0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Two Republican Senators have taken initiative against President Joe Biden’s “America the Beautiful” 30 x 30 Initiative by introducing legislation of their own. The 30 x 30 Termination Act is backed by Sen. Roger Marshall (R-Kan.) and Sen. Kevin Cramer (R-N.D.) and would effectively block the plan that seeks to retain nearly one-third of American land for conservation.If passed, this act would essentially nullify the executive order as it stands and would prevent the funding of any efforts to carry out the initiative plus some additional provisions.Why This Action is NecessaryThe signing of “America the Beautiful” raised major concern from agriculture organizations across the nation, especially from states where the vast majority of land is privately held and used for farming or ranching purposes.“Land ownership is a core right protected by the Constitution and we cannot allow radical environmentalists who are in the driver’s seat on 30 x 30 dictate what happens on our land. This initiative is further proof of the clear disconnect between the left and those who feed, fuel, and clothe the world,” said Senator Marshall as reported by multiple media outlets. “Farmers and ranchers are the original conservationists, and no one knows what’s best for the land better than those who work on it day in and day out. The best thing the federal government can do is trust the environmental judgment of farmers and ranchers and let them do what they do best: steward the land.” ...
Protect The Harvest51m ·In case you’ve missed this...President Biden’s 30 X 30 Executive OrderAmerica the Beautiful: Aligned with the Global Extremist AgendaBy Jaclyn Krymowski for Protect the Harvest In the midst of a very politically turbulent time for agriculture, tensions are high as farmers, ranchers and rural landowners look to concerning legislative activity. Just seven days after he was sworn in, President Biden signed Executive Order 14008, titled Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad. This is also known as the 30 X 30 initiative in reference to the overarching goal to conserve 30% of United States land and water by the year 2030. Recently the Biden administration released a vague document called the “America the Beautiful” report. This report is, “A preliminary report to the National Climate Task Force recommending a ten-year, locally led campaign to conserve and restore the lands and waters upon which we all depend, and that bind us together as Americans.” This is supposed to go hand-in-hand with the 30 X 30 initiative and provide a layout of how it will be implemented. Not surprising, the report has quoted on page 5 two extremist groups that we have discussed previously, The Nature Conservancy and the Society for Range Management. Page 10 of the report offers the same goals listed as Executive Order 14008 and mentions that, “...the U.S. is well positioned to achieve a 30 percent goal over the next decade.” To track all of the information from lands and waters that have been “conserved” and will be in the future, the government plans to establish an interagency called the American Conservation and Stewardship Atlas. ...Given the percentage of land that is privately owned, especially in certain states where much of that land is used for agrarian purposes, infringing on private land ownership would be inevitable to some degree. This has not been denied by any politicians. However, according to Jewel Bronaugh, Biden’s nominee for Deputy Secretary of Agriculture, “a lot more opportunities to make decisions” are reportedly on the horizon. American Farm Bureau Federation President Weighs In“This ’30 X 30’ goal has received a great deal of attention in farming and ranching communities across the country,” said Zippy Duvall, president of American Farm Bureau Federation in a letter. “America’s agriculturalists are asking whether their good work will be recognized by the administration. They have voluntarily enrolled more than 140 million acres of private land into federal and non-federal conservation programs – a landmass larger than the size of New York and California combined.” ...
OPINIONPublished 17 hours agoTucker Carlson: Abolishing the suburbs is major part of Biden administration's infrastructure plan'This isn’t about racism, stop with that—this is about power.'In early 2009, the Obama administration made a surprising, probably unprecedented accusation against Westchester County, New York—a pretty liberal place. According to the Obama administration, Westchester was an instrument of white supremacy — not the good liberals who live in Westchester, Bill and Hillary Clinton and Alexandria Ocasio Cortez, many others. No one accused them of being bigots. The problem was the buildings they lived in. All those single-family homes — row upon leafy row, set back from the street, well-tended lawns and mailboxes — were examples of racism — literally "structural racism." The only solution, the Obama people announced, was much greater density: more subsidized housing complexes in Westchester, more hi-rise apartment buildings, maybe some drug-addicted vagrants living on the sidewalk, begging for change. Only if Westchester became more like the Bronx could it become non-racist. This was all something of a surprise to the people who lived in Westchester, again, most of whom are dutiful liberals. They didn’t realize they had a white supremacy problem. Between 2000 and 2010, according to the census numbers, Westchester's Black and Hispanic population had risen by more than 50 percent. How could the county be racist? It didn't make any sense. In court, the Obama administration explained the reasoning. They singled out Westchester's practice of "standard zoning." That referred to county regulations that restricted the heights on certain buildings and limited the placement of sewers to protect drinking water"—it sounds reasonable. But according to the Obama administration, those were "restrictive practices." "Restrictive practices" is a legal term that, under civil rights law, means they were racist. And because they were racist, the Obama administration withheld more than $20 million in federal funds from Westchester County. If the county wanted the money, it would have to construct 10,000 low-income, high-density, very non-racist apartments. This battle went on for all eight years of the Obama administration and got very little news coverage. To its credit, Westchester fought back, because it could afford good lawyers, and eventually won in court. But most jurisdictions are not as rich as Westchester so they had to relent. Under pressure from federal ideologues, communities in Oregon and Minneapolis, for example, have abolished single-family zoning in recent years. ...
EXTREME ENVIRONMENTALISTS’ DREAM OF “REWILDING” THREATENS RURAL AMERICARewilding Devastates Rural America & Food ProductionProtect The Harvest supports meaningful and balanced conservation along with the right to hunt; rewilding, however, is something much different. It is painted in the rosy colors of enhanced conservation to disguise the devastating effects it is already having on portions of rural America, from livestock production to private property rights. The rewilding movement is systematically chipping away at rural living—and more alarmingly, the food production in rural areas that our nation, and the world, rely on.What Is Rewilding?The term “rewilding” is innocuously defined by Merriam-Webster as “the planned reintroduction of a plant or animal species, and especially a keystone species or apex predator (such as the gray wolf or lynx) into a habitat from which it has disappeared (as from hunting or habitat destruction) in an effort to increase biodiversity and restore the health of an ecosystem.”While wild places are certainly necessary and valued by the general population, the core beliefs of the rewilding movement are that:• Humans are not part of the ecosystem and have no part in nature• The millions of acres of protected lands already around the globe are insufficient• Existing protections for apex predators are insufficient• Even while there are plentiful populations of apex predators like wolves and grizzly bears in other parts of the world, they need to be restored to areas where they roamed over a century ago• Much of our rural lands should be returned to nature to allow “unrestricted movement among wide ranging animals.”Preservation of Farmland = Preservation of MankindThe preservation of already protected lands and species are something that few would argue with. However, as rural agricultural areas increasingly succumb to suburbia, the active and deliberate preservation of farming and ranching lands and the activities upon them is equally, if not more important. This is not to say that the need for wild spaces decreases—but nor does it increase.As the urban-based rewilding movement flaunts fantasies of an Ice Age renaissance and plans for a continental wildlife park that would cripple rural America, it has been estimated that 6,000 acres of open space are lost in the United States every day to development. Farmlands become suburban neighborhoods, and the space available for food production diminishes bit by bit—while demand for living space increases, so too does the demand for food. ...
