Showing posts with label Salmon Forever. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Salmon Forever. Show all posts

Wednesday, April 02, 2008

Salmon Forever 501(c)(3)

Gifts, grants and contributions received
2006 - $10,059.00
2005 - $23,075.00
2004 - $20,676.00
2003 - $54,355.00
2002 - $32,348.00
2001 - $34,967.00
2000 - $32,202.00
1999 - $55,322.00

Part III, Line 1 - During the year, has the organization attempted to influence national, state or local legislation, including any attempt to influence public opinion on a legislative matter or referendum? If "Yes," enter the total expenses paid or incurred in connection with the lobbying activities $___N/A____

Part IV, Line 11a - An organization that normally receives a substantial part of its support from a governmental unit or from the general public Section 170(b)(1)(A)(vi) (Also complete Support Schedule in Part IV-A)

more t/k

Friday, March 28, 2008

Samples

"Samples are taken regularly during storms and measured in a portable turbidity monitor, and the filtered sediment is weighed in our Sunnybrae sediment lab." That would be Ken Miller "Salmon Forever" (a 501(c)(3) btw) who claims in 2000 "We also serve as a scientific consultant to Voices of Humboldt County, a monthly publication of the Humboldt Watershed Council. The publication’s name comes from a video Salmon Forever and Humboldt Watershed Council co-produced in 1997." Co-produced? CO-PRODUCED? Let me get this straight, Ken Miller's "Salmon Forever" serves as a consultant for Ken Miller's "Humboldt Watershed Council" and he co-produced a video with - himself? It must be a coalition.

A January 21, 2003 press release from
Michael Shellenberger, Salmon Forever, 510-525-9900
Ken Miller, Humboldt Watershed Council, 707-839-7444
Jesse Noell, Salmon Forever, 707-443-7433
Cynthia Elkins, EPIC, 707-923-2931
is titled: Groups Demand Water Board Curtail Excessive Logging
Independent Scientific Panel Says Pacific Lumber Logging Will Prevent Recovery of Five North Coast Watersheds


Ken Miller recently opined, in a My Word in the Times Standard, that The court's decision in the Pacific Lumber case crystallizes a frightening expansion of the “right to lie,” so that the successful cheater (as opposed to one who is caught during the proceeding) is immune from any legal consequences for lying in most government proceedings. The rationale is that the protection of free speech, and finality in permitting processes, are worth the damages resulting from undetected deception.

How does the 'right to lie' argument apply to Ken Miller's own activities? To Humboldt Watershed Council's activities? To that "project" of Humboldt Watershed Council, "Healthy Humboldt Coalition?"

Monday, March 17, 2008