BAD News for CONSTITUTIONAL Rights

[Marlin]

TNC and NRSC Join Forces -

Bad News for Constitutional Rights
Nancy Levant



On February 18, The Nature Conservancy partnered with the Natural Resources Conservation Service, which is a division of the United States Department of Agriculture. This is another “partnership” with immense powers and no public input, whatsoever – no knowledge, no discussion, no opinion, no vote, nothing.

The Nature Conservancy is a non-profit. That is laughable. TNC is a multi-billion dollar “non-profit” biodiversity conservation organization with assets nearing 3 billion dollars. They are a global land acquisition group up to its eyeballs in U.N. global governance missions and Agenda 21 implementation, and it partners with anyone who will further its agenda to acquire more and more and more land. Over 15 million acres in the United States (probably much more) and over 102 million acres in the rest of the world, this “non-profit” owns nearly 120 million acres of land. If that doesn’t scare you, and the news of their constant, daily attempted land grabbing doesn’t scare you, then their partnering with the USDA’s Natural Resources Conservation Service sure as heck better.



"Together, the Conservancy and NRCS have set a new standard, one that will influence conservation nationwide. The Memorandum of Understanding that was signed promotes the sharing of conservation practices, strategies and scientific expertise," said Mark Rey, USDA's Under Secretary for Natural Resources and Environment.



"The agreement supports our mutual goals and will help more private landowners be aware of NRCS conservation programs that are available. This new partnership is what the President refers to as cooperative conservation. We need cooperative conservation like this to achieve our collective national conservation goals."



Well, Under Secretary Rey, you failed to tell, we, the people, to whom you report, anything whatsoever about your intention to partner with TNC, the NRCS’s goals, the “new standard,” the TNC/NRCS’s conjoined goals, or your collective national conservation goals. When was that press release that the entire nation missed?



As a citizen of this country, I don’t like you signing a “Memorandum of Understanding” when I am clueless about your missions, goals, intentions, or reliability. You work for the people of this country, and you are wheeling and dealing behind our backs and without our consent. In fact, you have entered into the business of illegal land acquisition based upon any conservation assertion that you and TNC can find. It is theft because you do not have the permission of the people you work for to partner with anyone who does not follow the laws and rights of the people in this country. We are your employers. You cannot use “memorandums” to plan the continued take-over of privately held land and water. You need our prior knowledge, our input, and our vote, or you are not acting legally or as a public servant.

Got it?

According to Steve McCormick, President and CEO of The Nature Conservancy, "The Conservancy has worked closely for years with NRCS staff around the country. This new agreement will encourage our organizations to collaborate even more closely. Together we will strive to develop effective conservation strategies and learning opportunities that will help advance the goals of voluntary private land and water conservation."

Mr. McCormick, I would like to know what the “goals of private property” means to you. I know what private property means to me, but since you have decided to take it upon yourself to “help advance the goals of voluntary private land,” I would like you to lay those goals out on the table. I want your definition of “voluntary private land and water.” What, in God’s name, does that mean? I want you to talk to the American people about the “goals” of The Nature Conservancy that have anything whatsoever to do with private property.

In fact, I demand that you do since your organization now miraculously trumps the constitutional rights of American citizens. When did that vote take place?



It is the belief of this writer that TNC/NRCS partnership, and others like it, created without public knowledge or vote, will institute further and massive land and water acquisitions based upon their manipulated strategies of choosing. These strategies will further the eco/global-education of American school children, and continue the global governance missions of the U.N. and it’s implementation plan, Agenda 21. That is the 2-sentence truth, and both sentences are self-explanatory.

Websites for truth and integrity: www.eco.freedom.org and www.sovereignty.net. These are very, very important websites for American people. You need to read the articles that they post because you are losing your country.

© 2005 The Sierra Times

[Carl S]

Interesting reading.

I have had a different experience with the Nature Conservancy. I have seen three major land acquisitions by the Nature Conservancy and the lands held by them until public entities could purchase them. These purchases preserved unique ecological areas that are rapidly disappearing in Florida. I like to know that my great grandchildren will be able to see, first hand, a bit of the Florida I grew up in and enjoyed.

Each of these purchases were made at market value on the open market. Instead of the owners selling to developers, they sold to the Nature Conservancy. I see nothing wrong with that. That, to me, is free enterprise at work. The landowners had choices and sold to whom they chose. Far better than eminent domain – which is now before SCOTUS and it doesn’t look favorable for individual property rights. But that’s another subject!

There may be aspects to the Nature Conservancy of which I’m not aware. But of those actions of which I am personally aware, I approve of the actions and the results. True, those lands are off of the tax rolls; but they are owned by the public and open to the public for enjoyment, recreation and preservation.

The preserve on which I live was purchased by an individual. His motive was to keep it from being purchased by developers. He held the land and sold it, at a profit, to the county when the county finally raised the funds for the purchase. Absolutely nothing wrong with his making a profit; that’s capitalism. He did this with four other tracts around the state, making a profit each time. He could have made a far bigger profit had he developed those tracts. From what I’ve seen, the Nature Conservancy has done just as this individual did.

Just my view looking out of a different window.