U.N. influence in Alabama
By Henry Lamb
web posted May 26, 2003
Only a handful of the people who gathered at the Birmingham
Hilton on April 8, 2003 knew that the objective of the meeting
was to implement U.N. policy in Alabama. Most people in
attendance thought the meeting was to solicit comments about a
"forest management plan" being developed by the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The comment period is open until
July, at which time, the plan will go into effect to standardize
"ecosystem management" in all National Forests in Alabama.
"Yes," answered Rick Morgan, spokesman for the government,
when asked if the plan provided for core wilderness areas,
surrounded by buffer zones. The plan fulfills the criteria of Article
4 of UNESCO's Statutory
Framework for U.N. Biosphere Reserves. Most of
Alabama has already been gobbled up by the Southern
Appalachian Biosphere Reserve, one of 47
U.N. Biosphere Reserves designated in the U.S., with no
debate, discussion, or vote by any state legislature, or the U.S.
A major function of all U.N.
Biosphere Reserves, is to continually expand the core
wilderness areas and connecting corridors of wilderness, pushing
ever-outward the buffer zones, and surrounding the entire area
with an ever-expanding "zone of cooperation." The Southern
Appalachian Reserve began with the designation of the 517,000-
acre Great Smoky Mountains National Park as a U.N.
Biosphere Reserve. State Department maps now show the
Reserve to include an area that stretches from Birmingham to
Roanoke, and from Nashville, to Asheville.
Who wants all this land managed according to policies decided
Morgan was asked: if all the comments received from the people
were negative, opposing the management plan, would the plan
be abandoned? His answer: "No, the comments will be taken
and duly noted."
This management plan is required by the U.N. Convention on
Biological Diversity. Why is this plan being implemented in
Alabama, and throughout the United States, when the U.S.
did not ratify the U.N. Convention on Biological Diversity?
The Clinton/Gore administration expected the treaty to be
ratified, with little or no opposition. They were shocked when it
failed, and decided to implement its provisions anyway, through
its administrative policy of "Ecosystem Management."
The people who insist that the U.N. has no control over our land
use policies, including those in Congress, either don't know, or
don't want others to know, how the system works.
The Convention on Biological Diversity was first proposed in
1981 by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature.
The IUCN is an NGO (non-government organization) in
Switzerland whose membership
includes more than 60 major U.S. environmental organizations,
and seven departments of the federal government.
The bureaucrats from these seven federal agencies, and the
leaders of the environmental organizations, worked together
through the IUCN to develop the draft treaty, which was then
presented to the U.N. Conference on Environment and
Development in Rio de Janeiro, where it was adopted in 1992.
Once adopted by the U.N. these same environmental
organizations, and federal agencies, lobby for ratification. The
federal agencies then implement the treaties which they helped
draft. And, these same agencies, award federal grants to the
NGOs to help implement the treaties. Almost all U.S.
environmental policy since the early 1970s has followed this
The Nature Conservancy has been an initiator of at least the last
four U.N. Biosphere Reserves nominated in the U.S., and a
primary promoter of Biosphere expansion everywhere. At the
Birmingham meeting, Rick Morgan was asked if his agency was
in partnership with The Nature Conservancy. His reply: "We are
mutually supportive, we attend their meetings and they attend
The Nature Conservancy and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
are members of the IUCN. Both organizations worked on the
development of the Convention on Biological Diversity, and both
organizations are working together to implement the management
provisions required by the treaty, even though the treaty was not
The long-term aim of the Convention on Biological Diversity is to
convert at least half of the land area to "core wilderness" areas,
connected by corridors of wilderness, all of which is off limits to
human activity. Wilderness areas are to be surrounded by buffer
zones, in which human activity is strictly limited by government,
and managed for "conservation objectives." People are gradually
being moved into "sustainable communities," which are designed
to achieve economic and environmental equity.
The meeting in Birmingham was to satisfy the requirement to
provide for public input to a plan, the outcome of which was
decided years ago. The people were told that the plan affected
only the National Forests in Alabama. Truth is, that the plan
affects all land in and near the National Forests. The federal
government uses the Endangered Species Act, the Invasive Species Initiative, wetland
policies, viewsheds, smart growth, and a host of other policies,
to restrict land use on private property to the point that the land
will ultimately fall into the hands of the government, or an
environmental organization such as The Nature Conservancy.
Alabama is not alone. Virtually every state and every
community has been targeted to undergo a similar
transformation into what Science magazine described in
1993 as "the transformation of America to an archipelago of
human inhabited islands surrounded by natural areas (p.1868)."
The transformation of America was designed by the IUCN in
Switzerland, adopted by the United Nations, and is being
systematically implemented in Alabama, and in every state, by
bureaucrats and environmentalists who have no accountability at
the ballot box. Elected officials, who are accountable at the
ballot box, are allowing the transformation to go forward. They
should be held accountable.
Henry Lamb is the executive vice president of the Environmental
Conservation Organization, and chairman of Sovereignty
Enter Stage Right -- http://www.enterstageright.com