-Caveat Lector-

Wayne Hicks of "It's About Freedom" radio show is going to do a show next 
week on this topic and tell his listeners to come here and sound off! Things 
should get lively here in the Saloon. Sweet, helpful Henrietta plans to 
provide Wayne with lots of ammo to shoot down the Green Meanie Gang of claim 
jumpers. 

--Henrietta 

 <A 
HREF="http://www.sierratimes.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=8&topic=21"
>
SierraTimes.com Sagebrush Saloon Message Board - Wild-Eyed in the Wilderness
</A> 
http://www.sierratimes.com/cgi-bin/ikonboard/topic.cgi?forum=8&topic=21 

Wild-Eyed in the Wilderness 


------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
By John Elvin 
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 

If eco-terrorist Dave Foreman has his way, half of the U.S. will be 
‘re-wilded,’ making it off-limits for human occupation and development. Why 
is big money funding this radical plan? 

Sure, life is wild in this country now, but you ain’t seen nothin’ yet. With 
the support of major corporations, wealthy foundations, environmentalist 
groups and friends in government, convicted eco-terrorist Dave Foreman, a 
founder of the radical Earth First “Monkey Wrench” gang of professed 
saboteurs, is mapping a new “re-wilded” America that would be 50 percent 
“off-limits” to human occupation. This huge portion of the re-wilded U.S. 
mainland would be home to large carnivorous predators such as grizzly bears, 
jaguars, panthers, pumas and packs of wolves. 
      Ridiculous? Most Americans would have said the same thing only a few 
decades ago if told that every driver and passenger in a motor vehicle would 
have to be harnessed in or that cigarettes would be $3.50 a pack and harassed 
smokers would be huddled on sidewalks like derelicts. 
      Foreman’s self-proclaimed “baby,” the Wildlands Project, is more than 
a vision. It’s more than a plan. It’s an in-the-mill, happening thing. 
      The Wildlands Project (TWP) is “the most ambitious and far-reaching 
attempt yet to reinvent the North American” continent according to 
ecologically correct guidelines, says Matt Bennett of the Citizens With 
Common Sense monitoring group. “Wildlands will be core reserves of millions 
of acres connected by vast corridors following rivers and other migratory 
paths from west to east, from Central America and Mexico through the U.S. and 
Canada, using national forests and other government lands.” 
      Where government lands or trust lands owned by environmental groups are 
unavailable, private property will be acquired by regulatory decree or 
eminent domain. When you see a river, tract of land or whole region 
designated as a U.S. Heritage site, U.N. Biosphere Reserve, greenway, trail, 
path or some other special name conferred by environmentalists and their 
legislative and bureaucratic allies, “think Wildlands in the making,” warns 
Bennett. 
      Designating these areas as environmentally unique provides a foot in 
the door, “creating the impression that the area has some sort of holiness, 
some sort of mystical significance and really should be protected in a 
special way,” says Carol LaGrasse, president of the Property Rights 
Foundation of America. LaGrasse should know: She lives in Stony Creek, N.Y., 
a rural hamlet in the heart of the Adirondack Mountains ordained a U.N. 
Biosphere Reserve without so much as local consultation. The spiritual aura 
that she sees implied in these designations discourages normal human uses of 
the land such as “modern home life, farming, forestry, mining, industry and 
commerce,” she tells Insight. 
      “Re-wilding” means that huge core areas in each region will be 
returned to prehuman conditions, connected by large roadless and unoccupied 
corridors maintained for migratory purposes. Extensive buffer zones will 
separate the completely wild areas from enclaves where humans may work and 
live. And that’s just the beginning. The wild cores would be expanded as the 
buffers become depopulated and re-wilded. 
      Feeling a little claustrophobic? Well, you won’t get any sympathy from 
the Wildlanders. Telegraphing the united environmental front he represents, 
project founder Foreman says: “All of us are warriors on one side or another 
in this war; there are no sidelines, there are no civilians.” 
      Can this really be? You betcha! Activists involved in Wildlands 
planning in Nevada, for instance, see all but Reno, Las Vegas, the gold mines 
and the I-80 corridor as returned to nature. “I like the idea of taking it 
all and making ‘people corridors,’” Marge Sill, federal-lands coordinator 
for the Sierra Club, told High Country News. “Move out the people and cars,” 
says Foreman. 
      “No compromise” is another favored phrase, though Foreman and others 
in his group have expressed the belief that their overall re-wilding plans 
may not be fully realized for hundreds of years. 
      One reason to take the project seriously is the big money behind it. 
Major foundations fund TWP and its affiliates. Ted Turner’s foundation has 
been a source of heavy funding, according to Ron Arnold’s book Undue 
Influence. Other major funding comes from large donors, including the Pew 
Charitable Trusts and Patagonia outdoor gear. Because Wildlands is the nerve 
center for so many connected, cooperating regional groups, observers consider 
foundations providing those groups with funds, such as the Rockefeller 
Brothers Foundation, to be Wildlands supporters. 
      Turner is of special interest because, when it comes to property 
rights, he has reason to be the country’s most outspoken advocate. The 
billionaire environmental crusader owns close to 2 million acres, more than 
any other individual. Yet he not only funds TWP but appears engaged 
personally in initiating it. 
      For one thing, his huge holdings — located in the Northwest, Southwest, 
Midwest and South — are described as “a swath,” indicating that he is 
building his empire in cooperation with the corridor concept. Conservation 
easements already are in place on several of his largest properties. While 
Turner dismisses concern that his lands will be given to the government as 
parks to be re-wilded, he told Progressive Farmer magazine that he can’t 
guarantee what will happen in a hundred years. For now, the plan is for the 
Turner lands to go to foundations and trusts. 
      TWP’s broader strategy calls for using existing parks and land trusts 
and acquiring the rest through methods some critics consider stealthy. 
Foreman explained the concept to Derrick Jensen, author of Listening to the 
Land, published by Sierra Club Books. “If we identify, say, a private ranch 
in Montana that’s between two wilderness reserves, and we feel that 50 years 
from now it will be necessary as a corridor for wolves to go from one area to 
another, we can say to the rancher, ‘We don’t want you to give up your ranch 
now. But let us put a conservation easement on it. Let’s work out the tax 
details so you can donate it in your will to this reserve system.’ When it’s 
needed for a corridor, it will be there.” 
      Conservation easements can take various forms, the key being that they 
essentially prohibit any kind of development. In some instances, such as 
Foreman’s example, the land may be used agriculturally for the lifetime of 
the farmer or rancher, then become a conservation area. Other arrangements 
simply prohibit future human use other than farming or ranching, eliminating 
development value but keeping the property private until some advocacy group 
or government agency sees it as vital to the cause. Usually, the owner at 
least has to agree to develop wildlife habitat on the private land, setting 
the stage to call for further “preservation.” All such easement arrangements 
are subject to legal challenges by interested parties trying to upset the 
agreement one way or another, be they heirs or conservation organizations. 
      Bennett tells Insight that conservation easements are a major part of 
the Wildlands plan. As he sees the process, it’s almost diabolical. 
Government, acting on behalf of environmental zealots, puts economic pressure 
on rural communities through restrictions on logging, ranching, mining and 
farming. “As the economic opportunities decline to the point that it is 
impossible to make a living, a conservation easement or even donation of land 
for some kind of tax credit may make sense to a landowner,” he says. 
      LaGrasse agrees. Speaking of those who convey title to land trusts, she 
says landowners often believe — or often are led to believe — that land will 
remain in agricultural use and will not fall into government hands. “But land 
trusts acquire land mainly with the specific purpose of reselling it to the 
government rather than holding the title themselves to keep the land as a 
private preserve,” she maintains. “And they often make fabulous profits when 
the land is rolled over to the government.” 
      Transactions monitored by her group included markups of 22 percent to 
155 percent in sales of trust lands to government, with profits of as much as 
$5 million. Critics say acquisitions of easements or properties in their 
entireties promise to become a more common practice with passage last year of 
a modified version of the Conservation and Reinvestment Act (CARA). It 
created a huge federal slush fund for park purchases and maintenance. With 
bipartisan support in Congress and the backing of major environmental groups, 
a full-fledged, fully funded CARA stands a good chance of getting through 
this year. 
      Foreman has his own spin on property rights, which he is trying to 
abrogate, attacking “so-called conservatives today who prattle on about 
property rights without any sense of responsibility. With rights come 
responsibilities and accountability.” His is an umbrella organization for 
more than 30 regional environmental groups that have adopted his terms, 
polemics and goals as their own. 
      Because its headquarters is in Tucson, Ariz., many who are aware of the 
Wildlands effort mistakenly believe it is limited to the West. Instead, there 
are active groups and plans from Maine to Florida. 
      Allied covert operations with similar agendas shy away from direct 
identification and talk in more vague and general terms of wilderness 
preservation, forest-land protections or stewardship programs. “There is a 
significant amount of synergy among various environmental groups and the 
Wildlands Project,” according to monitor Bennett. “Different, and often 
independent, groups work on their own projects and in an indirect way make 
TWP more likely.” 
      Bennett, whose group maintains a Website at 
http://www.wildlandsproject.org, calls TWP a “rethinking of science, 
politics, land use, industrialization and civilization. It requires a new 
philosophical and spiritual foundation for Western civilization.” Bennett 
calls it nature worship “on a mission from God or Gaia,” the term used by 
New Age eco-spiritualists for the living Earth or pagan Universal Mother of 
the ancients. 
      Not surprisingly, Bennett’s Website is, in turn, under attack by TWP. A 
note at its site, http://www.twp.org, accuses Bennett of using “scare tactics 
in an attempt to create unwarranted public fear about TWP’s proposals” 
through display of “altered maps, quotes taken out of context and false 
information.” Foreman’s group says it is “exploring legal options as a 
remedy for the confusion and fear being spread” by Citizens With Common 
Sense. 
      Lucky for Bennett and his group that Foreman has mellowed since his 
arrest on charges of plotting to sabotage several nuclear facilities in the 
West by downing power lines serving the plants. He pleaded guilty to federal 
conspiracy charges and received a suspended sentence. Involved since 1971 in 
radical efforts to reduce population and restructure the approach of Western 
civilization to technology, ideology and economics, Foreman was for many 
years the chief Washington lobbyist for the Wilderness Society. 
      After six years with Earth First, he says, he became disenchanted with 
its “hippie, countercultural” image. The real nature of the split seems to 
have been between left-wing activists who include “social justice” in their 
ecological agenda and those such as Foreman who just want to “re-wild” the 
planet. Not only is the Foreman contingent little concerned about humanity’s 
woes, but its attitude is the less humans the better. Foreman says he sees 
“eating, manufacturing, traveling, warring and breeding” by humans as causes 
of “the greatest crisis in 4 billion years of life on Earth.” 
      Today, Foreman calls those who practice the eco-terror tactics he once 
espoused “idiots.” He says he’s “never been a liberal or a leftist, which 
makes a lot of my friends in the conservation movement unhappy.” He describes 
himself as a registered Republican and “redneck,” a great-great-grandson of 
New Mexico homesteaders. His opposition to immigration — an outgrowth of his 
desire to limit population growth — also is a cause of friction with those on 
the left. 
      But this man is a member of the board of directors of the Sierra Club, 
the most influential left-wing environmental group in the country. It was 
Foreman who led it to endorse replacing the 50 states with 21 “bio-regions.” 
But the actual “how-to” for that particular scheme is presented as the work 
of TWP cofounder Reed Noss, a conservation biologist. 
      The plan is complex, requiring a hefty 50-page document to present, but 
it stems from belief that the current “parks” system to protect nature for 
scenic and recreational purposes doesn’t work. Because the parks are 
“islands” remote from each other and are used by humans, many types of 
wildlife are doomed to extinction, Noss explains. What is needed is 
“connectivity.” To have the connectivity vital to migrating species, 
particularly large carnivores, many other types of land “from the highest to 
the lowest elevations, the driest to the wettest sites, and across all types 
of soils, substrates and topoclimates” will have to be linked to the parks. 
      The way to do this is through creation of bio-regions or eco-regions 
for planning purposes. The regions also have psychological value in selling 
the idea to locals because they “often inspire feelings of belonging and 
protectiveness in their more enlightened human inhabitants.” Each of the 
regions would have large reserve areas restored to a primitive state, 
providing “connectivity” to other regions for the benefit of migrating 
wildlife. 
      The fact that many of these regions now lack huge swaths of primitive 
land suitable for wildlife migration gets to re-wilding — the core mission of 
the project. Noss advises activists to get busy now mapping local areas, with 
cornfields and parking lots of less interest than “roaded landscapes that are 
relatively undeveloped and restorable, especially when adjacent to or near 
roadless areas.” It’s that kind of thinking that makes rural-property 
holders more than a little nervous. 
      Having identified where corridors will exist in their areas, activists 
following Noss’ plan identify obstacles ahead. These include private property 
to be acquired, “land and mineral-rights acquisitions, road closures, road 
modifications, cancellations of grazing leases and timber sales, tree 
planting, dam removals, stream dechannelization and other restoration 
projects.” 
      One question that comes to mind is how these grizzlies, panthers and 
wolves will know to stay within their reserves and corridors. But that’s 
really no big problem, TWP statements assure us: “People can coexist with 
wolves, bears and other wildlife, just as they have for thousands of years in 
many parts of the world, including North America. In most cases, humans can 
easily learn to safely coexist with wildlife by making minimal lifestyle 
changes.” 


-----
Henr

<A HREF!ttp://www.ctrl.org/">www.ctrl.org</A>
DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER
���CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic
screeds are unwelcomed. Substance�not soap-boxing�please!  These are
sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'�with its many half-truths, mis-
directions and outright frauds�is used politically by different groups with
major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought.
That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and
always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no
credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector.
������������������������rchives Available at:
http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html
 <A HREF!ttp://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html">Archives of
[EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/
 <A HREF!ttp:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/">ctrl</A>
������������������������o subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send 
email:
SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email:
SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to