I may be uniquely qualified to comment on this topic. I grew up on National Wildlife refuges in 4 states in the western US. My father managed 8 different refuges until he retired and moved to Sequim. It was an amazing way to grow up and it was drilled into us that the land belonged to the people. Every refuge I lived on had many programs for the public to enjoy the lands from hiking and bird watching to hunting. I lived on all of these refuges, in government housing, and it was always understood we were visitors, stewarding the land.
I recently moved away from the western US for the first time in my life. I now realize I took for granted the public lands that are available for use in the western US. It has been so hard to find even a place to sit by the river here as almost every land is privately owned. That's really what we are talking about here, is transferring public land into private hands. From the citizens of the USA to a corporation. If the precedent is set be prepared to lose access to more and more lands as the private corporations and tribes swallow up any and every land they can. Watching these people who I know value the lands and open spaces that the USFWS, NPS, and State lands curate, give away the lands to private hands, is surreal and supremely disappointing.
Thank you for taking the time to provide such a detailed response. I appreciate your willingness to engage directly and to explain OlyCAP's role in the Safe Parking Pilot.
I would like to clarify one point. Before sending my email to the commissioners, I had already reached out directly to both Viola Ware and Robin, as Robin had instructed, on multiple occasions regarding these questions but did not receive a response. Ms. Ware also indicated that additional questions would be addressed when Trinity United Methodist Church presented to the Homelessness Task Force earlier this month. However, during that presentation, Trinity's representative, Joe Cress, was unable to answer several basic questions regarding the program's costs and funding. Likewise, I have not received responses from the county commissioners who represent me. My email to the Board was sent only after those earlier attempts were unsuccessful.
While your response answered several of my questions, a number remain unresolved. I remain interested in understanding what oversight mechanisms the County uses to evaluate whether the program is achieving its intended objectives and what safeguards are in place to address the appearance of potential conflicts of interest when county officials also serve on the boards of organizations receiving county funding.
Even accepting the positive outcome of helping two households secure permanent housing, this remains a significant public investment for a program that has served only a small number of participants. I believe taxpayers are entitled to understand how the County evaluates whether that level of expenditure represents an effective use of public funds.
That said, I appreciate your invitation to contact you directly in the future. Open communication benefits everyone, and I welcome the opportunity to continue asking questions through that channel.
Thank you again for your time and your thoughtful response.
Here is today's email sent to the three county commissioners:
Dear Commissioners,
As discussion continues regarding the proposed transfer of the Dungeness and Protection Island National Wildlife Refuges, I would encourage the Board to clearly state its position on behalf of the residents you represent. Recent information suggests that the Jamestown Corporation's stated reasons for seeking ownership of the refuges continue to evolve, making it even more important for the public to know where their elected officials stand.
Earlier this month, Commissioner French mentioned the possibility of holding a public town hall with Representative Emily Randall, Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, and representatives of the Jamestown Corporation. Has there been any progress toward organizing such a meeting? Given the level of public interest, it seems residents deserve an opportunity to ask questions directly of the elected officials and parties involved.
Thank you for your time, and I appreciate any update you can provide.
Neither the commissioners nor Viola Ware responded to yesterday's email seeking answers about OlyCAP funding, potential conflicts of interest, and the organization's refusal to answer questions from the public. However, OlyCAP Executive Director Holly Morgan did:
Dear Mr. Tozzer,
Thank you for your email. My name is Holly Morgan, and I serve as Executive Director of Olympic Community Action Partnership (OlyCAP). Viola Ware, our Director of Housing and Community Development, forwarded your message to me because the questions you raised concern organizational operations that are more appropriately answered by my office.
First, I would like to address your statement that OlyCAP has adopted a policy of not engaging with the public. That is not the case. OlyCAP staff regularly participate in public meetings, advisory groups, and community forums throughout Clallam and Jefferson Counties. We are always willing to answer questions when they are directed to us through an appropriate forum - period of public comment made available at city or county meetings are not appropriate forums to discuss this type of concern in any real depth - it's just not what public comment periods are for. In addition, because comments made on social media, blogs, or third-party websites are not always brought to our attention, we cannot reasonably respond to every discussion that occurs online. Going forward, if you have questions regarding OlyCAP's programs or operations, I invite you to contact me directly, and I will do my best to provide a timely response.
Regarding the Safe Parking Pilot, there appears to be some confusion about the nature of OlyCAP's role.
The Safe Parking Pilot is not an OlyCAP program. It is a program operated by Trinity United Methodist Church in Sequim, which received grant funding from Clallam County. In July 2025, Trinity contracted with OlyCAP to provide experienced staff to assist with implementation and participant support.
Safe Parking programs provide designated parking areas operated by nonprofit organizations, social service agencies, or faith communities where individuals and families experiencing homelessness can legally and safely park their vehicles overnight. Unlike unmanaged vehicle camping, Safe Parking sites provide structured oversight, sanitation facilities, participant codes of conduct, safety and security plans, and connections to housing navigation, case management, employment services, behavioral health resources, and other supportive services. The goal is to provide a safe, temporary alternative while helping participants transition into permanent housing.
Although the pilot has served a relatively small number of households, two of the four participating households have already secured permanent housing. While the sample size is small, that represents a meaningful outcome for those families.
Regarding expenditures, the financial information currently in your possession accurately reflects OlyCAP's billings under our contract with Trinity United Methodist Church. Our invoices document the staffing costs incurred in providing services under that agreement. Trinity then invoices Clallam County under its separate funding agreement with the County. To my knowledge, you also possess copies of those invoices.
If there is a specific expenditure or accounting item you believe is missing from those records, I would appreciate clarification so I can determine whether additional information exists.
Your email also characterizes the program as appearing to function as a "jobs program." That is not an accurate description. OlyCAP no longer operates supported employment programs.
You also asked about OlyCAP's governance.
OlyCAP is a federally designated Community Action Agency and is required to comply with the Community Services Block Grant Organizational Standards. One of those standards requires Community Action Agencies to maintain a tripartite governing board consisting of one-third elected public officials (or their representatives), one-third representatives of low-income communities, and one-third representatives of the private sector. This governance model is mandated by federal law and is designed to ensure balanced community representation.
In addition, OlyCAP maintains a Conflict of Interest Policy that is reviewed annually. Board members are required to disclose potential conflicts and reaffirm their compliance with the policy each year.
Finally, regarding my own participation on community boards, I currently serve on the boards of Olympic Communities of Health and the Jefferson County Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Advisory Board. Neither organization currently provides funding to OlyCAP. Should a matter arise involving potential funding or another issue creating a conflict of interest, I would recuse myself from the discussion and any related vote, consistent with applicable governance requirements.
As to independent oversight, OlyCAP undergoes an annual independent financial audit in addition to numerous monitoring reviews conducted by our state and federal funding agencies. These reviews examine financial management, contract compliance, and adherence to applicable regulations. Our audit reports are publicly available here, and I encourage you to review them if you are interested in our financial oversight processes.
I hope this information is helpful. Thank you again for reaching out.
Well written on this land steal by the Tribe. The article is factual and fair and CANT be disputed. Now the critics of Jeff and Jake will answer by personal attacks on them instead of dealing with the articles content. My word to them is comment on the topic at hand and stop your personal attacks on them instead deal with the topic of discussion.. Now that said my coffee is tasting good this AM
The Refuges needs real stewards not deceitful stewards.
JKT has not demonstrated they can make the right call for the Dungeness River let alone the Refuges.
The JKT formed a partnership with Clallam County and the State of Washington (the Consortium) and made promise after promise to restore wild salmon. Since 1999 this well-funded effort by the “consortium” to "restore wild salmon" has been a complete failure. What’s worse than the failure to "restore wild salmon" has been the clear use of "restore wild salmon" to achieve property buy backs. For 27 years the “consortium” came up with “solutions’ to "restore wild salmon."
There is no doubt JKT threw its weight around the consortium using treaty rights as a power play to dictate the final decision making and goals..(acquire “ancestral lands”) JKT led and still leads this consortium by the nose and the tax payers wallet for the benefit of JKT’s wallet. The Dungeness River Management Team ( DRMT) is totally tribal centric.
The first of this consortium’s “solutions’ in 2004 was to plug and pipe irrigation ditches so that the Dungeness could “store fine sediment.” The consortium plugged and piped 66 miles of irrigation ditches for that purpose way before the Dungeness water rule.
The project and the millions spent were doomed to fail for two major reasons. First, because the irrigation ditches were only plugged for property buy back purposes ,they failed to stop the fine silt from being diverted by the upper east highland irrigation ditch system and the other upper irrigation ditches on the west side of the Dungeness, which have now been raised in level because they have been caked with fine sediment, creating system wide flooding problems. Whatever fine silt that managed to head down river was flushed out into the Cline spit, by the shear flow of the Dungeness. Salmon do not spawn at Cline spit..
The project was also doomed because the “consortium” sat on its Jimmycomelately ( JCL) science and failed to create and protect the JCL fixed meandering coil. The failure to administer JCL science to create a place for fine silt to gather at a 4 percent grade so that wild salmon can spawn has been an epic 27 year failure. JCL science includes the assertion that stormwater should be diverted from the JCL fixed meandering coil, because large sediment and logs gouge salmon beds. The snapshot of DRMT’s work is clear. No fine sediment to "restore wild salmon."
Then the consortium blamed the lack of a floodplain for loss of salmon habitat. The new plan was to "restore wild salmon" with the Rivers end project. You would think the consortium would have used this project to build JCL science and the “fixed meandering coil. You like me would be wrong. Simultaneously, along with the Strait Ecosystems Recovery Network” ( SERN) “property buy back program” the Consortium allowed the Meadowbrook “estuary restoration” grant to engineer three crabs flooding , which intercepted “rivers end “ floodplain efforts, which never included the “fixed meandering coil.” The consortium took tax payer money under the guise of “wild salmon restoration” to build competing floodplains…in a rain shadow… Only under stormwater conditions is there enough water for both. This leaves all salmon at all stages in shallow water vulnerable to predation. This is bad for the ecosystem but great for property buy back. Oh, but the consortium wasn’t through making things worse, they conjured up the restoration of the Olympia oysters to the area and spent even more taxpayer resources scattering bags of Olympia oysters along the shorelines. I am sure most of us have seen the signs “do not feed the birds.’ Well , apparently the consortium thought lowering the level of the river and feeding birds at the mouth and nearby beaches would be safe for the salmon exposed in shallow rain shadow levels. The consortium was wrong.
Then, the consortium recently discovered that plugging the irrigation ditches did not have the outcome they had hoped. Duhr.. ya think..Ben Smith..Duhr…The irrigation ditches fanned out and recharged the water levels above the Dungeness that flowed into the lower reaches in summer. The consortium showed illustrations of incompetence on their screen at the last DRMT meeting…Duhr.. Rather than restore the irrigation ditches to do what they have always known they needed,…Duhr… the consortium plots with ecology once again to install meters on all wells. Once again , the consortium does what is best for the “willing seller willing buyer” element of its “property buy back program” not to “restore wild salmon.”
The consortium thinks it can just ignore these failures and shuffle new members of the loyal socialist ideologs in and out of the consortium to be led around by the nose by JKT and keep defrauding the tax payer , so they can acquire ancestral lands.
I won’t let them because I am a "crackpot." (according to JKT's Randy Johnson) I do everything I can to expose the "willing seller willing buyer" scam imbedded into the "property buy back program" and the "wild salmon restoration" perpetual fraud.
Here is what I am sending out. I took out the Duhr..and crackpot..
Subject: Perpetual Fraud in the Dungeness River and Refuges Salmon Restoration Programs
To the Commissioners, Department of the Interior, and Members of Congress:
The Refuges need real stewards, not deceitful ones.
The Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe (JKT) has not demonstrated that they can make the right decisions for the Dungeness River, let alone the Refuges. JKT formed a partnership with Clallam County and the State of Washington (the Consortium), making promise after promise to restore wild salmon. Since 1999, this well-funded effort by the Consortium has been a complete failure.
What is worse than the failure to restore wild salmon is the clear use of the "restore wild salmon" narrative to achieve aggressive property buybacks. For 27 years, the Consortium has come up with "solutions" that do nothing for the fish. There is no doubt that JKT threw its weight around the Consortium, using treaty rights as a power play to dictate final decision-making and goals in order to acquire ancestral lands. JKT led, and continues to lead, this Consortium by the nose and by the taxpayers' wallets, solely for the benefit of JKT’s own financial interests. Furthermore, the Dungeness River Management Team (DRMT) has become totally tribal-centric.
The first of this Consortium’s "solutions" in 2004 was to plug and pipe irrigation ditches so that the Dungeness could "store fine sediment." The Consortium plugged and piped 66 miles of irrigation ditches for that purpose, long before the Dungeness Water Rule was established. This project, and the millions of taxpayer dollars spent on it, was doomed to fail for two major reasons:
1. Property Buyback Focus & Flooding:
Because the irrigation ditches were only plugged to facilitate property buybacks, they failed to stop fine silt from being diverted by the upper east highland irrigation ditch system and other upper irrigation ditches on the west side of the Dungeness. These ditches have now risen in level because they are caked with fine sediment, creating system-wide flooding problems. Whatever fine silt managed to head downriver was flushed out into Cline Spit by the sheer flow of the Dungeness. Salmon do not spawn at Cline Spit.
2. Failure of Jimmycomelately (JCL) Science:
The project was also doomed because the Consortium sat on its Jimmycomelately science and failed to create and protect a JCL fixed meandering coil. The failure to administer JCL science—which would create a place for fine silt to gather at a 4 percent grade so wild salmon can spawn—has been an epic 27-year failure. JCL science includes the clear assertion that stormwater should be diverted from the fixed meandering coil because large sediment and logs gouge out salmon beds.
The snapshot of the DRMT’s work is clear: there is no fine sediment being managed properly to restore wild salmon. When this failed, the Consortium blamed the lack of a floodplain for the loss of salmon habitat. Their new plan was to "restore wild salmon" through the River's End project. You would think the Consortium would have used this project to build upon JCL science and the fixed meandering coil. You would be wrong.
Simultaneously, alongside the Strait Ecosystem Recovery Network (SERN) property buyback program, the Consortium allowed the Meadowbrook estuary restoration grant to engineer a three-crabs flooding project. This intercepted the River's End floodplain efforts, which never included the fixed meandering coil in the first place. The Consortium took taxpayer money under the guise of wild salmon restoration to build competing floodplains in a rain shadow. Only under severe stormwater conditions is there enough water for both. This leaves all salmon at all life stages in shallow water, highly vulnerable to predation. This is devastating for the ecosystem, but great for the property buyback program.
To make things worse, the Consortium then conjured up the restoration of Olympia oysters to the area. They spent even more taxpayer resources scattering bags of Olympia oysters along the shorelines. Most of us have seen the signs that say "do not feed the birds." Yet, the Consortium apparently thought that lowering the level of the river and feeding birds at the mouth and nearby beaches would be safe for salmon exposed in shallow, rain-shadow water levels. They were wrong.
Recently, the Consortium discovered that plugging the irrigation ditches did not have the outcome they hoped for. The irrigation ditches originally fanned out and recharged the water levels above the Dungeness, which naturally flowed into the lower reaches during the dry summer months. The Consortium openly illustrated this incompetence on their screens at the last DRMT meeting. Rather than restoring the irrigation ditches to do what they have always known was needed, the Consortium is now plotting with the Department of Ecology to install meters on all wells private and commercial.
Once again, the Consortium does what is best for the "willing seller, willing buyer" element of its property buyback program—not what is best to restore wild salmon. The Consortium thinks it can ignore these failures and simply shuffle new members of loyal ideologues in and out of the organization to be led around by JKT, all while defrauding the taxpayer to acquire ancestral lands.
I will not let them. I do everything I can to expose the "willing seller, willing buyer" scam embedded into the property buyback program and the perpetual fraud of this salmon restoration narrative.
Please block the transfer of the Wildlife Refuges to the Jamestown Tribe.
I will premise this comment with my acceptance and admiration for the JST as friends and neighbors. If there is any doubt as to the JST no longer living their ancestry simply go visit their casino. After that, maybe their petroleum business and outlets, pot shops and commercial fishing operations. The "indigenous" have and use the latest in technology and locomotion. Pretending to be the long lived stewards of the land while using the advances provided by others like roads, locomotion, sanitation and the now myriad forms of technology from computers to cell phones to GPS is a deception. The "indigenous" played no part in creating or building all the current conveniences they exploit. Yet they use those advances to exploit special rights and privileges the majority of citizens do not have. Yes; the land transfers and land back are all about commercial interests. The problem is not that JST progeny are bad and wrong. The problem is the facade of a proud native warrior with a feather in his hair and the truth of a cell phone in his back pocket. To be blunt so that even the most naive among us can understand; the indigenous peoples of this land are all dead. It gets even more absurd when you contemplate, were the first nations first ? Who proceeded whomever the JST members were ? Most importantly; does it matter ? If it matters, what about the ancestry of the rest of us ?
I may be uniquely qualified to comment on this topic. I grew up on National Wildlife refuges in 4 states in the western US. My father managed 8 different refuges until he retired and moved to Sequim. It was an amazing way to grow up and it was drilled into us that the land belonged to the people. Every refuge I lived on had many programs for the public to enjoy the lands from hiking and bird watching to hunting. I lived on all of these refuges, in government housing, and it was always understood we were visitors, stewarding the land.
I recently moved away from the western US for the first time in my life. I now realize I took for granted the public lands that are available for use in the western US. It has been so hard to find even a place to sit by the river here as almost every land is privately owned. That's really what we are talking about here, is transferring public land into private hands. From the citizens of the USA to a corporation. If the precedent is set be prepared to lose access to more and more lands as the private corporations and tribes swallow up any and every land they can. Watching these people who I know value the lands and open spaces that the USFWS, NPS, and State lands curate, give away the lands to private hands, is surreal and supremely disappointing.
Dear Ms. Morgan,
Thank you for taking the time to provide such a detailed response. I appreciate your willingness to engage directly and to explain OlyCAP's role in the Safe Parking Pilot.
I would like to clarify one point. Before sending my email to the commissioners, I had already reached out directly to both Viola Ware and Robin, as Robin had instructed, on multiple occasions regarding these questions but did not receive a response. Ms. Ware also indicated that additional questions would be addressed when Trinity United Methodist Church presented to the Homelessness Task Force earlier this month. However, during that presentation, Trinity's representative, Joe Cress, was unable to answer several basic questions regarding the program's costs and funding. Likewise, I have not received responses from the county commissioners who represent me. My email to the Board was sent only after those earlier attempts were unsuccessful.
While your response answered several of my questions, a number remain unresolved. I remain interested in understanding what oversight mechanisms the County uses to evaluate whether the program is achieving its intended objectives and what safeguards are in place to address the appearance of potential conflicts of interest when county officials also serve on the boards of organizations receiving county funding.
Even accepting the positive outcome of helping two households secure permanent housing, this remains a significant public investment for a program that has served only a small number of participants. I believe taxpayers are entitled to understand how the County evaluates whether that level of expenditure represents an effective use of public funds.
That said, I appreciate your invitation to contact you directly in the future. Open communication benefits everyone, and I welcome the opportunity to continue asking questions through that channel.
Thank you again for your time and your thoughtful response.
Here is today's email sent to the three county commissioners:
Dear Commissioners,
As discussion continues regarding the proposed transfer of the Dungeness and Protection Island National Wildlife Refuges, I would encourage the Board to clearly state its position on behalf of the residents you represent. Recent information suggests that the Jamestown Corporation's stated reasons for seeking ownership of the refuges continue to evolve, making it even more important for the public to know where their elected officials stand.
Earlier this month, Commissioner French mentioned the possibility of holding a public town hall with Representative Emily Randall, Senators Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, and representatives of the Jamestown Corporation. Has there been any progress toward organizing such a meeting? Given the level of public interest, it seems residents deserve an opportunity to ask questions directly of the elected officials and parties involved.
Thank you for your time, and I appreciate any update you can provide.
Neither the commissioners nor Viola Ware responded to yesterday's email seeking answers about OlyCAP funding, potential conflicts of interest, and the organization's refusal to answer questions from the public. However, OlyCAP Executive Director Holly Morgan did:
Dear Mr. Tozzer,
Thank you for your email. My name is Holly Morgan, and I serve as Executive Director of Olympic Community Action Partnership (OlyCAP). Viola Ware, our Director of Housing and Community Development, forwarded your message to me because the questions you raised concern organizational operations that are more appropriately answered by my office.
First, I would like to address your statement that OlyCAP has adopted a policy of not engaging with the public. That is not the case. OlyCAP staff regularly participate in public meetings, advisory groups, and community forums throughout Clallam and Jefferson Counties. We are always willing to answer questions when they are directed to us through an appropriate forum - period of public comment made available at city or county meetings are not appropriate forums to discuss this type of concern in any real depth - it's just not what public comment periods are for. In addition, because comments made on social media, blogs, or third-party websites are not always brought to our attention, we cannot reasonably respond to every discussion that occurs online. Going forward, if you have questions regarding OlyCAP's programs or operations, I invite you to contact me directly, and I will do my best to provide a timely response.
Regarding the Safe Parking Pilot, there appears to be some confusion about the nature of OlyCAP's role.
The Safe Parking Pilot is not an OlyCAP program. It is a program operated by Trinity United Methodist Church in Sequim, which received grant funding from Clallam County. In July 2025, Trinity contracted with OlyCAP to provide experienced staff to assist with implementation and participant support.
Safe Parking programs provide designated parking areas operated by nonprofit organizations, social service agencies, or faith communities where individuals and families experiencing homelessness can legally and safely park their vehicles overnight. Unlike unmanaged vehicle camping, Safe Parking sites provide structured oversight, sanitation facilities, participant codes of conduct, safety and security plans, and connections to housing navigation, case management, employment services, behavioral health resources, and other supportive services. The goal is to provide a safe, temporary alternative while helping participants transition into permanent housing.
Although the pilot has served a relatively small number of households, two of the four participating households have already secured permanent housing. While the sample size is small, that represents a meaningful outcome for those families.
Regarding expenditures, the financial information currently in your possession accurately reflects OlyCAP's billings under our contract with Trinity United Methodist Church. Our invoices document the staffing costs incurred in providing services under that agreement. Trinity then invoices Clallam County under its separate funding agreement with the County. To my knowledge, you also possess copies of those invoices.
If there is a specific expenditure or accounting item you believe is missing from those records, I would appreciate clarification so I can determine whether additional information exists.
Your email also characterizes the program as appearing to function as a "jobs program." That is not an accurate description. OlyCAP no longer operates supported employment programs.
You also asked about OlyCAP's governance.
OlyCAP is a federally designated Community Action Agency and is required to comply with the Community Services Block Grant Organizational Standards. One of those standards requires Community Action Agencies to maintain a tripartite governing board consisting of one-third elected public officials (or their representatives), one-third representatives of low-income communities, and one-third representatives of the private sector. This governance model is mandated by federal law and is designed to ensure balanced community representation.
In addition, OlyCAP maintains a Conflict of Interest Policy that is reviewed annually. Board members are required to disclose potential conflicts and reaffirm their compliance with the policy each year.
Finally, regarding my own participation on community boards, I currently serve on the boards of Olympic Communities of Health and the Jefferson County Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities Advisory Board. Neither organization currently provides funding to OlyCAP. Should a matter arise involving potential funding or another issue creating a conflict of interest, I would recuse myself from the discussion and any related vote, consistent with applicable governance requirements.
As to independent oversight, OlyCAP undergoes an annual independent financial audit in addition to numerous monitoring reviews conducted by our state and federal funding agencies. These reviews examine financial management, contract compliance, and adherence to applicable regulations. Our audit reports are publicly available here, and I encourage you to review them if you are interested in our financial oversight processes.
I hope this information is helpful. Thank you again for reaching out.
In the spirit of community,
Holly
Well written on this land steal by the Tribe. The article is factual and fair and CANT be disputed. Now the critics of Jeff and Jake will answer by personal attacks on them instead of dealing with the articles content. My word to them is comment on the topic at hand and stop your personal attacks on them instead deal with the topic of discussion.. Now that said my coffee is tasting good this AM
JST is a Corporation.
JST does not engage in profit sharing with its members like other tribes do.
Why is that?
The Refuges needs real stewards not deceitful stewards.
JKT has not demonstrated they can make the right call for the Dungeness River let alone the Refuges.
The JKT formed a partnership with Clallam County and the State of Washington (the Consortium) and made promise after promise to restore wild salmon. Since 1999 this well-funded effort by the “consortium” to "restore wild salmon" has been a complete failure. What’s worse than the failure to "restore wild salmon" has been the clear use of "restore wild salmon" to achieve property buy backs. For 27 years the “consortium” came up with “solutions’ to "restore wild salmon."
There is no doubt JKT threw its weight around the consortium using treaty rights as a power play to dictate the final decision making and goals..(acquire “ancestral lands”) JKT led and still leads this consortium by the nose and the tax payers wallet for the benefit of JKT’s wallet. The Dungeness River Management Team ( DRMT) is totally tribal centric.
The first of this consortium’s “solutions’ in 2004 was to plug and pipe irrigation ditches so that the Dungeness could “store fine sediment.” The consortium plugged and piped 66 miles of irrigation ditches for that purpose way before the Dungeness water rule.
The project and the millions spent were doomed to fail for two major reasons. First, because the irrigation ditches were only plugged for property buy back purposes ,they failed to stop the fine silt from being diverted by the upper east highland irrigation ditch system and the other upper irrigation ditches on the west side of the Dungeness, which have now been raised in level because they have been caked with fine sediment, creating system wide flooding problems. Whatever fine silt that managed to head down river was flushed out into the Cline spit, by the shear flow of the Dungeness. Salmon do not spawn at Cline spit..
The project was also doomed because the “consortium” sat on its Jimmycomelately ( JCL) science and failed to create and protect the JCL fixed meandering coil. The failure to administer JCL science to create a place for fine silt to gather at a 4 percent grade so that wild salmon can spawn has been an epic 27 year failure. JCL science includes the assertion that stormwater should be diverted from the JCL fixed meandering coil, because large sediment and logs gouge salmon beds. The snapshot of DRMT’s work is clear. No fine sediment to "restore wild salmon."
Then the consortium blamed the lack of a floodplain for loss of salmon habitat. The new plan was to "restore wild salmon" with the Rivers end project. You would think the consortium would have used this project to build JCL science and the “fixed meandering coil. You like me would be wrong. Simultaneously, along with the Strait Ecosystems Recovery Network” ( SERN) “property buy back program” the Consortium allowed the Meadowbrook “estuary restoration” grant to engineer three crabs flooding , which intercepted “rivers end “ floodplain efforts, which never included the “fixed meandering coil.” The consortium took tax payer money under the guise of “wild salmon restoration” to build competing floodplains…in a rain shadow… Only under stormwater conditions is there enough water for both. This leaves all salmon at all stages in shallow water vulnerable to predation. This is bad for the ecosystem but great for property buy back. Oh, but the consortium wasn’t through making things worse, they conjured up the restoration of the Olympia oysters to the area and spent even more taxpayer resources scattering bags of Olympia oysters along the shorelines. I am sure most of us have seen the signs “do not feed the birds.’ Well , apparently the consortium thought lowering the level of the river and feeding birds at the mouth and nearby beaches would be safe for the salmon exposed in shallow rain shadow levels. The consortium was wrong.
Then, the consortium recently discovered that plugging the irrigation ditches did not have the outcome they had hoped. Duhr.. ya think..Ben Smith..Duhr…The irrigation ditches fanned out and recharged the water levels above the Dungeness that flowed into the lower reaches in summer. The consortium showed illustrations of incompetence on their screen at the last DRMT meeting…Duhr.. Rather than restore the irrigation ditches to do what they have always known they needed,…Duhr… the consortium plots with ecology once again to install meters on all wells. Once again , the consortium does what is best for the “willing seller willing buyer” element of its “property buy back program” not to “restore wild salmon.”
The consortium thinks it can just ignore these failures and shuffle new members of the loyal socialist ideologs in and out of the consortium to be led around by the nose by JKT and keep defrauding the tax payer , so they can acquire ancestral lands.
I won’t let them because I am a "crackpot." (according to JKT's Randy Johnson) I do everything I can to expose the "willing seller willing buyer" scam imbedded into the "property buy back program" and the "wild salmon restoration" perpetual fraud.
Here is what I am sending out. I took out the Duhr..and crackpot..
Subject: Perpetual Fraud in the Dungeness River and Refuges Salmon Restoration Programs
To the Commissioners, Department of the Interior, and Members of Congress:
The Refuges need real stewards, not deceitful ones.
The Jamestown S'Klallam Tribe (JKT) has not demonstrated that they can make the right decisions for the Dungeness River, let alone the Refuges. JKT formed a partnership with Clallam County and the State of Washington (the Consortium), making promise after promise to restore wild salmon. Since 1999, this well-funded effort by the Consortium has been a complete failure.
What is worse than the failure to restore wild salmon is the clear use of the "restore wild salmon" narrative to achieve aggressive property buybacks. For 27 years, the Consortium has come up with "solutions" that do nothing for the fish. There is no doubt that JKT threw its weight around the Consortium, using treaty rights as a power play to dictate final decision-making and goals in order to acquire ancestral lands. JKT led, and continues to lead, this Consortium by the nose and by the taxpayers' wallets, solely for the benefit of JKT’s own financial interests. Furthermore, the Dungeness River Management Team (DRMT) has become totally tribal-centric.
The first of this Consortium’s "solutions" in 2004 was to plug and pipe irrigation ditches so that the Dungeness could "store fine sediment." The Consortium plugged and piped 66 miles of irrigation ditches for that purpose, long before the Dungeness Water Rule was established. This project, and the millions of taxpayer dollars spent on it, was doomed to fail for two major reasons:
1. Property Buyback Focus & Flooding:
Because the irrigation ditches were only plugged to facilitate property buybacks, they failed to stop fine silt from being diverted by the upper east highland irrigation ditch system and other upper irrigation ditches on the west side of the Dungeness. These ditches have now risen in level because they are caked with fine sediment, creating system-wide flooding problems. Whatever fine silt managed to head downriver was flushed out into Cline Spit by the sheer flow of the Dungeness. Salmon do not spawn at Cline Spit.
2. Failure of Jimmycomelately (JCL) Science:
The project was also doomed because the Consortium sat on its Jimmycomelately science and failed to create and protect a JCL fixed meandering coil. The failure to administer JCL science—which would create a place for fine silt to gather at a 4 percent grade so wild salmon can spawn—has been an epic 27-year failure. JCL science includes the clear assertion that stormwater should be diverted from the fixed meandering coil because large sediment and logs gouge out salmon beds.
The snapshot of the DRMT’s work is clear: there is no fine sediment being managed properly to restore wild salmon. When this failed, the Consortium blamed the lack of a floodplain for the loss of salmon habitat. Their new plan was to "restore wild salmon" through the River's End project. You would think the Consortium would have used this project to build upon JCL science and the fixed meandering coil. You would be wrong.
Simultaneously, alongside the Strait Ecosystem Recovery Network (SERN) property buyback program, the Consortium allowed the Meadowbrook estuary restoration grant to engineer a three-crabs flooding project. This intercepted the River's End floodplain efforts, which never included the fixed meandering coil in the first place. The Consortium took taxpayer money under the guise of wild salmon restoration to build competing floodplains in a rain shadow. Only under severe stormwater conditions is there enough water for both. This leaves all salmon at all life stages in shallow water, highly vulnerable to predation. This is devastating for the ecosystem, but great for the property buyback program.
To make things worse, the Consortium then conjured up the restoration of Olympia oysters to the area. They spent even more taxpayer resources scattering bags of Olympia oysters along the shorelines. Most of us have seen the signs that say "do not feed the birds." Yet, the Consortium apparently thought that lowering the level of the river and feeding birds at the mouth and nearby beaches would be safe for salmon exposed in shallow, rain-shadow water levels. They were wrong.
Recently, the Consortium discovered that plugging the irrigation ditches did not have the outcome they hoped for. The irrigation ditches originally fanned out and recharged the water levels above the Dungeness, which naturally flowed into the lower reaches during the dry summer months. The Consortium openly illustrated this incompetence on their screens at the last DRMT meeting. Rather than restoring the irrigation ditches to do what they have always known was needed, the Consortium is now plotting with the Department of Ecology to install meters on all wells private and commercial.
Once again, the Consortium does what is best for the "willing seller, willing buyer" element of its property buyback program—not what is best to restore wild salmon. The Consortium thinks it can ignore these failures and simply shuffle new members of loyal ideologues in and out of the organization to be led around by JKT, all while defrauding the taxpayer to acquire ancestral lands.
I will not let them. I do everything I can to expose the "willing seller, willing buyer" scam embedded into the property buyback program and the perpetual fraud of this salmon restoration narrative.
Please block the transfer of the Wildlife Refuges to the Jamestown Tribe.
Sincerely,
John Worthington
I will premise this comment with my acceptance and admiration for the JST as friends and neighbors. If there is any doubt as to the JST no longer living their ancestry simply go visit their casino. After that, maybe their petroleum business and outlets, pot shops and commercial fishing operations. The "indigenous" have and use the latest in technology and locomotion. Pretending to be the long lived stewards of the land while using the advances provided by others like roads, locomotion, sanitation and the now myriad forms of technology from computers to cell phones to GPS is a deception. The "indigenous" played no part in creating or building all the current conveniences they exploit. Yet they use those advances to exploit special rights and privileges the majority of citizens do not have. Yes; the land transfers and land back are all about commercial interests. The problem is not that JST progeny are bad and wrong. The problem is the facade of a proud native warrior with a feather in his hair and the truth of a cell phone in his back pocket. To be blunt so that even the most naive among us can understand; the indigenous peoples of this land are all dead. It gets even more absurd when you contemplate, were the first nations first ? Who proceeded whomever the JST members were ? Most importantly; does it matter ? If it matters, what about the ancestry of the rest of us ?