Bush Seeks $100M for Land Conservation

"Conservation is a responsibility of citizenship, and the citizens who live on the land often know more than anyone else about the land and how to conserve it," said Interior Secretary Gale Norton ...

So why is she so adamant in funding the watermelon groups instead of the owners ??

Clang!

I guess a few Senators need money to "conserve" the land the people bought for them with the money they got not to grow food on it.

Thanks for the flag.

I completely agree. An A for his foriegn policies and a d- for his domestic. On domestic issues, the differences betwixt Albore and W can be counted on one hand.

House Republicans last year rejected the administration's proposal to restrict the ability of environmental groups to get plants and animals added to the endangered species list.

I don't know how, but I completely missed this one! Dubya wanted to limit the ability of the environazis to add things to the ESA? And the Republicans Said No??? Excuse me?

Where is Norton adamant re funding the enviro groups?

This is called good stewardship. No one loves the land more the good farmers/ranchers in these critical areas:

The Bush administration will ask Congress to fund a $100 million program to encourage private landowners to take up conservation projects with public land managers and local communities.

"Conservation is a responsibility of citizenship, and the citizens who live on the land often know more than anyone else about the land and how to conserve it," said Interior Secretary Gale Norton, who plans to announce the new program Thursday at Pennsylvania's John Heinz National Wildlife Refuge at Tinicum.

"Our initiatives will empower a new generation of citizen-conservationists," she said.

I can guruantee you that Club Sierra, Andy Kerr, the Oregon Resource Council and other enviralRats will fight this shift 24/7.

In fact this quote from the Club Sierra envirals says it very clearly:

Carl Pope, executive director of the Sierra Club, said the administration should focus first on getting more money for protecting endangered species.

"This sounds like another example of a good but lower-priority program which is being funded at the expense of the basic legal obligations of the Department of the Interior," Pope said.

The enviralRat from Club Sierra, the racist elite enviralist exclusive club, knows that if this goes through two things will happen.

#1. The racist elite enviralists like Club Sierra will lose funding.

#2. They will not be able to use ESA to rurally cleanse farmers, ranchers, timber companies, and other property owners from their Druid Cathedrals. If they get an ESA, we pay the farmers, ranchers, Timber companies, and others to protect the new ESA critter. If they get no funding, and the ranchers and farmers and others get funding on ESA's, they will run away from new ESA's faster than the Talibaniers from our Spec Op guys in Afghanistan.

The Bush administration will ask Congress to fund a $100 million program to encourage private landowners to take up conservation projects with public land managers and local communities.

Bottom line is if the landowner takes the money, the "public land manager" and "local community" will tell him what he can and cannot do with the land. May as well sell it to the watermelons. This smells like the existing land grab technique known as "conservation easements".

Regards

J.R.

#1. Until the tax laws get changed, that won't happen. You and I are paying, through our own taxes and purchases, the support monies provided to the watermelon outfits directly by 'charitable deductions'. We don't need direct payment of taxpayer funds to these groups, which is what this will continue.

#2. Here's a clip that sums up what happens, as noted by NMC EXP, about the 'impact' that those erroneous easements provide:

When Augustine Natale bought farmland in Chester County Pennsylvania
in 1989, he did not recognize the significance of language that had been added 22 years earlier to an older deed to the same land. The language, which had been repeated in the deed just before his own deed, was what is technically known as a "conservation easement." The language said that the land could be used only for farming or nature conservation, and for small buildings related to those uses.
Nine years after he bought the land, this language destroyed his life's dream. In November 1998, the broken hearted, elderly man stood by while a bulldozer tore into his new farmhouse and ripped it down to rubble.

Just because Norton is to the right of James Witt on the environment doesn't place her on the conservative side of the ledger, IMHO. I hope I am wrong; we will all find out in the next few years. Cheers.

This is not a very well written article and implies that Bush is seeking additional funding for these programs. The reality is that Bush is asking Congress to divert a portion of Land and Water Conservation Funds into his market based conservation programs.

Everyone needs to realize that this will be the third consecutive year that LWCF has been 100% appropriated by Congress. When the CARA Compromise of 2000(aka CARA lite) was reached Congress indicated that they would appropriate LWCF 100% for 6 years. This comittment by Congress also applied to those other Titles in CARA: Urban Park Renewal, Indian and Federal Lands improvement, National Historic Sites, etc.

This press release explains it well.

The cite you posted, had the poor guy dying in 1998!

Take a deep breath now, my friend, and I consider you a friend.

Was GW president in 1998? Was Norton secint in 1998 or during this poor guy's life time? What party controlled congress most of the time during this poor guy's life?

Lets help Norton and GW weed out the lynx hair planters and worse and then give them a chance to put in their people. Then we can judge them!

Or the Fire Safe Councils they are setting up in Santa Cruz county.

Or the Fire Safe Councils they are setting up in Santa Cruz county.

Another "public/private partnership" in the name of "conservation"? Whenever you hear those terms, go on high alert.....your liberty and property are at risk.

Regards

J.R.