Both foundations and non-governmental organizations (NGO/ENGO) are pushing forward with new strategies. As much as possible, everyone needs to stay on top of their new direction. What had been more of a laid back, nobody challenges us attitude, has now become more of an offense because of the challenges laid at their feet by both Canadians and Americans, and they are proceeding with more deceit and lies. Slowly, members of NGOs and ENGOs have been slipping themselves into governments, getting themselves elected, in order to influence policy. This is happening in both Canada and the U.S.. In every election, detailed scrutiny of each candidate must be conducted for any involvement in NGOs and ENGOs, and exposed to the public. There has also been a massive commitment from multiple foundations to increase the amount of funding to these groups, the sole purpose is only taking land away from citizens, and only to have it placed in protection with non-use. Never doubt that. The amount of land they now want to take, originally around 20-30%, is now 50%, and that includes a combined takeover of both Canada and the U.S.. This agenda comes from the International Union of Conservation for Nature (IUCN) and was promoted by Harvey Locke, one of Yellowstone to Yukon founders. On this website, Nature Needs Half, you can find areas they want to take in Canada and the U.S., and Y2Y is involved with both objectives. The International Union of Conservation for Nature, Harvey Locke, Foundation Earth, and Wild Foundation are on the steering committee, while Gary Tabor from the Center for Large Landscape Conservation is one of the advisors. The Hewlett Foundation outlines the new strategies pretty well, the same strategies can be found in new NGO and ENGO jibberish, and they are implementing those strategies. Hewlett identified oil and gas development near wildlife corridors and protected areas, water scarcity, residential development, agriculture, insufficient funding for conservation, and lack of constituencies for conservation as some of the risks to ecosystems. They find gains have been less than what was expected, and progress halted, undone, or threatened with reversal. This is the background for their new strategies. Their focus has now changed to public policy as primary for advancing their outcomes. Therefore, they intend to focus on "community-driven, collaborative" solutions, which means getting more people to join their bandwagon, rather than "securing federal public land policy and protections" which is what they have been trying, instead going after state and local policies. Funding for this agenda have already begun, "building capacity" is what they call it. NGO/ENGO work was acknowledged with conserving 198 million acres since 2013. But for them it wasn't enough. So, now the focus will be partnerships with Tribes/First Nations and rural communities. "Conserving working lands" means duping land owners into engaging with them and adopting their sick forms of land management practices. Another tactic will be targeting local land-use planning, and securing new policies at a local level. For every local government, they will be knocking at your door to get new laws in place for their objectives. A new phony ploy will be tried, called Rural Perspectives on Western Conservation, they will pretend to listen to you, falsely giving a perception of interest, using the Jemez principle to manipulate you. Notice this is more reflective of a democracy, to "change from operating on the mode of individualism to community-centeredness." Collectivism, how Communistic is that? All efforts to place land into protection will continue as this new ploy is implemented. New efforts will be targeting state policies in the U.S., an agenda already started by the Network For Landscape Conservation. Funding for this agenda has already started pouring in. Building and enhancing collaboration and strengthening partnerships will be a new focus as well, but how can this be strengthened when they are already one with governments that will achieve policy changes? At least this is the case in the U.S.. Supporting civil litigation doesn't seem to be a immoral activity for them either. Starting on page 15 are focal areas for Canada and the U.S.. Anyone who lives in those areas should take note, keep an eye out for these new tactics. Don't be fooled by them, it is a mind game they intend to play on you.
0 Comments
The wealthy seem to have the belief they are the ones who should own the world, using their money to fund non-governmental organizations (NGO/ENGO) who hold the same belief. Here is a recent report on who Wilburforce funded. This is just for 2019, previous years are also listed.
Canada - British Columbia Skeena Watershed Conservation Coalition Northwest BC Ecosystem Conservation $90,000.00 Tides Center Rivers Without Borders: $80,000.00 Taku/Transboundary Watershed Conservation Campaign Trout Unlimited TU Alaska: Transboundary Protection Campaign $100,000.00 Trustees for Alaska Protecting Arctic Ecosystems, Special Places, $50,000.00 and Wildlife Wilderness Society Western Arctic Projects $80,000.00 WildLandscapes International Alaska Conservation, Connectivity, $130,000.00 and Constituents Wildlife Conservation Society $100,000.00 Wild Salmon Center SkeenaWild Conservation Trust: $115,000.00 Skeena Watershed Conservation New Venture Fund Alaska Engagement Partnership $60,000.00 Wildsight (Y2Y) Rocky and Columbia Mountain Corridors $100,000.00 Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society BC Conservation Opportunities $90,000.00 Canada - Alberta Miistakis Institute for the Rockies (Y2Y) Connectivity along Highway 3 in SW Alberta $30,000.00 US - Idaho Conservation Voters-Idaho Education Fund $35,000.00 Greater Yellowstone Coalition Wildlife and Habitat Protection in the High Divide $100,000.00 Future West (Y2Y) Protecting Landscapes and Building Conservation $45,000.00 Capacity in the High Divide Wildlife Conservation Society (Y2Y) Sustaining Wildlife Habitat/Linkages in Y2Y Region $65,000.00 US - Y2Y Project Implementation and Organizational Capacity Support $275,000.00 |