topal63
. . .
+533|7159
Taking Liberty by Taking Land: http://www.takingliberty.us/TLHome.html

Introduction: http://www.takingliberty.us/Narrations/ … layer.html

Current Government ownership:
https://i12.tinypic.com/4xwt7w8.png

The Goal:
https://i10.tinypic.com/53ewtqq

Instead of partnering with American citizens, supporting our liberty, our rights and our right to own private property - in an effort to solve real environmental concerns - our Government would rather just take our land and our liberty.

The Wildlands Project exists within legal boundaries, and their ideal is even something to be admired, however that should not prevent anyone from being concerned. At the very least, it advocates an extreme manifestation of environmental public policy. And so, any claim the Wildlands Project makes toward public policy should be debated and decided in the public arena. Yet to date it has existed almost anonymously beyond the knowledge of the wider public. (Founder: Dave Foreman).
________

UN Agenda - a Connection to the Wildlands Project?
The influence of Agenda 21, and other United Nations treaties and policy documents is very clear in the implementation of land use policies in rural America. The United Nations policy on land use was adopted in 1976 by the UN Conference on Human Settlements (HABITAT I). The Preamble says, in significant part:

"Land...cannot be treated as an ordinary asset, controlled by individuals and subject to the pressures and inefficiencies of the market. Private land ownership is also a principal instrument of accumulation and concentration of wealth and therefore contributes to social injustice..."
( Learning from informal markets - E Berner, page 230)

Agenda 21: "Compile detailed land capability inventories to guide sustainable land resources allocation, management and use at the national and local levels"(Chapter 10.7(f) p. 86).

Global Biodiversity Assessment: "Include methods that limit the use of land resources through zoning schemes; use incentives and tax policy to foster particular land-use practices; create and enforce tenure arrangements...and establish easements...that seek to establish landscape characteristics favourable to biodiversity" (Section 13.1.3(5), p. 926).

Sustainable America: "Government agencies, conservation groups, and the private sector should expand the use of ecosystem approaches by using collaborative partnerships...for sustaining ecosystems and biodiversity. Develop indicators which can be used to monitor the status of ecosystems...for restoring damaged ecosystems." (Chapter 5.2(1-5) p. 119).
Eco-logic, January/February, 1997 edition.

________

H.R. 2337: Energy Policy Reform and Revitalization Act of 2007 is endorsed by the The Sierra Club.

SEC. 103. ENERGY RIGHTS-OF-WAY CORRIDORS ON FEDERAL LAND.
(B) shall not consider as available for designation as a [ENERGY] corridor, any area that is--

      (i) within one mile of any place designated or otherwise identified by State or Federal law or any applicable Federal, State, or State land use plan for recognition or protection of scenic, natural, cultural, or historic resources; or (ii) in a sensitive ecological area, including any area that is designated as critical habitat under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 or otherwise identified as sensitive or crucial habitat, including seasonal habitat, by the United States Fish and Wildlife Service, by a State agency responsible for managing wildlife or wildlife habitat, or in a Federal, State, or State land use plan;

SEC. 452. NATIONAL POLICY ON WILDLIFE AND GLOBAL WARMING.

      It is the policy of the Federal Government, in cooperation with State, tribal, and affected local governments, other concerned public and private organizations, landowners, and citizens to use all practicable means and measures--

            (1) to assist wildlife populations and their habitats in adapting to and surviving the effects of global warming; and (2) to ensure the persistence and resilience of the wildlife of the United States, together with its habitat, as an essential part of our Nation's culture, landscape, and natural resources.

SEC. 454. NATIONAL STRATEGY.

      (A) identify and monitor wildlife populations, including game species, likely to be adversely affected by global warming, with particular emphasis on wildlife populations at greatest need for conservation; (B) identify and monitor coastal, marine, terrestrial, and resources and freshwater habitat at greatest risk of being damaged by global warming; (C) assist species in adapting to the impacts of global warming; (D) protect, acquire, and restore wildlife habitat to build resilience to global warming; (E) provide habitat linkages and corridors to facilitate wildlife movements in response to global warming; (F) restore and protect ecological processes that sustain wildlife populations vulnerable to global warming; and (G) incorporate consideration of climate change in, and integrate climate change adaptation strategies for wildlife and its habitat into, the planning and management of Federal lands administered by the Department of the Interior and lands administered by the Forest Service.
________

PS. I didn't create the website, nor their name: Taking Liberty by Taking Land. :)

Last edited by topal63 (2007-08-07 18:58:33)

GorillaTicTacs
Member
+231|6814|Kyiv, Ukraine
Keep believing that, when just the opposite is true.  Our national reserves of federal land have been sold off at an alarming rate, or "rented" to corporations that strip mine it and pay the government dubious rental fees (if at all).
stryyker
bad touch
+1,682|7161|California

National Parks. Nuff said. No matter how good their argument is, National Parks will never decrease in size.
topal63
. . .
+533|7159

GorillaTicTacs wrote:

Keep believing that, when just the opposite is true.  Our national reserves of federal land have been sold off at an alarming rate, or "rented" to corporations that strip mine it and pay the government dubious rental fees (if at all).
I don't need to believe anything...

I have worked on many engineering projects in Florida that have supposed environmental concerns - where mitigation by land swapping would have achieved far better results (were large wetlands could have been created by developers, instead of retaining tiny insignificant wetlands incorporated therein a project - creating unsightly common areas at perpetual maintenance cost to the Public). But, the agencies & environmentalists simply don't work with you - they (both) dictate to you. I've personally been involved in condemnation proceedings. Lands that small private property owners - held (which were massively devalued by mere listing on a target acquisition map); nor did the municipality even want the land - but the state working with environmentalists did - and as I said they dictate.

Aside from Bush's eco-blunders (a. http://www.bushgreenwatch.org/mt_archives/000111.php) & Bush's ill-conceived plan (b. http://www.wilderness.org/Library/Docum … ellOff.pdf) to raise a pointless billion dollars - which is nothing in comparison to waste & corruption of the government (a. & b. : neither of which I personally support). I am thinking whatever... and that you are missing the point. I am not endorsing every word or thought - that belongs to someone else. I think the, non-corporate, property owner (little-guy) is left out of the picture (I have seen this first-hand). It isn't a matter of the Government vs Environmentalists. Or just Corporations/corporate pollution vs Environmentalists/Environmental concern.

There is a often a private property owner (a little man, a common man) in the middle - that often has few (or no) rights within the system.

______________

b. The Bush's land sale plan:
(Bush's land sale dies in Congress - second year in a row: http://pmbryant.typepad.com/b_and_b/200 … ate_b.html)
https://i19.tinypic.com/53gflsn.gif

______________

Brilliant management by the Fed.
Western forests and prairies are ablaze again. As of July 20, there have been 53,741 fires in the western United States since January 1. The fires have burned 3,788,883 acres and there are months of warm weather yet to go. This year's fires will probably surpass last year's record 4,676,830 acres of burned timber and destroyed grasslands, not to mention habitat of untold numbers of endangered species. Ranchers are seeing their summer range go up in flames and they are hot under the collar about government mismanagement of the public lands.

Last edited by topal63 (2007-08-07 18:00:20)

Kmar
Truth is my Bitch
+5,695|7042|132 and Bush

If you plan on developing in an area zoned wetlands (in Fl) you had better plan on mediating them somewhere else. My county used to be real stringent on what was considered wet. Too many builders were giving them grief I guess. I remember a seller we worked with had a ditch he dug for cows considered to be wet.
Xbone Stormsurgezz
RAIMIUS
You with the face!
+244|7155|US
What the heck is that bottom map supposed to represent?  What the hell are "wilderness to wildland" and "buffer zones" supposed to be?
topal63
. . .
+533|7159
The Wildlands Project:
http://www.twp.org/cms/page1090.cfm

https://i9.tinypic.com/5zchwyp.jpg
The Wildlands Project's work to reconnect the continent begins with "MegaLinkages"--vast pathways that tie natural places together.
________

National Heritage Area Act:
http://www.nationalcenter.org/NPA548.html
http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s109-203
https://i12.tinypic.com/68287b5
________

RAIMIUS wrote:

What the heck is that bottom map supposed to represent?  What the hell are "wilderness to wildland" and "buffer zones" supposed to be?
The red areas - represent wildland proposed "megalinkages."
https://i19.tinypic.com/520z0r8
a.) Think of it like this - it's a sort of master plan - where the yellow and light green areas = what is potentially left-over as privately owned lands.

b.) These yellow areas would represent privately owned lands that would be - designated as "buffer areas," "conservation areas," etc.

c.) There would be little, as an owner you could do with (yellow) land - if that happens (and I've seen it happen first hand). It can potentially amount to a total loss of value to the land - for the land owner. It potentially amounts to an owner not having any property rights. The gov./eco-agents/etc - dictate use to the owner - instead of working with the owner.

d.) There is nothing wrong with setting aside lands, restoring lands, for wildlife-wildlands - or having a master plan for such. But, the reality is they are not always right, nor right in their methods and small-time property owners near these designations get caught in between a battle of ideologues.
__________

Any relationship (in planning) to the North American Union?
(Overlay of strategic trade corridors [NASCO] & Wildlands Corridors)
https://i19.tinypic.com/4pbm8pk.jpg

Last edited by topal63 (2007-08-07 16:17:28)

unnamednewbie13
Moderator
+2,072|7212|PNW

I live in Washington state, and have already seen people lose property rights in the name of reestablishing marshlands.

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard