Brad,

What I posted above (and many others) is intended to provide background information for fellow herpers here on the forum to as to what I think is going on based on my attempt to become informed – my opinion. When I first read about HR.669 (and the similar bill the year before), it made me mad…Who are these people that are back with the same crud after we, the people, told them we didn’t want what they are selling. I discovered that what we think doesn’t matter to "them" because this is an agenda, driven by a decades old movement. Because they chapped my hide, I started doing research as to what was going on behind the scenes in congress and the sponsors of these bills. I have no idea how many times I asked myself the question, “what is this”? Often while looking for one thing, I’d find several other things by accident and the process would repeat itself over and over again. The bottom line is that HR.669 and S.373 are connected to biodiversity conservation, sustainable development and climate change programs. There is no question about this in my mind. The bureaucracies at the state and federal levels (and some large municipalities), are implementing the tenents of these three programs whether they are domestic or international (UN) in nature or origin.

An agenda driven movement IS going on (internationally and domestically) that involves governmental bureaucracies, elected politicians, NGO’s, private foundations, colleges and universities, the news media, etc, and HR.669 and S.373 are just a small piece of the entire picture. To think of these national bills as a single problem or issue is naïve (in my opinion). Besides, I’m NOT suggesting that we “herpers” can fix what I’m talking about by ourselves (we are too few in number to accomplish this) but, what if we could involve other folks in this fight? I’m not talking about dog, cat, fish, horse, etc owners (some of them are already doing what we are doing)…I’m talking about our neighbors, family and friends. A solution to the problem is first understanding what is REALLY going on by becoming informed ourselves and then voting. Our first remedy occurs on Election Day to begin the correction of what is going on as ALL of the regulations that exist now are a result of a public law that originated in congress. What has been done before can be undone (forcing a new regulatory climate on the bureaucracy) but, this has to be done on Election Day.

On the public relations front, how can you convince people to un-elect a professional politician to support candidates that are “pro-herper” as a single issue? In all probability, you’ll probably not have much success with this approach – it’s only about snakes and I don’t like snakes anyway. However, what if you could convince folks that what is planned for the future by the ECO agenda folks is, in my mind, a chilling prospect! Have you read the “Cap and Trade” legislation? Why has the USEPA designated CO2 as a pollutant subject to regulation? These two questions seem disconnected but they are not. They go together as eventually “they” plan to “use” us regarding CO2 to expand the trade in the new and “emerging” market of “Carbon Credits”. In the last revision of the Farm Bill, “mitigation banks” were created and universities and NGO’s are actively working on its implementation. In fact, these mitigation banks actually exist and is trading in “Carbon Credits”.

As with the numerous supporters of python issue in Florida, the “Carbon Credit” marketeers have their “propaganda” experts…All funded by either the tax payers or by public or private grants…Here are just a few...

http://onthecommons.org/media/pdf/original/Commons_Rising_06.pdf
http://www.peri.umass.edu/fileadmin/pdf/working_papers/working_papers_101-150/WP150.pdf
http://www.mfc.ms.gov/pdf/Mgt/CC/Carbon_Credits_MSUEXT.pdf
http://www.familyforestresearchcenter.org/publications/Landowners'_Willingness_Sell_Carbon_Credits.pdf

http://www.pineywoodsbank.com//RES-Press Release.pdf
http://www.resourceenvironmentalsolutions.com/
http://www.pbsj.com/Pages/default.aspx

http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=111_cong_bills&docid=f:h1698ih.txt.pdf
http://www./resources/publications/programs_and_policy/biodiversity_partners/buying,_selling_and_trading_biodiversity_in_washington.pdf

Hopefully you read these as they are part of the connection. The first four papers are examples of grant-funded “outreach and education” propaganda effort to “sell” the idea to the American people…Just like we were sold the idea of a rebate from the federal government by our support of the income tax. The middle three papers are about the “mitigation banks” that are a result of the last farm bill (Congress approved this). When you read the links, note the “approving” agencies of the state and federal government. The last two papers are the behind the scenes “stuff”…Imagine the creation of a new national bank that caters to the “green” movement (totally funded by the American tax payer) that will make loans for “green” oriented projects. Last but not least, imagine some government bureaucracy (or government approved NGO operating as a GSE) deciding every aspect about your land and even being involved in the transaction process at closing! In this case the federal governmental agency is the USEPA.

The point I’m trying to make with my posts is this: the domestic and international ECO agenda has three legs and they are 1) Biodiversity Conservation (non-native invasive species), 2) Sustainable Development and 3) Climate Change. They are ALL connected to one another via “networks” and “partnerships” which mutually support each other via redundancy of programs, information sharing and financial support. Ask yourself, why does the USGS have a biological component? Why is the USEPA worried about “ecoregions”? Think about those two questions for a second…Why is the USGS involved in “invasive species”? I mean, what does geology have to do with invasive species? Also, what do “ecoregions” have to do with the regulation of pollutants, hazardous waste and superfund mitigation from the USEPA? After all, why even have a Fish and Wildlife Service if these other agencies are working on the same and/or similar projects. Finally, why are any of these agencies implementing programs from an intergovernmental agency of the UN based on the signature of a Secretary of State (Madeleine Albright signed the "Rio" document for the US)? They are treating the “Rio” Convention on Biodiversity as if it was a treaty. It is not as according to the Constitution, the United States does NOT enter into treaties without the ratification vote of that treaty by a two-thirds vote of the members present in the US Senate. This has NOT happened!

In conclusion, whether you realize it or not, by opposing HR.669 and S.373, you already ARE opposing ALL of them…I hope that makes sense.

Later,
Jim.

PS: ECO = Environmental/Conservation.
-----
CSRAJim

[ Show Entire Thread ]