Media Scare Tactics and Manipulating Law - Center for Biological Diversity

It has been no secret that once the Center for Biological Diversity trashed the oyster farm, they would go after the ranchers.

Here is a simple explanation of their disturbing tactics.

http://www.undueinfluence.com/Center_for_Biological_Diversity.htm

"Self-description: As the country's leading endangered species advocates, the Center for Biological Diversity works through science, law, and creative media to secure a future for all species, great or small, hovering on the brink of extinction.
Actual: Anti-industry legal attack group uses the Endangered Species Act and media scare tactics as a weapon to destroy America's industrial strength and resource production by bringing lawsuits against a wide spectrum of resource use companies, private property owners and against government to stop resource use. The Center for Biological Diversity lost a 2005 defamation lawsuit to fifth-generation rancher Jim Chilton of Arivaca, Arizona, when a jury awarded him $600,000, including $500,000 in punitive damages for falsely accusing him of damaging the range. The Center appealed the decision to the Arizona State Supreme Court and lost again in 2007" - from "Undue Influence"

Trainer's Friend Writes Book Without Interviewing Protagonists

Trainer's friend did not once take the time to call up Kevin Lunny or Corey Goodman and ask for their side of the story yet writes a "non fiction" story in which they are the central characters and calls it a true story. Claims to it to be the "true," but also claims she was there from the beginning and throughout. She was not even 2 years old in the beginning, 39 years ago, and lived in another part of the county, miles from the oyster farm and schools where the Lunny family was and is a major contributing part of the community. The Lunny family is highly respected. But how would she know that? She didn't even talk with them.

Brennan lived in New York while the real battle was waged. Based on her previous writings, compulsive prevarication is likely to be the basis of this yet-to-be-released hit piece. What editor or publisher will let her get away with that?

Trainer, with a reputation a mile long for sneaky tricks, inventing false allegations and being a flat-out liar, was her friend and, based on the synopsis below, was a major source for this piece of landfill. Should save the trees, Brennan.

Reaction to Closure of Drake's Bay Oyster Farm by Jane Gyorgy

POSTED FOR Jane Gyorgy: 

This is shameful and, in my opinion, the National Park Service, the NPCA, the EAC and the leaders of those environmental organizations who opposed the continuation of the ecologically beneficial, sustainable, renewable, local oyster farm, as well as all those who mislead the public, are just this kind of dangerous! Joining those at the top of my list of dangerous is Judge Gonzales Rogers, for her kangaroo court shenanigans which effectively prevented proper hearing of the DBOC side in this issue in the first place.

My opinion:

1. Fire all involved,
2. Strip them of their pensions
3. Rescinding of the under graduate, graduate and doctorate degrees awarded any of them (for they have shat upon them, reducing those sheepskins to toilet paper).
4. Impeachment for Judge Rogers is in order as well as cancelling her pension and stripping her of all of her degrees.

At the National Park Service level, and from their involvement at the Point Reyes National Seashore level, those who should be ousted first and stripped of pensions and all letters include, yet are not limited to, Jon Jarvis, Don Neubacher, Dr. Sarah Allen, Dr. Ben Becker, David Press, Melanie Gunn and, Cicely Muldoon.

The EAC should be run out of town along with Amy Trainer and Gordon Bennett.

All those at the top of National Park Conservation Association and most especially Neal Desai.

Others that should be terminated and stripped include, but are not limited to, Dr. Tim Regan of the Marine Mammal Commission (see 

11-07-2012 Marine Mammal Commission Report on Drakes Estero Tainted By NPS-MMC Misconduct at http://oysterzone.wordpress.com/?s=dr+Ragen

In my opinion, so many have contributed to the abuse and misuse of science, the law, and history, but these people stand out as the most dangerous and would be a good place to start. Add whatever names you wish.

Finally, in my opinion, it is too bad tarring, feathering, and being run out of town on a rail is no longer an option, that would be a fitting end to all of the above mentioned.

More People Want Amy Trainer Exported

From letter to the editor, West Marin Citizen, July 10, 2014

Call for DBOC healing, but first…
Editor:
We are all aware of how divisive this
misadventure was, within our community
as well as within some families. A
number of people, Amy Trainer of the
EAC included, have called for a time of
healing.
I agree, we need a more united community
when the next environmental
challenge presents itself.
Within the past few months I reversed
my position on DBOC and concluded
that their time was up. I changed
my mind, not because their departure
would be a good idea or be beneficial
for the environment (it could have a
negative impact) but because the Secretary
of the Interior was within his legal
authority to decline an extension of a
lease, already expired.
This argument was not sufficient for
the opponents of the DBOC, the EAC in
particular, as well as the Sierra Club
and Earth Justice. They obfuscated the
argument with fabricated information
attacking the environmental stewardship
of the DBOC.
For healing to take place, those who
lied to us should not remain in positions
of responsibility. They should resign or
be fired. I wish that Amy Trainer were
the first to go.
Chet Seligman
Pt. Reyes Station

The Most Hated Woman in Marin

 

After the Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal from Drakes Bay Oyster Farm, opponents paraded out the abrasive Amy Trainer to offer sneering and chiding public responses. A graduate of "mean-girl" tactics who offers disturbing reminders of 7th grade playground hair-pulling bullies, Trainer managed, once again to offend an estimated 85 percent of Marin folk - the ones who support the oyster farmers and truly care about the farm workers who are about to lose their homes, jobs, schools and friends. These images are from yet another Amy-gloat while she discussed the fate of the farm workers. It's time for Amy to ride off in her kayak to create a disturbance in yet another community. She's unwelcome in Washington and Colorado. Her alpaca farmer-father in Kansas must be ashamed of what she's become.
Really, non-profit corporations, is this who you want as the face of environmentalism?

Is This Really The Last Shot for the Long-Enduring Lunnys?

The title of this succinct piece jumps to  wrong conclusion -- that the battle for the Lunnys ends with the Supreme Court Decision -- a common misconception about what the Court does. If the Court decides not to take the Lunnys' case, well then yes, this is that last shot for the Lunnys, but the story is not over if they win because the family would then have to take their case back to the lower court. Impetuous proclamations that this battle is soon over by in a recent article by L.A. Times author with a grudge, Julie Cart, ignore the fact that a win at the Supreme Court is only the beginning of another long haul for this strong, steadfast, kind and caring family. We have no doubt that they are up to the challenge. 
Here is the opinion from Sonoma: 

One last Lunny long shot

Thursday, June 12, 2014 5:13 PM
By David Bolling/Index-Tribune Editor
Share:  Amazingly, you can still buy Drake’s Bay oysters.
That’s because the oyster war continues to unfold on the Pt. Reyes Peninsula, where Kevin and Nancy Lunny – with family roots deep in Sonoma – have been driven to the brink in their stubborn efforts to continue farming shellfish. The Lunnys are still in business, but it appears they have just one or two more legal lives to lose.
It could have been assumed that, when former Interior Secretary Ken Salazar issued an edict that the oyster farm’s lease had expired and must be banished from the pristine waters of Drake’s Bay, that was the end of the line.
Not so.
It could also have been assumed that when the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco, ruled in a split, 2-1 decision that Salazar’s edict was legal and binding, that that would be the end of the line.
Not so.
It could have been further assumed that, when the Lunny’s appeal was denied to have the court sit en banc, with a full, 11-judge panel to review the three-judge decision – a rare occurrence at best – that was surely the end of the line.
Nope.
On April 14, the Lunnys petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari to review the Ninth Circuit decision. The odds of the high court accepting the case are long, and longer still that it will accept the case and reverse the decision. But stranger things have happened, and meanwhile, the Lunnys are being allowed to continue farming until the final hand is played.
That’s because, according to the Lunnys, they have shown there is a “reasonable probability” the high court will take the case, and a “significant possibility” that the oyster farm will win.
In a recent press release, the Lunnys announced a decision on the writ could come as early as the end of June.
It is an intriguing, sometimes troubling issue, only partly about the sanctity of so-called “wilderness” lands, which Drakes Bay ostensibly became after its federal lease expired, under terms of the 1964 Wilderness Act.
For supporters of the wilderness conversion of Drakes Bay, the issue is simple: the Lunnys’ lease ran out. End of story. Commercial developments aren’t compatible with wilderness.
Except, perhaps, where they are.
Drakes Bay Peninsula lands are, and presumably will continue to be, farmed by commercial cattle ranchers. Commercial developments in Yosemite and Yellowstone and countless other wild parklands of America have somehow been accommodated.
And, it has been credibly demonstrated, the Lunnys’ oyster operation has no negative environmental impact on the land and waters of Drake’s Bay.
That may not matter, because the legal issues involved have nothing to do with environmental impacts. The key legal issue will likely be whether the federal government can be taken to court for abusing its discretionary power. That’s what the Supreme Court has to decide.
That the Lunnys will win their last battle is unlikely. And we think that’s a shame. Environmental leaders we respect think a Lunny victory would set a dangerous precedent for the preservation of wilderness land. We disagree.
We think the Lunnys represent a perfect example of a positive bridge between sustainable agriculture and wilderness protection.
We hope they prevail.

Trainer and Desai - Feet held to the Fire in Real Clear Politics - Tactics Mimic the Right Wing. Are they really leftists?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/05/11/protecting_a_bay_while_treading_on_truth_122602.html#ixzz31QIp3RA5
 
The problem is that one side (out-spoken environmental purists) rigged the game and is employing guilt-by-association, one of the most despicable (and least authentically liberal) methods of argumentation in the public policy arena.

Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/05/11/protecting_a_bay_while_treading_on_truth_122602.html#ixzz31QLh5rhb
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter

... Neal Desai of the National Parks Conservation Association, has fudged facts when discussing this issue. He calls the Drakes Bay estuary “the only marine wilderness on the West Coast” (it isn’t) and claims harbor seals are “endangered” (they aren’t.)
The other spokesperson is Amy Trainer of the West Marin Environmental Action Committee. Her preferred method of argumentation is ad-hominem attacks. When Louisiana Republican Sen. David Vitter offered an amendment that would have directed the government to renew the farm’s lease, Trainer unleashed a rhetoric attack on Kevin Lunny, who doesn’t know Vitter and hadn’t asked him for anything.
“Apparently right-wing politicians and industry lobbyists on Capitol Hill have made this policy-based decision about protecting our most special waters into a national cause celebre of conservatives,” she said. “It appears that the corporation’s deep-dive into special interest, right-wing politics has backfired … in the rabid attempt to attack national parks, and [is] in fact making statements that inadvertently undermine the corporation’s own arguments before the court.”

Read more: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2014/05/11/protecting_a_bay_while_treading_on_truth_122602.html#ixzz31QIp3RA5
Follow us: @RCP_Articles on Twitter