Angling for the future – Hunting for the truth:

Understanding the threat of “Sustainable Development – Agenda 21”

By John C. Street

 

The United States of America has more “recoverable” oil reserves within its contiguous border (i.e., not counting known off-shore reserves) than all the other proven reserves worldwide.  In just one of these known and recoverable reserves, the Bakken, that stretches from Montana to North Dakota and on up into Canada, there are an estimated 500+ billion barrels, enough crude oil, according to both government and industry estimates, to meet this nation’s fuel requirements for over 2,000 years.  (To read the U. S. Geological Service’s report on the Bakken formation as well as links to the Energy Information Administration assessment of this reserve, please go to http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1911 ). 

How is it possible, then, that the United States of America still imports a vast majority of its oil from foreign countries, many of whom have made public declarations attesting to their hatred of us?  The answer may surprise (and then shock and, hopefully, anger) ever person who identifies themselves as a hunter and/or angler.  A brief look at recent history will both explain our culpability and shed light on what we – hunters and anglers – will face in the future. 

It’s hard to pinpoint the exact date that hunting and fishing began to change but historical evidence points to the late 1970s and early 1980s.  Without being pejorative about this change, most would agree this is when hunting and fishing began to shed any semblance of their utilitarian “hunter-gatherer” traditions and tied their future to commercialization. 

Today, according to a report (“Hunting and Fishing: Bright Stars of the American Economy” available at www. nssf.org) prepared for the National Shooting Sports Foundation and the Congressional Sportsmen’s Foundation, hunting and fishing are “a $76 billion economic force” here in the United States.  Furthermore, the report adds, through the purchases of licenses, related gear and travel, hunters and anglers “directly support 1.6 million jobs … And they generate $25 billion a year in federal, state and local taxes.” 

Ironically, though, at about the same time hunting and fishing began evolving into a “$76 billion economic force,” a new environmental ethos was taking root here in the United States and, not surprisingly given their historically well documented conservation background, hunters and anglers embraced this nascent environmental awakening.  

Today, according to information (found at “The Green Tracking Library” available at www.greentrackinglibrary.com) researched and published by Ron Arnold at the Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise, this environmental movement has blossomed into a multi-billion dollar, tightly controlled consortium of both fringe and “mainstream environmental organizations” that is attempting to blur the line between traditional hunter/angler groups and the politically potent environmental movement.    

Yet, while many in the hunting and fishing community advocate for partnerships between this new, politically potent environmental movement and traditional hunter/angler groups, there is mounting evidence that suggests this will have dangerous consequences for the future of hunting and fishing and may, by causal consequence, result in a socio/economic Armageddon the likes of which this nation has never seen.   

Like any other “industry,” the hunting and fishing “economic force” is susceptible to and controlled by the market that purchases the “goods” it produces.  So, while some might argue that the array of high-tech electronic and mechanical gadgets and gizmos being hauled – or hauling hunters and anglers - into the boondocks these days has nothing to do with the real acts of hunting and fishing, they are the manifestation of a free-market economy working as it should.   

However, at the same time those “goods” are being manufactured by the individual companies and corporations that collectively make up the “$76 billion economic force,” their suppliers (the other companies and corporations that extract and harvest the raw materials from which all the gadgets and gizmos are made) are under attack by the very environmental movement that wants hunters and anglers to be their partners.  And that, alas, is not the worst of it.     

Unbeknownst to – or, perhaps, unacknowledged by - most who advocate for a partnership between the environmental movement and the “$76 billion economic force,” there is a little known document called “Agenda 21” that spells out prescriptions and action plans for, among a long list of other frightening things, taking away your right to “keep and bear arms” and curtailing your access to public land.    

“Agenda 21,” as described on the Wikipedia web site (www.wikipedia.com), “is a program run by the United Nations related to sustainable development. It is a comprehensive blueprint of action to be taken globally, nationally and locally by organizations of the UN, governments, and major groups in every area in which human’s impact on the environment.”  The “major groups” referred to in this description are identified in the text of the Agenda 21 document as Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) or, in laymen’s terms, the environmental movement.  Almost without exception, the individual organizations that make up this movement are independent, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) corporations.       

While it might be appropriate at this point to list the names of the NGOs – the “main stream environmental groups” – who are complicit in aiding and abetting the UN’s effort to deny you your Second Amendment Rights and prevent you from accessing the “Public’s Land,” it will serve a much greater purpose if you would go back to the Green Tracking Library and learn this on your own.  And when you have finished reviewing the incestuous relationships that have formed between the environmental movement and the national hunting and fishing organizations, please go to www.takingliberty.us/TLHome.html for a thorough explanation of the “Wildlands Project.”  Be forewarned, though, if you are not already somewhat aware of these relationships and have never heard of the “Wildlands Project,” you are in for a shock. 

As you will discover by spending time at the Green Tracking Library, the “mainstream environmental groups” that hunters and anglers allied with in those early days of this nation’s environmental awakening have chosen a new course, a course more aligned with the “Sustainable Development” initiatives of the United Nations than with any concern for the future of hunting and fishing or the $76 billion dollar industry these pastimes have created.   

Now, for all practical purposes, these environmental groups have co-opted many of our national hunting and fishing organizations, turning their memberships into their “Poster Children” and sacrificing a century of conservation credibility on the pantheistic alter of Sustainable Development and Agenda 21. 

Lured by the enormous foundation largess bestowed on those willing to proselytize for the new green Agenda (21), our national hunting and fishing organizations seem unable to comprehend  - or are unwilling to publicly acknowledge – that their crusade for a New World Order will subjugate the sovereignty of the United States of America to the socialistic prescriptions of the United Nations.  Ironically, though, as revealed in a book written by Ron Arnold titled, “Freezing in the dark,” many of these prescriptions were created and are being put in place by our own national hunting and fishing organizations. 

Think for a moment what will happen when their plan to curtail the production and use of carbon based fuels succeeds.  From just what they’ve done to date, we’re already seeing higher prices, and not just at the gas pump but when we pay our electric bill, buy a gallon of milk or a loaf of bread or send in our federal, state and local taxes.  

And that’s not the worst of it.   

These crusaders want to force us to use nothing but alternate energy like bio-fuels and wind and solar even though these sources currently make up just one percent of our total energy usage, five percent if you add in nuclear power … which they don’t like either.  Please note, however, there’s nary a word in the literature of their crusade about how they intend to make up the shortfall until alternate power becomes commercially available and economically feasible.   

So, can’t we grow corn and make our own fuel?  Sure, and people in third world countries die of starvation by the thousands because the United States is the largest provider – by a whopping’ margin - of food-aid in the world and we won’t have an excess to spare. And ethanol in our gasoline mix lowers mpg’s meaning we burn more fuel to cover the same distance.  And it would require a whole bunch of extra farm land which would require cutting down a whole lot of trees and displacing a whole bunch of wildlife and … 

Well, how about windmills?  They’re OK but it would, according to knowledgeable sources, take a wind farm the size of New Jersey just to supply New York City alone.  And, don’t forget a windmill’s average run time is only about thirty-five percent meaning we’d either have to do without electricity for sixty-five percent of the time or have back-up, carbon fuel burning electric generating plants.  And they kill an awful lot of birds.  And people are in favor of them until they have to either look at or listen to them and …   

How about photovoltaics?  They’re all well and good, too, except none but the wealthiest could afford the equipment for personal use and the cost of trying to use it on a retail scale (residential, commercial and industrial) would make our current electric bills look like chump-change.  And, currently, some of the critical components are manufactured overseas (where they don’t have our environmental laws) and … 

So why are we doing all this, why are we inflicting this hardship on ourselves, and specifically and most drastically, why aren’t we – hunters and anglers - being told that we are inflicting these life or death hardships on those at the bottom of the economic ladder?   

Why have we allowed our good name to be used to drive gas and oil prices and, by consequence, the price of everything else up so high that many of our fellow citizens are being forced to decide between their mortgage payment and their heating bill and losing their homes in the process?   

And why are we allowing our good name to be used to cripple a nation that has more than enough raw fuel (coal, gas and oil) to be energy self-sufficient within a year, forcing us in the process to kowtow to despots and dictators who despise and would like to destroy us?   

Because a cabal of not-for-profit environmental ideologues, unfortunately including many of our heretofore highly respected national hunters’ and anglers’ organizations, is on a crusade to subjugate the sovereignty of our nation, exclude us from the land that we helped set aside for both recreational use and its economic value (the concept is called “Multiple-Use” in the original, enabling legislation that created our National Forests) and extinguish our God given rights, not the least of which is our right to “keep and bear” the arms that we take afield as hunters. 

Given the war chests many of our national hunters’ and anglers’ organizations have accumulated as a result of conscripting their membership to their environmental crusade, it’s highly unlikely a grass-roots reform movement by the membership would have much affect.  Having learned how to make money by suing the federal government, for which they get paid handsomely whether they win or lose, and how to keep their snouts firmly stuck in the trough of the enabling foundations (again, please see the Green Tracking Library) and a myriad of federal agencies, the income derived from membership fees is of little consequence.   

As a result, America’s hunters and anglers have been demoted to little more than window dressing, paraded out like a casting call for a B grade movie when a “consensus” needs confirmed but otherwise treated like mushrooms; kept in the dark and fed manure.  

Further, and perhaps even more alarming, the “Sustainable Development” crusade is being championed in the national hook ‘n bullet press as evidenced by the ongoing harangue for “Sportsmen [to] band together with environmental groups.”  It can no longer be assumed this harangue is a reflection of poor research by individual writers (and, by implication, the editors who review those writers’s work).  It must be postulated this is evidence of capitulation by the corporate ownership of those magazines to the political influence wielded by those lavishly funded environmental – and hunter’s and angler’s - groups.   

For over 100 years now, and beginning long before hunting and angling became the “Bright Stars of the American Economy,” participants in these hunter/gatherer pastimes demonstrated their commitment to wildlife and wild places.  The accomplishments that came as a result of this commitment are part of a well documented history.  Poignantly, the list of fish and wildlife – both “game” and “non-game” – brought back from the brink of extinction as a result of this commitment are too voluminous to list but illustratively represented by two high-visibility survivors; the Bald Eagle and the whitetail deer.   

Consequently, today, as it was before this country was known as the United States of America, there is land aplenty for the buffalo to roam and for eagles to soar and, as a result of the conservation ethic demonstrated by this nation’s hunters and anglers, there is also land aplenty for those who cling to hunting and fishing as a sacred way of life.   

Allowing the accomplishments and credibility of this nation’s hunters and anglers to be usurped by environmental extremists who are willing – arguably anxious – to cripple the nation that spawned a conservation ethic that is the envy of the world is anathema to all that has transpired since this important work began.   

And it is unadulterated naiveté to believe that the $76 billion industry, the “Bright Star of the American Economy,” that evolved out of that conservation ethic will somehow be spared from the socio/economic Armageddon that will inevitably follow. 

If the United States of America is to survive as a sovereign nation, it is imperative that the first and the only true conservationists – hunters and anglers - disenfranchise themselves from the false prophesy of a New World Order and from those environmental ideologues, including many heretofore highly respected hunters’ and anglers’ organizations, who are attempting to march us into that new order under the banner of Agenda 21.