DRYWST goes long

The payout states that FEMA or DOI most call a state of emergency

That is not true, the payout states:

"This proposition will pay out at POP$100 per share if a drought-related state of emergency is declared in any state west of the Mississippi River AS POSTED on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites by December 31, 2009. "

As the payout states, the SOE doesn't have to be ANNOUNCED by the website, just declared....

Whoops, I meant the other way around....
The SOE doesn't have to come from FEMA/DOI. I don't know where in the the payout you are reading that.
The payout statement just says a DOE has to be POSTED on a FEMA/DOI website.

It looks like such an emergency declaration was posted on the DOI website.

California and Texas have both declared STATEWIDE states of drought emergency. If these were posted on the DOI website, then I would say that by the letter of the prop, it's a payoff. But there's a problem...

They AREN'T posted on the DOI website. If you do a search on the DOI site you'll only get LINKS to postings on other websites. The announcements do not appear on www.doi.gov.

In fact, if you do a search from the DOI home page, the search goes through usasearch.gov and then takes you off the DOI site.

Do a search for "drought www.doi.gov". All you'll find are links to congressional testimony and environmental statements.

But not a word about a drought emergency declaration.

There's a news bit at www.doi.gov/news/09_News_Releases/022709.html
about the California drought, but it does not use the word "emergency" anywhere.

Further, if you're looking at the appeal for federal assistance in Texas's drought emergency, don't expect to see it on the FEMA or DOI pages. The request was put to the USDA.

www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/default.asp?ArID=234166

There is no announcement on the DOI or FEMA websites. And there won't be unless FEMA or the DOI change the way their websites report things.

Good job huntjorg!!! This stock is done and is long... way long.

Please halt and Pay!!!!!

http://www.doi.gov/news/09_News_Releases/022709.html

Vulgarian-

Again, I quote the payout statement:

"This proposition will pay out at POP$100 per share if a drought-related state of emergency is declared in any state west of the Mississippi River AS POSTED on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites by December 31, 2009. "

Your first argument is that California only declared a STATEWIDE SOE. That is all that is needed according to the payout statement. ("...is declared in any STATE west...") Check.

Second, you claim that this link is not a DOI website. The Bureau of Reclamation is part of the Dept of the Interior. This is one of the DOI's websites. The logo in the upper left clearly shows this is a DOI website. This is a federal agency folks, not a state govt entity. The SOE is all over California's state websites. But that doesn't help make this payout long. But the Bureau of Reclamation is part of the DOI. Check.

And, finally, dbsquared claims that FEMA and/or the DOI must call the SOE. But nowhere in the payout statement does it say that. In fact, it only says it has to be posted on FEMA/DOI, or one of it's websites. Check.

Hate to burst everyone's bubble but neither links
http://www.doi.gov/news/09_News_Releases/022709.html
or http://www.usbr.gov/newsroom/newsrelease/detail.cfm?RecordID=26883 specifically say that a state of emergency was called.
the latter does indicate that "The Governor of California requested emergency drought assistance under the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (Act), Public Law 102-250, as amended, and the Commissioner of Reclamation determined that emergency drought assistance is merited. " but does not indicate that a state of emergency was declared.
According to FEMA the last declared drought state of emergency in California was in 1977.

roygbiv:

Why don't you read where it says:

(first link: which shows that in fact California issued a state of emergency)
"The Governor of California requested emergency drought assistance under the Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (Act), Public Law 102-250, as amended, and the Commissioner of Reclamation determined that emergency drought assistance is merited."

(second link: Posted on DOI shows that DOI posted the fact that California declared a state of emergency and that the DOI will work with all agencys to help).

“The drought situation in California is dire,” said Secretary Salazar. “Farms, ranches, and communities across the Central Valley are withering on the vine and in need of any help that the federal government can provide. The formation of a Federal Drought Action Team will ensure that the federal government’s response to the drought is coordinated across all agencies and that we are doing all we can to provide assistance where it is needed as quickly as possible.”

“During a disaster such as extreme drought, it is essential that farmers, ranchers, and rural communities have confidence that the government will be working together to ensure they have access to every tool available.”

"Both USDA and DOI offer a range of assistance programs that help farmers, ranchers and rural communities impacted by drought."

Both conditions have been meet
1)drought-related state of emergency is declared in any state west of the Mississippi River (California as shown in link one)

2)AS POSTED on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites by December 31, 2009. " (DOI posted on link 2 and shows what they will do about it. )

Please halt the stock and pay up!!!!

Grusso7: The first link says that he asked for emergency assistance, it does not say that he declared a state of emergency, the two are not the same thing.

Again the second link indicates that things are dire but no where does it say a state of emergency was declared.

Again no where in either link does it say that a state of emergency related to drought has been declared.

If you can find that statement in those links please quote it.

Grusso I can't even find anything indicating that under "Reclamation States Emergency Drought Relief Act of 1991 (Act), Public Law 102-250" a state of emergency even has to be declared.

The Governator declared a drought related state of emergency on February 27, 2009. A google search (california drought state of emergency) will provide multiple links to this fact; so one of the two parameters of the payout statement has been met.

IMO, the second parameter has not been met. Neither the DOI nor FEMA websites have direct mention or disclosure of a drought related SOE in CA.

The second link listed above references the Bureau of Reclamation's response to drought conditions, but I can find nowhere in the body of the text the words "state of emergency in California." They may be verabally responding to Arnold's declaration and setting actions into motion but they do not seem to have announced the SOE as required in the payout statement.

And you know what else? "Posted" does, indeed, mean "announced" in this context. Here's the Merriam Webster definition;

1 a: to publish, announce, or advertise by or as if by use of a placard; b: to denounce by public notice; c: to enter on a public listing; d: to forbid (property) to trespassers under penalty of legal prosecution by notices placed along the boundaries; e: score
2: to affix to a usual place (as a wall) for public notices : placard
3: to publish (as a message) in an online forum (as an electronic bulletin board)

Now, if you want to split hairs, I'll split them very fine here. Definition 1.) clearly means "announce", not "mention" or "refer to". So nothing mentioned on the DOI site (or it's related sites) can be construed as "posting" under this definition.

Definition 2.) clearly has nothing to do with this prop, but if you want to get picky, it still is "public notice" which means "announcement"

Definition 3.) refers to online forums. The DOI and DEMA sites are not online forums, as no one but DOI or FEMA personell can put up anything, and the personnel can only put up agency material.

So in order for it to be "posted" at these sites, it has to be an announcement, not a passing (or even substantial, for that matter) reference to a state or other agency's announcement.

Clarification on definition 1.) above; I don't mean nothing on the web site counts, I only mean that no article like those cited above would count.

The main point of all the above definitions supplied by Merriam Webster (a widely respected dictionary, to those not "in the know")is that a post is a "public notice" of something. The DOI sites and the FEMA site do not put up "public notice" of things they do not declare or announce.

If the DOI had an article that referred to the military action in Iraq, would they be giving "public notice" of it? No, this was already known and announced by other sources. What if it referred to The Brady Bunch Movie or Japan? Would that be "posting" their existence?

No. Their existence was already known, and the DOI would not be "publishing, announcing, or advertising by or as if by use of a placard".

If one person seizes on the word "publishing" and tries to pull it out of context to suit their own limited understanding, I'm gonna scream. I will also scream if someone starts a post with "your arguments have holes I can drive a truck through" or "the flaws in your reasoning are laughable" and then proceed to demonstrate nothing of the sort.

"Posted" means "announced". I've demonstrated it.

Vulgarian: although I appreciate your enthusiasm for research, and I agree that the links given fail to end this stock (but mainly because neither indicate that a SOE was called). However your exercise with the definition of "posted" is faulty, the definition lists several meanings, and you ignored all but the one that you wanted, and decided that that was the context that was meant. In the definition you posted it lists several conditions which would have applied to these links had they included any wording that included that a SOE had been declared in California, whether by them or by the Gov. The specific parts that apply are:

to publish,or advertise by or as if by use of a placard", "to enter on a public listing", "to affix to a usual place (as a wall) for public notices" "placard
3: to publish (as a message) in an online forum (as an electronic bulletin board)".

"Announce" is only one aspect of the definition, the other aspects clearly fit those links. We have had this discussion before when words have more than one possible meaning unless a particular aspect of a definition is defined as valid or not valid (where it is used) then all aspects of the definition are able to be applied, and you can not choose to ignore those parts that do not support your argument..

Vulgarian: anyone that places information on the net or in a location for the general public, be it other peoples work or writings, or their own is posting a public notice (even if it is already known), a good example of this would be school closings for snow the a school administrator decides to close schools for snow, and the put out a notice, local radio and TV stations take that notice and broadcast it as a public notice even though they did not close the schools themselves, and it is still valid if I first saw it or TV, and then heard it or radio after I knew the school was closed. So yeah if the DOI placed on their website information about an action in Iraq, then that would be a public notice (I may or may not consider it a valid source but it is a public notice none the less). Posting has absolutely nothing to do with who initiated the information or whether it was known, or even if it has validity. Now the DOI and FEMA were chosen at the points of reference for this stock because someone has decided that their postings is of importance, and I'm sure because they intended the SOE to be declared at a federal level which FEMA does post on their sites all federally declared SOE, however when the stock was written it was not indicated that it had to be a Federal declaration, so in order for the stock to payout any declaration of a SOE would count (in the geographic area described)if the DOI or FEMA wrote about it and specifically indicate that a SOE was declared (even if it wasn't a federal declaration, and even if it did not go on FEMA's official list of emergency declarations.

roygbig:
This proposition will pay out at POP$100 per share if a drought-related state of emergency is declared in any state west of the Mississippi River as posted on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites by December 31, 2009.

Proposition says: "drought-related state of emergency" it does not say "State of Emergency" I emphasize is all lower case "drought-related state of emergency"

Many links in the web show California is in a state of drought-related state of emergency
example:
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jun2008/2008-06-05-092.asp

Dry California Officially in a State of Drought
SACRAMENTO, California (ENS) - After two straight years of below-average rainfall, low snowmelt runoff and the largest court-ordered water transfer restrictions in state history, California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger Wednesday proclaimed a statewide drought, the first official drought since 1991.
"We must recognize the severity of the crisis we face," said Governor Schwarzenegger, "so I am signing an Executive Order proclaiming a statewide drought and directing my Department of Water Resources and other entities to take immediate action to address the situation."

Roygbiv:
Now if you want it spell out here it goes:
http://democrats.assembly.ca.gov/members/a28/press/20090227AD28PR02.htm

SACRAMENTO – Assembly Member Anna Caballero (D-Salinas) issued the following statement in response to today’s proclamation by Governor Schwarzenegger declaring a drought state of emergency, and the creation of a Drought Action Team at the federal level:

I hope the words "drought state of emergency makes" it for you.

Pay UP!!!! nothing more to argue about.

I forgot to mention that if you want more here is the original proclamantion: http://www.gov.ca.gov/proclamation/11557/

State of Emergency - Water Shortage
...
...
WHEREAS the State of California is now in its third consecutive year of drought; and

WHEREAS in each year of the current drought, annual rainfall and the water content in the Sierra snowpack have been significantly below the amounts needed to fill California’s reservoir system; and

...WHEREAS the circumstances of the severe drought conditions, by reason of their magnitude, are beyond the control of the services, personnel, equipment and facilities of any single county, city and county, or city and require the combined forces of a mutual aid region or regions to combat; and

Grusso7 Reread the porp statement and the arguments above. No one has disputed that the Governor has declared a state of emergency. no one disputes that California is in dire condition due to a drought. What is disputed and is the most import fact is that neither DOI or FEMA has listed anywhere on their web sites (that people have reported) that a SOE has been declared. The two links you gave although informative are from neither the DOI or FEMA, which is the criteria for payout. The president could announce it on TV that there is a declared SOE in California, and this stock can not pay out until such information is posted on the DOI or FEMA websites.And I agree it doesn't have to be in the declared emergencies data base, but it does need to appear on their website. To make it easier here is the payout statement:

"This proposition will pay out at POP$100 per share if a drought-related state of emergency is declared in any state west of the Mississippi River as posted on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites by December 31, 2009."

See it very specifically says Fema and/ or DOI websites, not the governors website, not some news website.

The head of FEMA himself could say that there is a declared SOE in California related to drought, and that would not cause this stock to pay off, until it is posted on FEMA or DOI's website.

Now that said I would not be surprised if FEMA does declare the drought situation in California a SOE at some point in the near future, or at least reports it that way. but it hasn't happened yet.

Here is a link to the FEMA site containing a drought update that contains the words "On Feb 27, the Governor of California declared a State of Emergency due to current drought conditions."

http://www.fema.gov/emergency/reports/2009/nat022809.shtm

Still, not sure if this satisfies the payout, though. It depends on the interpretation of "as posted on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites." Is a simple mention sufficient, or is a more formal announcement required?

Bernburg I think you have a winner. I think the intent of the stock was actually to require a federal SOE, but that is not what is in the payout. I also think it was intended that for payout it would be posted in the declared emergencies DB, but again this was not what the payout statement says.

According to what the payout statement does say this link appears good, it is on FEMA's website and it indicates that California has declared a SOE. Figured it would be posted eventually.

Wow, didn't realize how many threads there were for this topic... My apologies for the duplicate posting, but here is my comment from the other DRYWST threads. I know, I haven't posted in months and now several in one day, but I'd like to finish the day without feeling dirty.
--------------------------------

I am saddened by two things.

1) I find myself on the same side of something as Vulgarian.

2) I find that all these months later, the meaning of words in English still don't matter to PopSci.

The payout criteria used the word "as" not the word "is".

If the payout criteria had said that a state of emergency be declared and "is" posted on the FEMA site, then yes, it should be closing long.

What the criteria actually says is that a state of emergency be declared "as" posted on the site, which indicates that it would need to be a declaration by FEMA, which it's not.

You can do searches on the FEMA site for states of emergency for drought that FEMA has declared, the last one was in 2007 in Indonesia. The last one they declared in California was in 1977.

Once again, PopSci will use peer pressure and the results of public education to change the meaning of what was written.

ejcassel

ejcassel:

{"as posted on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites by December 31, 2009."

"and or means" it can just be only one of these agencies that post the news or info on the drought.}

The DOI did it first.

DRYWST short. lots of nice links and thoughts about why this one should halt long now in the previous posts BUT... it is still short.-- no FEMA or DOI declarations of emergencey have been made
Does giving help to a state that requests help under an emergency declaration mean that the agency giving the help declares emergency or only that they recognize the states need for help under what the state would classify an emergency?

The main point everyone that is agreeing on LONG here is because of the way it is worded. The intent was clearly for what you are saying, but the fact is they did not word it that way. All it took was for an anoucement of a drought related state of emergency, (This condition was met when Governor Arnold's request for one and then the anouncement of it) in California.(This met the condition of west of the Mississippi River) And finally as POSTED on(Not BY) the FEMA and/or DOI websites by Dec 31, 2009.(This was met when this was stated on the FEMA website link> www.fema.gov/emergency/reports/2009/nat022809.shtm mainly the line below DROUGHT UPDATES that stated word for word "California declared a State of Emergency due to current drought conditions") I do not think I could break it down any clearer than that but follow what I said and then check the link to the FEMA WEBSITE and read the full payout statement word for word I pasted from the PROP below this\/

This proposition will pay out at POP$100 per share if a drought-related state of emergency is declared in any state west of the Mississippi River as posted on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and/or Department of the Interior websites by December 31, 2009

All this arguing about the definition of posting is a moot point. I brought up this EXACT scenario over two months ago in this forum and nobody tried to challenge it:

http://www.popsci.com/content/drywst

Now that it has happened, the ones who shorted this prop want to debate the definition of "posting".

I'm sorry, but in this long thread there have been MANY examples of a drought SOE posting on DOI/FEMA websites.
We needed to halt this prop last week before everyone jumps on the bandwagon after the criteria has been met.
Please close it so we can move on.

Scott78-
You aren't reading the payout statement. You said it is short because "no FEMA or DOI declarations of emergencey have been made".
They don't have to. Where in the payout statement does it say that? It doesn't.
In fact, it specifically says that that it will pay out if "a drought-related state of emergency is declared in any STATE west of the Mississippi". It says STATE, and not FEMA/DOI.
A drought SOE was declared in California by the governor on Feb 27th and that SOE has been posted on SEVERAL FEMA/DOI websites (see numerous links above).

I see your point, this has even been pointed out to people over 2 months ago yet people still chose to short it even knowing this was the case. I was trying to help explain it to people, but it doesn't matter now. They still have not put a halt on it so people can just switch there sides to get a payout, as I am sure most people are. They should go though and not payout people who switched sides after Taylors post announcing this was being closed LONG.