook language are too important to Boldt. He does not mention sign language. Have you ever played "Charades" or just watched others. Lots of information can be conveyed. How hard is it to point at everyone present for the treaty and make a big sweeping inclusive motion? Many Indians had seen explorers' ships and even the explorers since 1805 when Lewis and Clark came as far as Astoria. A fort was built there in 1813. There were numerous settlers in Seattle, Olympia, and probably elsewhere years before the treaty was signed in 1855. How much English did some Indians already know? I suspect more than Boldt and the plaintifs want us to believe.
Surely, the Indians must have recognized the fact that the reservation was their designated common area just for them. Shouldn't that make it obvious to them that the rest was the common area for everyone else and them? How difficult is that to see? It follows naturally and logically. I don't see the Indians as so primitive that this would be difficult for them.
Indians always talk about how their elders are wise and how much they honor and respect them. Yet, some 120 years after the signing, some unhappy tribal members were willing and anxious to throw their ancestors under the bus, and Judge Boldt swallowed.
Article 10 of the Point No Point Treaty makes a lie of the whole case. The tribes were desirous of alcohol prohibition on the reservations. This is all the evidence needed to conclude they knew what The Common was and it needed rules to protect it.
Article 9 also has something about The Common shared by all. Two rules for the Indians when on the joint commons: be friendly and respect property.
End of Part 1. Parts 2 and 3 are available.
“Credentials” what a clown
Clallum.County Commissioners oath to support the U.S. and Washington Constitutions and swear to "perform faithfully ,impartially and honestly the duties of office " Putting any group of people above anyone else giving special privileges ,power ,control over others is elitism and is incompatible with the principles this country was founded on democracy. .Let him who would be the greatest among you be the servant of all .
“Mein Kampf” His primary rules were: never allow the public to cool off; never admit a fault or wrong; never concede that there may be some good in your enemy; never leave room for alternatives; never accept blame; concentrate on one enemy at a time and blame him for everything that goes wrong; people will believe a big lie sooner than a little one; and if you repeat it frequently enough people will sooner or later believe it.
I'm assuming the Dungeness River Management Team is ultimately an environmental benefit and kudos to them for that. It is the inequity in the harvesting of Dungeness River's resources that concerns me. I would need statistical verification, but I am confident that those who enjoy sovereign rights are benefitting from a disproportionate amount of those resources. Sovereign rights should only be allowed and exercised exclusively on sovereign, ( reservation ), land. Any commerce outside those sovereignty confines subject to the laws of the land. 50% of the "harvestable" fish has been judged an allowable resource for the sovereign to feed the sovereign. That judgement does not provide for the sovereign to sell their resources to the non sovereign without the same constraints a non-sovereign harvester must meet. Back to the DRMT; do all players get equal benefit ?
Seems the only question left is Ozais benefiting financially from association he has with all the NGOs he is psrt of while serving as a County Commisioner representing the people of the County? If not, more power to him. If so, he needs to be prosected. In thus State with one party rule and unintertsed compliant news sources that isnt likly...unless the US DOJ gets interested.
Just a note on false equivalency - like it or note, Ozias is elected by the public and Tozzer is not. This is a factual difference. I'd say that's a reasonable basis for the PDC to treat his column differently than the CCWD.
13, 020 of 57, 359 registered voters is hardly the entire public.
Of course not, but who won?
Certainly not the county.