Suppose half the land in the United States were suddenly declared "offlimits" to people, and most of the remaining half were managed by governmentagencies to assure that the needs of"non-human populations" were given priority over the needs of humans.Grounds for another civil war?
Had the transformation been declared suddenly, and publicly, there wouldundoubtedly be a public uprising of civil war proportions. The transformersare far too smart for that. Instead,the transformation plan is buried in tons of boring bureaucratic bunk thatrarely catches a reporter's eye. Nevertheless, government agencies arequietly going about the task of takingcontrol of every square inch of American soil in order to convert "at leasthalf" of the lower 48 into wilderness, while managing most of the remaininghalf for "conservation objectives," forcing the people into so-called"sustainable communities."
Advertisement - story continues below
This plan was first published in the United States in 1992 by DaveForeman, co-founder of Earth First! and now a director of the Sierra Club.Even though the plan was written by Dr. Reed Noss, and funded by The NatureConservancy and the Audubon Society, no one took it very seriously. Afterall, who could take seriously the idea of locking up half the country beyondthe reach of people?
The Department of Interior took it seriously, as did the EnvironmentalProtection Agency. Both federal agencies, under the direct instruction of AlGore, changed dramatically their policies relating to land management. Bothagencies adopted the idea that human beings were to be considered a"biological resource," and that ecosystem protection would be elevated tothe same priority level as "human health."
The United Nations took it seriously. Foreman's plan is namedspecifically, as "central" to the biodiversity protection scheme required bythe Convention on Biological Diversity, in an officialU.N. publication entitled, Global Biodiversity Assessment. Sadly, privatelandowners are now taking the plan seriously, even though they have no ideathat the plan even exists. In SouthFlorida, Jared Figley is being pressured by a state agency to leave the landhis family has ranched for four generations. In Pennsylvania, Bob Learzaf'sland, purchased by his great-grand-uncle in 1923, is being taken from him bythe feds -- without compensation. From one end of the country to the other,people are being squeezed off their land under some pretense of protectingthe environment.
What we are now just beginning to see is hardly the tip of the iceberg.Dozens of federal programs have been launched to implement Foreman's planincrementally. The U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program(USMAB) is working to expand 47 U.N.Biosphere Reserves in the United States, each of which consists ofwilderness areas, "managed" areas, and "zones of transition," which are usedto continually expand the area under government domination.
Advertisement - story continues below
Al Gore's Clean Water Initiative, and Clinton's Land Legacy Initiative,are both designed to extend federal jurisdiction over private land in thename of protecting the environment. At the same time, the President'sCouncil on Sustainable Development iswaging war on urban sprawl by promoting "visioning councils" to transformAmerican cities into "sustainable communities." Without any publicannouncement, without any congressional debate, and certainly without theconsent of the governed, the federal government is transforming America toconform to the plan Foreman published in 1992.
"No," say the feds, "we're just trying to protect the environment."That's the same "feds" who for six years denied using pyrotechnics at Waco,led by the chief fed who "... did not have sex with that woman."
Many, if not most, of the state and federal field workers have no ideathat the policies they are implementing are even related to a grand plan totransform America. They are just doing as they are told, often defending theintegrity of their agency, while being used by their superiors to subvertthe very foundations of American liberty.
Private property rights are constantly under attack as the major obstacleto "institutional environmental management." Property rights advocates arealso attacked as "anti-environment" activists. Private owners are, by far,the best caretakers of the land. The problem is, private owners may not carefor their land in the same way that the government thinks it should be caredfor. By bringing the awesome power of government to bear on landownersindividually, through its myriad programs, the government is succeeding intransforming America. Should private landowners wake up, and realize thatwhat's happening to their neighbors will soon be happening to them, theremay well be an uprising.