Link to Organizational Chart of UN Gobal authority
"American
Land Sovereignty Protection Act Reintroduced -
H.R. 833 would protect private property rights and national
sovereignty from UN designation of Biosphere Reserves and
World Heritage Sites"
These maps are based on the strategy and procedures laid out in what
is known as the Wildlands Project and the UN/US Man and the Biosphere Program
(MAB). Both are based on the need of protecting biological diversity
using core wilderness reserves which are
surrounded by buffer zones that variably regulate human activity to
protect the attributes of the core reserves (see below). Areas not included
in core reserves or buffer zones are zones of cooperation where regulations
are designed to favor biodiversity and ecosystems.
The Statutory Framework of the World Network of Biosphere Reserves,
The Seville Agreement for the MAB Program, and the Strategic Plan for the
USMAB
all state the MAB Program is designed to help implement the Convention
of Biological Diversity, a Treaty currently before the US Senate for ratification.
Likewise, Section 13.4.2.2.3 of the United Nations Global Biodiversity
Assessment defines the Wildlands Project
as the basis for preserving biodiversity for the Convention on Biological
Diversity. The Wildlands Project is based on the science of conservation
biology and was developed by Dr. Michael Soule', co-founder and first president
of the Society for Conservation Biology; Dr. Reed Noss, current editor
for the journal of Conservation Biology; and David Foreman, co-founder
and longtime leader of Earth First!
The science of conservation biology was largely created by the IUCN
(International Union for Conservation of nature). These include the EPA,
US Forest Service, US National Park Service, US Fish and Wildlife Federation,
Natural Resources Defense Council, The Nature
Conservancy, Society for Conservation Biology, and many others. The
IUCN is also one of the primary promoters and developers of the Convention
on Biological Diversity. This perhaps explains why the US Government and
environmental organizations appear to be working in concert to implement
the Wildlands project and Biodiversity Treaty even though the treaty has
not been ratified.
This map is drawn under the supervision of a Ph.D. in Ecology, and follows instructions provided by the Wildlands Project, the UN/US MAB, and the rapidly increasing control within US counties through the UN/US Heritage programs. This is especially true for counties having federal land, particularly in the Western US. The map incorporates, when available, actual maps as well as a multitude of government and environmental literature demanding various reserves or national parks interconnected with corridors.
MAGNITUDE OF THE WILDLANDS PROJECT
"Conservation must be practiced on a truly grand scale," claims Reed Noss. And grand it is. Taken from the article "The Wildlands Project: Land Conservation Strategy" in the 1992 special issue of Wild Earth, Noss provides the whopping dimensions of this effort.
Core reserves are wilderness areas that supposedly allow biodiversity to flourish. "It is estimated," claims Noss, "that large carnivores and ungulates require reserves on the scale of 2.5 to 25 million acres....For a minimum viable population of 1000 [large mammals], the figures would 242 million acres for grizzly bears, 200 million acres for wolverines, and 100 million acres for wolves. Core reserves should be managed as roadless areas (wilderness). All roads should be permanently closed."
Corridors are "extensions of reserves....Multiple corridors interconnecting a network of core reserves provide functional redundancy and mitigate against disturbance....Corridors several miles wide are needed if the objective is to maintain resident populations of large carnivores."
Buffer zones should have two or more zones "so that a gradation of use intensity exists from the core reserve to the developed landscape.
Inner zones should have low road density (no more than 0.5 mile/square mile) and low-intensity use such as...hiking, cross-country skiing, birding, primitive camping, wilderness hunting and Fishing, and low-intensity silviculture (light selective cutting)."
WHAT DO RESERVE AND CORRIDORS
REALLY MEAN?
While this effort has a noble mission, the implications
are staggering. As noted in the June 25, 1993 issue of
Science, it "is nothing less than the transformation of
America to an archipelago of human-inhabited
islands surrounded by natural areas."
According to the Wildlands Project, "One half of the
land area of the 48 conterminous [united] states be
encompassed in core [wilderness] reserves and inner
corridor zones (essentially extensions of core reserves)
within the next few decades....Half of a region in
wilderness is a reasonable guess of what it will take to
restore viable populations of large carnivores and
natural disturbance regimes, assuming that most of the
other 50 percent is managed intelligently as buffer
zone." (Noss, 1992) If fully implemented, the
Convention On Biological Diversity would have to
displace millions of people through unacceptable
regulations, nationalization of private land, and forcing
people to move out of core reserve areas and inner
buffer zones. It would seriously reduce the production
of agriculture, forest, and mining products. In the
process, millions of Americans could lose their jobs. In
turn, the resulting scarce resources means the rest of
us are going to pay double and triple for these
products.
This may sound insane, but it's either being planned or
implemented right now across America. Land is being
condemned or zoned in reserves, corridors or buffer
zones under a variety of names to reestablish or
protect biodiversity and/or specific species. Should
these quasi-religious theories and pseudo-science
determine our future?
RESERVES & CORRIDORS DO NOT WORK
What science is really showing is that there is no clear
evidence that reserves and corridors work or are even
needed. Rather, good forest management, including the
use of clearcutting, enhance biodiversity and
sustainability:
* "The theory has not been properly validated and the
practical value of biogeographic principles for
conservation remains unknown....The theory provides
no special insights relevant to
conservation."Zimmerman, B.L. and R.O. Bierregaard.
1986. Journal of Biogeography 13:133-143.
* The theory behind the need for reserves and
corridors is being "increasingly heavily criticized...as
inapplicable to most of nature, largely because local
population extinction was not demonstrated."
Simberloff, D.J. Farr, J. Cox, and D. Mehlman. 1992.
"Movement Corridors: Conservation Bargains or Poor
investment?" Conservation Biology 6(4): 495.
* "No unified theory combines genetic, demographic,
and other forces threatening small populations, nor is
their accord on the relative importance of these
threats." Ibid.
* "There are still few data, and many widely cited
reports are unconvincing....[The theory that reserves
and corridors] "facilitate movement is now almost an
article of faith." Ibid.
* "Studies that have been frequently cited as
illustrating corridor use for faunal movement, do not, in
fact, provide clear evidence." Of those that do support
the need for corridors, wooded fence rows are
adequate for many species, while only a few require
well vegetated strips. Hobbs, R.J. 1992. "The Role of
Corridors in Conservation: Solution or Bandwagon?"
Tree 7(11): 389.
The science used in the Convention Biological
Diversity does not work and may actually reduce
biodiversity. The implications of this treaty are
enormous and must be thoroughly reviewed before it is
considered for ratification.
For more information on the maps and Wildlands Project, call
Environmental Perspectives, Inc. (EPI), (207) 945-9878
Visit: http://www.libertymatters.org
