YELLOWSTONE TO YUKON CORRIDOR AND OTHER ISSUES
Understanding New and On-going Environmental Influences on Lemhi County
The following document is to be used as an educational history on the intentions of the environmental organizations, along with government institutions regarding Lemhi County and adjoining areas. Click on the link which is highlighted and review the base reference regarding each topic. The pertinent quote is listed below the reference link. However, you may choose to read more on each website. The total review of these references should take about 30 minutes.
From: http://www.y2y.net/people/communities.asp
"... the Y2Y Initiative has partnered with the Sonoran Institute"
From:
http://www.activistcash.com/biography.cfm/bid/132
Who is Ray Rasker?
Background
Northwest Office Director, The Sonoran Institute; Former economist, The Wilderness
Society; Adjunct faculty, Montana State University
From
www.wilderness.org/WhereWeWork/
Montana/y2y.cfm?TopLevel=Y2Y - 40k
The Wilderness Society has been a member and leader of Y2Y since its inception. ...
From: http://www.jhguide.com/Archives/Environmental/2004/040908-enviro.html
Rasker quote: Rasker agrees that wilderness alone will not generate economic
growth.
In rural remote areas that do not have air service, for example, the study
found that wilderness did not spur economic development.
"It's never damaging to create wilderness, but it's not enough,"
Rasker said. "Unless it also has an educated workforce, and unless it's
also connected to larger markets, it's not going to make much of a difference."
Does Dr Rasker intend to educate our workforce as he tries to push for 20 million more wilderness acres, or will it be too late? and where does he have any long term data to suggest that it is "never damaging [to the local economy] to create wilderness."?
Other Names & Organizations
From: http://www.wilderness.org/WhereWeWork/Idaho/roadless.cfm
Idaho has nearly 9 million acres of roadless, undeveloped National Forest land, more than any other state in the lower 48. The Wilderness Society has made permanent protection of these roadless lands a top priority, for within them is a cache of irreplaceable wild places. Many deserve to become part of the National Wilderness Preservation System, joining 4 million acres of Idaho wilderness that the Congress has already protected. Some of the Healthiest Forests in the Nation anchored by 4 million acres of congressionally designated wilderness in the central part of the state, Idaho's forests are among the healthiest, most ecologically intact lands in the nation. They offer habitat for such rare species as the gray wolf, grizzly bear, Canada lynx, and steelhead and bull trout.
The fact that these species still remain in the lower 48 states owes much to
designated wilderness, certainly, but much also to Idaho's roadless national
forest lands that cover nearly 9 million acres.
Note: Permanent Roadless area of 9,000,000 acres. Gee if the Sonoran Institute
says were rich with our current 4 million acres of wilderness, just think how
rich we could be with 9! With 20?
From
SALMON –– Dave Krosting, Salmon Field Officer Manager, has been instrumental in organizing a grass roots effort designed to help the local community of Salmon, Idaho. Krosting and others from Salmon, Idaho attended a recent Western Community Stewardship Forum, held in Estates Park, Colorado, which was sponsored by the National Association of Counties and the Sonoran Institute.
As a result of these and other collaborative efforts by Krosting, a local partnership
involving BLM, the City of Salmon, Lemhi County, The Nature Conservancy, Sonoran
Institute, and local landowners has been formed. The creation of this partnership,
called the Salmon River Mountain Working Group, is the first step in a long-term
process envisioned to have the city, county, federal governments, and private
landowners working together to conserve the culture of the Salmon area.
Local planning efforts will be led by the Sonoran Institute, a nonprofit organization
that works collaboratively with local people and interests to conserve and restore
important natural landscapes. According to Krosting, the planning effort is
expected to take about two and one-half years. The Group hopes to manage and
plan for the expected growth and change while protecting the unique rural culture
of the area around Salmon, preserve the open space and agricultural land while
providing expansion areas for development, and strengthen the local tax base.
Community Stewardship is what the Sonoran Institute calls their innovative approach
to conservation. For the Salmon area, that means people communicating, working
cooperatively together, consulting with experts such as the Sonoran Institute
and other counties who have already adopted the approaches, all with a common
goal of proper conservation of the land and resources.
After visiting with the Salmon Field Office staff recently, Kit Kimball, Chief
of the Office of External Affairs for the Department of the Interior, was very
impressed with the leadership Krosting and his staff have shown in the Salmon
area, not only with the Mountain Working Group but also working with the public
in general. She feels this management approach is an excellent example of the
ways in which BLM is meeting Secretary Norton's "4Cs" philosophy ––
communication, cooperation, and consultation, all in the service of conservation.
From http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=25191
NGOs: Leading the Parade
©© 2001 WorldNetDaily.com
Agencies of the federal government gave $137 million last year to 20 major environmental
organizations, according to Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter Tom Knudson. Among
the organizations claiming the bulk of the prize are The Nature Conservancy
and the World Wide Fund for Nature (World Wildlife Fund). Both of these organizations
are also members of another international non-government organization, to which
the U.S. State Department generously gives more than $1 million per year ––
the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.
In addition, six federal agencies are members of the IUCN, paying annual dues
totaling nearly $300,000.
If taxpayers are surprised to learn that their hard-earned dollars are being
turned over to environmental organizations, they will be shocked to learn that
this direct transfer is dwarfed by the amount of money funneled to environmental
non-government organizations through the United Nations.
These same three NGOs, along with Greenpeace and the World Resources Institute,
are each identified as "executing agency," or "collaborating
organization" on 46 projects, which received grants totaling $808,537,000,
as reported in the June 30, 1999, "Operational Report on GEF [Global Environment
Facility] Programs."
The United States contributes substantially to the Global Environment Facility.
Environmentalism is a multi-billion dollar business, led by giant not-for-profit
corporations whose offices and executive salaries dwarf those of struggling,
for-profit corporations that are often the targets of environmentalism.
The Nature Conservancy, whose assets exceed a billion dollars, is known primarily
for "protecting" land by direct acquisition, or the purchase of "conservation
easements" or "development rights." It also serves as a real
estate agent for the federal government, reselling many of its acquisitions
to federal agencies for tidy profits.
Whenever land is acquired by the government, or one of these organizations, the property taxes generated by the land vanishes, or is reduced dramatically. The remaining taxpayers are thereby forced to pay higher taxes to replace those no longer produced by the "protected" property.
This land-acquisition fever, promoted in the name of environmentalism, is an essential element of the global-environmental agenda –– developed over the last few decades –– that is being methodically implemented by this NGO-U.N.-government partnership.
· The International Union for the Conservation of Nature first
proposed the Convention on Biological Diversity in 1981 –– a proposal
developed by its members, which include these NGOs and six federal agencies.
When the treaty was finally adopted in 1992 –– even though it was
not ratified by the U.S. Senate in 1994 –– these NGOs and federal
agencies continued to implement domestic policies to achieve the objectives
of the treaty.
· Biosphere Reserves, a program of UNESCO –– the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization –– are a
key ingredient of the Convention on Biological Diversity. The State Department,
using The Nature Conservancy as the local promoter, instigated the nomination
of the Ozark Biosphere Reserve in Missouri and Arkansas. Local activists, who
knew the threat these Biosphere Reserves pose to private-property rights, opposed
the project so effectively that it was abandoned.
· The Nature Conservancy is the "big-dog" in the fight
which has continually worked to expand the wilderness areas and lock up more
land in the Southern Appalachian Biosphere Reserve –– one of 47 in
the United States.
· The World Wildlife Fund originated the "debt-for-nature"
swap in South America, that resulted in exchanging poor-country debt for vast
stretches of land –– at rates as low as 10 cents on the dollar. This
organization has also led the campaign to eliminate the use of chlorine, used
to purify 98 percent of all public water supplies. PVC pipe and most plastics
would be eliminated if they are ever successful in their quest.
Our tax dollars are being used to support and finance these activities.
The International Union for the Conservation of Nature –– which is
a private, not-for-profit corporation headquartered in Switzerland, beyond accountability
to any U.S. government entity, maintains special consultative status with the
U.N. It was a "scientific adviser" from the IUCN who accompanied UNESCO
officials to Yellowstone National Park to declare it a World Heritage Site "in
danger," which triggered U.N. treaty authority to require "protection
beyond the border of the site."
These NGOs develop the environmental policy through the IUCN, which is legitimized
by the U.N. through treaties and side-agreements with government partners, then
lobby law makers to implement the policies through law, and then promote the
policies through TV ads, so-called "educational" material provided
to school children and, frequently, through law suits.
These NGOs should not be receiving tax dollars. Congressional hearings have
demonstrated abuse of these funds, but the funding continues. So powerful is
the environmental lobby that our tax dollars continue to fund the very organizations
leading the parade to global governance.
Henry Lamb is the
executive vice president of the Environmental Conservation Organization and
chairman of Sovereignty International.
From
http://www.canoe.ca/CNEWSPoliticsColumns/981111_kieran.html
Canada & the US
VICTORIA -- More than 800 members of the business community gathered in Vancouver this week to wrestle with the challenges of restoring vitality to B.C.'s ailing economy. High on the agenda was onerous taxes and government red tape.
Simultaneously, in Victoria, more than 400 members of the environment community met at a conference titled 'Helping the Land Heal.' One of the buzzwords at the conference was "Y2Y", the Yellowstone to Yukon Conservation Initiative.
Y2Y -- a dream in 1993, a well-organized campaign today -- is the Final Frontier
for U.S. and Canadian environmentalists dedicated to the de-activation of vast
tracts of wilderness.
Y2Y is gaining momentum to the point that it now represents a resource sector
investment disincentive as grave as the high taxes and red tape that drain the
energy out of B.C. business men and women.
Driven to a large extent by protectionists south of the border, the proposal would link 3,000 contiguous kilometres of the Rocky Mountains from Yellowstone to as far north as the Columbia and Mackenzie Mountains in the Yukon.
Alberta-based Y2Y co-ordinator Bart Robinson says Y2Y "seeks to restore and protect the natural heritage of the Rockies by creating an interconnected web of core protected areas and wildlife movement corridors."
Over the past seven years, B.C. has been moving to double the amount of parkland from six-12% of the land base. There was no scientific underpinning to this strategy. It was just thought to be the right thing to do and, for the most part, British Columbians have embraced that level of preservation.
Y2Y would dwarf those efforts. It would create an eco-region of more than one million square kilometres, a vast land mass of "ecological integrity" that Robinson says represents the "common sense thinking of land use planners and decision makers."
Set-asides in British Columbia would constitute 40% of the enshrined eco-reserve. It doesn't end at the borders of this massive park. The plan also calls for buffer zones in which "degrees of human activity" would be tolerated.
Here's the kicker -- the American raison d'etre: Robinson says "our current parks and protected areas are not big enough to protect the creatures they were established to protect." As well, he says, populations of large carnivores near the U.S. border "are an indispensable key to restoring healthy populations south of the border." In short, the Yanks need B.C. fenced off as a breeding ground for bears and elk.
Y2Y planning is accelerating. This year the initiative entered what Robinson calls phase two -- "an extensive regionally-oriented, map-based conservation planning process."
"With a little good luck and sufficient funding, seven regional plans will be stitched together to provide a Y2Y-wide plan over the winter of 2000/2001," he says.
Walter Segsworth, CEO of Homestake Canada, warned delegates at the Vancouver business summit that Y2Y is a land use crisis in the making. "The potential economic implications of this ill-conceived concept should not be underestimated. The uncertainty created by these land use set aside proposals has impeded economic development and ensured declining resource activity.
"The goal of Y2Y seems to be to de-populate the region in order to provide a recreational playground for wealthy Americans," Segsworth said.
Historically, mining disturbs less than 0.1% of the land base, but the key to mining is exploration and that initial phase of the mining cycle requires access to large areas over which to test for mineralization.
Access for this initial, low-impact exploration work is normally accomplished by using the province-wide network of trails and dirt roads built over the years to support resource development, forestry and fire fighting.
Ground access for exploration is already threatened by the rapid pace of road de-activation that is taking place as part of the provincial government's environmental agenda.
To impose Y2Y on top of this regime of road de-activation would be ruinous for mining and would be an economic disaster for the eastern region of B.C.
From
http://www.crowley-offroad.com/notable_quotes_wildlands_project.htm
Notable Quotes from Wildlands Project Leaders
Harvey Locke, President of The
Wildlands Project:
"Private land will often be critical to our conservation plans. Voluntary
mechanisms like conservation easements and wildlands philanthropy can benefit
landowners and Nature. If saving a species requires restrictions on or public
acquisition of private land, our society can provide compensation. North America
is, after all, home to the richest civilization in history."
Dave Foreman, Co-founder
of Earth First! and current chairman of The Wildlands Project
"The only hope of the Earth is to withdraw huge areas as inviolate natural
sanctuaries from the depredations of modern industry and technology. Move out
the people and cars. Reclaim the roads and the plowed lands."
"Commercial livestock grazing of federal and state lands cannot be justified ecologically or economically. Commercial logging, with the possible exception of small pole, post, and firewood sales, should be prohibited. Mining is an inappropriate use of public lands in virtually all cases. Vehicle use off established roads must be entirely prohibited. By freeing Forest Service, BLM, and state lands of such multiple-abuses, many roads and other developments could be closed. Roads necessary only for logging and grazing or recreational access should be closed. It may be necessary to allow some roads to remain open to official use for short time periods to allow active restoration in severely abused areas, or for reintroduction of extirpated species, but the majority of dirt and gravel roads on the public lands should be closed quickly."
Does …… The Wildlands Project advocate the end of industrial civilization?
Most assuredly. Everything civilized must go....
—— John Davis, Editor,
Wild Earth magazine
In Summary
According to an article in the IUCN journal Conservation Biology, "we assume
that environmental wounds inflicted by ignorant humans …… can be treated
by wiser humans." If this means that "ignorant humans" come to
harm, so be it: "Conservation biology is a crisis discipline. On a battlefield
you are justified in firing on the enemy."
This research only hints and the depth of our looming problems...
Reasonable conclussions include:
Not economic health, but essential depopulation.
Not Cultural respect and enhancement, but outside control until depopulation.
Y2y = the wildlands project = man &biosphere. The Sonoran Institute is partnered with all environmental groups concerned with y2y; therefore SI = the Wildlands Project.
The Sonoran Institute = Depopulation of our community!
Questions for Dr. Rasker
You've been quoted as saying that "creation of wilderness is never bad..." relative to local economies, how long is your data stream on this and are the data relative to communities or to individuals during whatever time frame you have?
How much more wilderness in Idaho should be created? Please don't answer with:
"How much do you think should...?
Your old employer suggests 20 million more acres for Id, Mt and Wy, is this
enough, too much, not enough?
SI had previously suggest a local GIS, why not put it in the court house for the county to use. Instead of simply using the GIS to map future wilderness corridors perhaps we could map some truly sustainable timber harvests to promote a diverse local economy.
Why was the federal property/economic well being link held from Lemhi Co residents at the Incubation Center meeting?
If you (the Sonoran Institute) are in bed with organizations that are clearly opposed to economic growth are you also opposed to such growth?
With SI's obvious ties to very active y2y groups, why should we trust you? Please note that the y2y afficionados think that Salmon should just vanish.
Where do YOU see Lemhi Co in 15 years?
How many communities in North America that have embraced a program of limiting economic growth to telecommuters have prospered? Please name one?
In your analysis of the Salmon area, how many smaller start-ups succeed, and where does this fit into the national average? Do we have any that you would call footloose entrepreneurs?
Does the Sonoran Institute track the records of communities with which they have been involved? If so, please present your track record. If not, why not?
Are the people that were miners and loggers footloose entrepreneurs? How many "footloose entrepreneurs" are there to go around?, and how is it possible to attract the few that may be interested in Salmon? Are there enough in the aggregate to save Salmon, and how many could we hope for? Does this system create a cut-throat give-away the farm competition between smaller rural communities? If so how can any of them survive?
Does the Sonoran Institute worry about the reduction of local and national sovereignty that goes along with the international versions of eco-corridor building (wildlands project, unesco man and biosphere)?
Since service industries and service jobs in the US have been outpacing all others since about 1908, is your message about being in the service sector a little dated?
When the Sonoran Institute (with Bob Cope) held an info get together at the local Elks Club and the key speakers were from the Nature Conservancy and The US Fish and Wildlife Service and SI had essentially no presence many decided that SI is a front for the foes of local economic growth... Any comment?
Does the fact that Custer and Lemhi Counties are the number one and two federalized counties in the nation destroy the credibility of SI based on our economies?
Since the USDA and the DOI have published that they are using and will continue to use Conservation Easements to accomplish goals that law and regulation cannot, should area residents be skeptical of SI supporting easements for future economic growth?
The philosophy behind conservation easements centers on the belief that Federal control of land results in environmental health. Since this is demonstrably not the case how do reconcile SI's push (via TNC and all the rest) towards easements?
Also, since easement land does fall off the tax roles when eventually federalized have you prioritized environmentalism over education?