NOYO NEWS

Radioactive Seawater Impact Map (March 2012), US Dept of State Geographer Image

from: Nation of Change

Just prior to the Supermoon of March 18th, 2011, the world witnessed a natural and manmade disaster of epic proportions. What transpired off the coast of Honshu Island, Japan on March 11 has forever altered the planet and irremediably affected the global environment. Whereas the earthquake and tsunami proved to be truly apocalyptic events for the people of Japan, the ongoing nuclear disaster at Fukushima is proving to be cataclysmic for the entire world.

Most of the world community is still unaware of the extremely profound and far-reaching effects that the Fukushima nuclear disaster has had. If the nations of the world really understood the implications of the actual ‘fallout’ – past, current and future – the current nuclear energy paradigm would be systematically shut down. For those of us who are in the know, it is incumbent upon each of us to disseminate the relevant information/data necessary to forever close down the nuclear power industry around the globe.

There is now general agreement that the state of the art of nuclear power generation is such that it was deeply flawed and fundamentally dangerous from the very beginning. This fact was completely understood to be the case by the industry insiders and original financiers of every nuclear power plant ever built. Nuclear engineers had a very good understanding of just how vulnerable the design, engineering and architecture was at the startup of this industry. Nevertheless, they proceeded with this ill-fated enterprise at the behest of who?

Therefore, this begs the question, “Why would such an inherently unsafe technology and unstable design be implemented worldwide in the first place?”

More importantly, “Who ought to be responsible for mitigating this ongoing planetary nuclear disaster?” And, is there any practical way this predicament can be fixed? Is there technology available which can address this situation in any meaningful way?

With the increasing energy needs of the global economy pushing energy-poor nations like Japan into nuclear power, the economic incentive has always overridden good judgment. Especially in Japan do we see a nation that was literally set up to be a poster child for the nuclear power industry. This, in a place that is known to be the most seismically active region in the world!

“Does anyone in their right mind believe that nuclear power plants can ever be designed, engineered or constructed to withstand 9.0 earthquakes followed by 15 meter high tsunamis? Sorry if we offend, but such a display of so deadly a combination of ignorance and arrogance must represent the very height of hubris. Particularly in view of the inevitable consequences which have manifested at Fukushima, how is it that so few saw this pre-ordained and disastrous outcome, except by willful blindness?”—Japan: A Nation Consigned To Nuclear Armageddon

read more:  HERE

 ***

by Dan Bacher

Don’t try Bigfoot hunting in California – it could result in your arrest and conviction, according to the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG).

The DFG issued a statement in response to recent media reports about a Texas wildlife official proclaiming that bigfoot hunting is legal in the long horn state.

“The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department says that in theory, it would be legal to hunt Bigfoot in their state,” stated a DFG facebook post on May 11. “Not so in California!”

“The lack of confirmation of this alleged animal’s existence brings into question whether or not it occurs naturally in California,” according to the DFG. “If Bigfoot occurs naturally in the state, then it would be defined as a non-game mammal pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 415.”

In order to take a non-game mammal legally in California, it must be listed in the California Code of Regulations, which Bigfoot is not.

“If Bigfoot does not occur naturally in California then it would not be defined as a non-game mammal and could not be taken legally… unless the Bigfoot was causing property damage (in which case it could be depredated) or if a Bigfoot was considered a public safety threat (in which case the animal could be taken).”

If the existence of only one Bigfoot was confirmed, then it could be considered “threatened and endangered” and could potentially be listed as a protected species under the state or federal Endangered Species Acts, according to the DFG.

“But if a healthy and growing population of Bigfoot was confirmed, a hunting season for the creature might be considered and could potentially be implemented (unless a law is passed that lists it as a specially protected mammal),” the DFG said.

However, the DFG cautioned, “But even if it was legal to hunt Bigfoot in California, the cryptid would surely prove to be extremely elusive prey for even the most crafty and seasoned of hunters. Because, as history shows, this species is notoriously hard to spot, photograph or document … which means it’s likely to be extraordinarily difficult to track down and dispatch.”

“Despite its massive frame, the legendary Bigfoot seems to be as light on its feet as Fred Astaire in his hoofing prime … and perplexingly adept at blending into its habitat,” the Department quipped.

The Texas Parks and Wildlife Commission has a far different approach to Bigfoot hunting regulations.

According to a Texas Parks and Wildlife Department official, you’re free to kill as many Bigfoot as your want, since the giant cryptid isn’t listed as an endangered species, reported Live Science magazine on May 11. (http://www.livescience.com/20248-shooting-bigfoot-legal-texas.html)

“If the Commission does not specifically list an indigenous, nongame species, then the species is considered non-protected nongame wildlife, e.g., coyote, bobcat, mountain lion, cotton-tailed rabbit, etc,” wrote Lieutenant David Sinclair, Chief of Staff at the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, in an email response to Bigfoot enthusiast John Lloyd Scharf. “A nonprotected nongame animal may be hunted on private property with landowner consent by any means, at any time and there is no bag limit or possession limit.”

Sharf reported that he replied to Sinclair, “So, it is the case all individuals of an unknown species … could be exterminated without criminal or civil repercussions — essentially causing extinction?”

Bigfoot enthusiasts and researchers have been concerned for years that somebody may kill a Bigfoot if and when the species is finally captured, preventing researchers from studying a live specimen of the species. Some regional governments in the Pacific Northwest, where the most Bigfoot sightings have occurred, have passed resolutions and laws to protect the cryptid, also known as Sasquatch.

In 1992, Whatcom County, Washington officials approved a resolution declaring the County a “sasquatch protection and refuge area.” This was a “county resolution,” not a new law.

In 1969, Skamania County Washington passed an ordinance prohibiting the killing of Bigfoot.

In 2007, Mike Lake, a Canadian member of parliament from Edmonton, Alberta, introduced a petition calling Bigfoot to be protected under the Canadian version of the endangered species act.

However, these measures are all based on the assumption that Bigfoot is an animal. If a Bigfoot is ever captured or its existence is proven, it may turn out that it is actually a species of hominid related to homo sapiens. Wouldn’t it then be considered murder to kill a Bigfoot? Would Texas still consider Bigfoot a “nonprotected nongame animal?”

Anyway, the message is clear from the California Department of Fish and Game: don’t kill a Bigfoot if you happen to encounter one while hiking, camping, fishing, hunting or rafting in California.

You will not only deprive science of its unique opportunity to study a live Bigfoot, but will face possible jail time and a big fine under the California Fish and Game Code. And if it is determined that Bigfoot is a close relative of homo sapiens, you may face murder charges.

Below is the email response from Lieutenant Sinclair to Scharf: (http://www.outdoorhub.com/news/is-it-legal-to-hunt-bigfoot/?utm_source=iContact&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Outdoor+Hub+News&utm_content=May+8%2C+2012+Texas+Bigfoot+Hunting)

Mr. Scharf:

The statute that you cite (Section 61.021) refers only to game birds, game animals, fish, marine animals or other aquatic life. Generally speaking, other nongame wildlife is listed in Chapter 67 (nongame and threatened species) and Chapter 68 (nongame endangered species). “Nongame” means those species of vertebrate and invertebrate wildlife indigenous to Texas that are not classified as game animals, game birds, game fish, fur-bearing animals, endangered species, alligators, marine penaeid shrimp, or oysters. The Parks and Wildlife Commission may adopt regulations to allow a person to take, possess, buy, sell, transport, import, export or propagate nongame wildlife. If the Commission does not specifically list an indigenous, nongame species, then the species is considered non-protected nongame wildlife, e.g., coyote, bobcat, mountain lion, cotton-tailed rabbit, etc. A non-protected nongame animal may be hunted on private property with landowner consent by any means, at any time and there is no bag limit or possession limit.

An exotic animal is an animal that is non-indigenous to Texas. Unless the exotic is an endangered species then exotics may be hunted on private property with landowner consent. A hunting license is required. This does not include the dangerous wild animals that have been held in captivity and released for the purpose of hunting, which is commonly referred to as a “canned hunt”.

If you have any questions, please contact Assistant Chief Scott Vaca. I have included his e-mail address. I will be out of the office and in Houston on Friday.

Best,

L. David Sinclair
Chief of Staff – Division Director I

Texas Parks and Wildlife Department
Law Enforcement Division
4200 Smith School Road
Austin, TX 78744

Office 512.389.4854
Cell 512.971.2668
Fax 512.389.8400
“Texas Game Wardens Serving Texans Since 1895-Law Enforcement Off the Pavement”

From: Peter Flores
Sent: Thursday, May 03, 2012 5:59 PM
To: David Sinclair
Subject: Fw: TAKING WILDLIFE RESOURCES PROHIBITED

Please respond.

Pf.

(from: SF IndyMedia, by Carlos Miller, Photography is Not a Crime)

On November 30, during the height of the Occupy movement, more than 100 activists marched down the street in Santa Cruz, one of hundreds of demonstrations taking place throughout the country at the time.

At one point, the activists entered an abandoned Wells Fargo – directly across the street from an active Wells Fargo branch – and began a three-day occupation, hoping to turn it into a community center in this Northern California city.

Covering the demonstration were photojournalists Bradley Stuart Allen and Alex Darocy of the Indybay Collective, a coalition of independent journalists in the Bay Area.

Also covering the demonstration was Shmuel Thaler, a photojournalist from the Santa Cruz Sentinel, the city’s mainstream newspaper.

The three photojournalists entered the building with the activists, snapped their photos and videos and left by nightfall.

Upside-down flag outside abandoned Wells Fargo Bank building, Santa Cruz

Meanwhile, Santa Cruz police attempted to disperse the activists from the abandoned building, but were outnumbered. After three days of negotiations with police, the activists left the building peacefully.