I’m not sure which fight is more difficult. Your’s which appears to me almost entirely political about natural resources. The fight over the science of anthropogenic global warming seems more religious in nature. What’s the greenhouse, an atmosphere in open space?
It actually is a “religious issue” in the cosmic battle (Eph 6:12).
AGW is one of the weapons being used against mankind.
Look at their “solutions”:
More human suffering and reduced standards of living through energy use restrictions.
Subjecting humanity to the tyranny of a world government.
Worldwide population control.
Seriously, this stuff is infernally inspired.
Natural resource issues also have religious overtones. On the Klamath, there is the tribal aspect and the desire to impose Native American notions on resource management. Salmon have a role in their religion and the notion of world renewal. This is also the territory of Earth Firsters, tree sitters, etc. and there is the religious connection that the extreme left has with Deep Ecology. In many respects the Climate folk have the same roots.
Wikepedia describes Deep Ecology as:
“Deep ecology’s core principle is the claim that, like humanity, the living environment as a whole has the same right to live and flourish. Deep ecology describes itself as “deep” because it persists in asking deeper questions concerning “why” and “how” and thus is concerned with the fundamental philosophical questions about the impacts of human life as one part of the ecosphere, rather than with a narrow view of ecology as a branch of biological science, and aims to avoid merely anthropocentric environmentalism, which is concerned with conservation of the environment only for exploitation by and for humans purposes, which excludes the fundamental philosophy of deep ecology. Deep ecology seeks a more holistic view of the world we live in and seeks to apply to life the understanding that separate parts of the ecosystem (including humans) function as a whole.”