Tucson is the environmental litigation factory capitol of America. Tucson is home to the Center for Biological Diversity which has been spewing out lawsuits over alleged violations of the Endangered Species Act. And the CBD has been raking in millions in legal fees for these lawsuits under the Equal Access to Justice Act (EAJA).
Nationally the CBD has become the poster child of a litigious environmental group...prompting Congress to actually try and reform the Equal Access to Justice Act and cut off the pipeline of taxpayer money to the CBD and other similar environmental litigation factories such as Western Watershed Project and WildEarth Guardians.
CBD engages in what some call the "EAJA racket".
Read full article at InsideTucsonBusiness.com
Showing posts with label CBD. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CBD. Show all posts
Monday, July 11, 2011
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Mexican Wolf’s Enemy #1
Copyright © 2011 CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com
Right now, all over the web and in print, there are words of panic regarding the amendment to the Continuing Resolution (CR) legislation proposed by Representative Steve Pearce (R-NM). Since no formal appropriations bill has been signed for 2011, the CR allows continued funding of federal agencies (Amendment No. 342: "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the continued operation of the Mexican Wolf recovery program").
What has gotten so many people upset about cutting funding for an obviously failed program, particularly in a time when so many more critical programs are facing the axe? Pro-wolf people would like you to think that throwing more money at Mexican wolf recovery will make it work better. Mr. Pearce understands that no amount of money is going to fix what has become one of the most embarrassing of all the attempts to protect "endangered species" in the history of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), particularly when the source of the problem is the program itself.
Let's for the moment put aside the troubling questions that put doubt on the legitimacy of the attempt to "reintroduce" Mexican wolves to begin with (two of the most obvious: Can it be called reintroduction when the animals never used the reintroduction area as native habitat? Can animals that have been bred by humans from a limited genetic pool that may not even be pure be considered a real species?).
The base cause for the failure of the Mexican wolf program has nothing to do with ranchers or right-wing local governments, despite what the pro-wolf supporters like to claim. No, the fundamental problem with the program is actually the fact that it doesn't have any wild animals in it.
But what are Mexican wolves if not wild animals, you ask?
Wild animals that need the protection of the ESA need it because of outside pressures they have no control over; give them back their natural habitat or remove toxins or other outside pressures from their habitat and they proliferate like… well, like wild animals. In fact, healthy species are extraordinarily adaptable - they just need half a chance and they'll thrive. We have plenty of examples of how that works (normal wild animals can thrive even living around humans - the peregrine falcon being a case most people are familiar with). Even such rabid environmentalist groups as the Center for Biological Diversity state that the ESA is one of the most successful environmental laws in U.S. history, with hundreds of endangered species' populations increasing to sustainable, healthy levels.
Of course, the success stories occur when humans back away from messing with the species in question and let them do their thing. The Mexican wolf has no such luck. The 50 or so wolves that the program counts are in the wild, but they are not wild - they are merely feral. This is because humans interfere with every aspect of their lives: The Mexican wolf program chooses which animals will be in the packs and which wolves will mate; pups are stolen from their mothers in the wild so they can be hand-raised in captivity; adults and half-grown wolves are trapped every few years so they can be examined and their collar batteries changed. Of course the program is a failure. It causes physical damage to the wolves (there are three-legged wolves out there because of the trapping, wolves have been run to death by program helicopters) and psychological damage (wolves become habituated to humans; they don't know how to be wild wolves after that) to the animals the program is supposed to be protecting. Every chance a Mexican wolf gets to be wild is thwarted by the intense hands-on management of the program.
The Mexican wolf program is a Mexican wolf's worst enemy.
The very best way to ensure that Mexican wolves thrive in the wild is to prohibit any more interference in their lives by the experts. Let the many hundreds of Mexican wolves in captivity in zoos and refuges around the country live out their lives behind bars in peace. Captivity is all they've known, after all, so they should be as content as any other predator living that way.
And let the Mexican wolves in the wild alone, to survive as best they can. Maybe they'll make it, maybe not. But at least they'll be wild.
www.onestillfree.com
Right now, all over the web and in print, there are words of panic regarding the amendment to the Continuing Resolution (CR) legislation proposed by Representative Steve Pearce (R-NM). Since no formal appropriations bill has been signed for 2011, the CR allows continued funding of federal agencies (Amendment No. 342: "None of the funds made available by this Act may be used for the continued operation of the Mexican Wolf recovery program").What has gotten so many people upset about cutting funding for an obviously failed program, particularly in a time when so many more critical programs are facing the axe? Pro-wolf people would like you to think that throwing more money at Mexican wolf recovery will make it work better. Mr. Pearce understands that no amount of money is going to fix what has become one of the most embarrassing of all the attempts to protect "endangered species" in the history of the Endangered Species Act (ESA), particularly when the source of the problem is the program itself.
Let's for the moment put aside the troubling questions that put doubt on the legitimacy of the attempt to "reintroduce" Mexican wolves to begin with (two of the most obvious: Can it be called reintroduction when the animals never used the reintroduction area as native habitat? Can animals that have been bred by humans from a limited genetic pool that may not even be pure be considered a real species?).
The base cause for the failure of the Mexican wolf program has nothing to do with ranchers or right-wing local governments, despite what the pro-wolf supporters like to claim. No, the fundamental problem with the program is actually the fact that it doesn't have any wild animals in it.
But what are Mexican wolves if not wild animals, you ask?
Wild animals that need the protection of the ESA need it because of outside pressures they have no control over; give them back their natural habitat or remove toxins or other outside pressures from their habitat and they proliferate like… well, like wild animals. In fact, healthy species are extraordinarily adaptable - they just need half a chance and they'll thrive. We have plenty of examples of how that works (normal wild animals can thrive even living around humans - the peregrine falcon being a case most people are familiar with). Even such rabid environmentalist groups as the Center for Biological Diversity state that the ESA is one of the most successful environmental laws in U.S. history, with hundreds of endangered species' populations increasing to sustainable, healthy levels.
Of course, the success stories occur when humans back away from messing with the species in question and let them do their thing. The Mexican wolf has no such luck. The 50 or so wolves that the program counts are in the wild, but they are not wild - they are merely feral. This is because humans interfere with every aspect of their lives: The Mexican wolf program chooses which animals will be in the packs and which wolves will mate; pups are stolen from their mothers in the wild so they can be hand-raised in captivity; adults and half-grown wolves are trapped every few years so they can be examined and their collar batteries changed. Of course the program is a failure. It causes physical damage to the wolves (there are three-legged wolves out there because of the trapping, wolves have been run to death by program helicopters) and psychological damage (wolves become habituated to humans; they don't know how to be wild wolves after that) to the animals the program is supposed to be protecting. Every chance a Mexican wolf gets to be wild is thwarted by the intense hands-on management of the program.
The Mexican wolf program is a Mexican wolf's worst enemy.
The very best way to ensure that Mexican wolves thrive in the wild is to prohibit any more interference in their lives by the experts. Let the many hundreds of Mexican wolves in captivity in zoos and refuges around the country live out their lives behind bars in peace. Captivity is all they've known, after all, so they should be as content as any other predator living that way.
And let the Mexican wolves in the wild alone, to survive as best they can. Maybe they'll make it, maybe not. But at least they'll be wild.
Saturday, October 3, 2009
APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION
AMERICANS FOR PRESERVATION OF WESTERN ENVIRONMENT, INC.
PO BOX 612
RESERVE NM 87830
Ed Wehrheim, Chair
Contact: Ed Wehrheim FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6687
Email: info@amprowest.org
APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION
Group Asks Is Mexican Wolf Really Worth The Cost
RESERVE, N.M. On August 11, 2009, the Tucson-based environmental litigation group, Center For Biological Diversity (CBD), filed a petition with Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
“The petition calls for taking the Mexican wolf off of its current experimental, non-essential” status and putting it on fully endangered status,” said Ed Wehrheim, Chair of Americans for Preservation of Western Environment (APWE), a citizen-based New Mexico non-profit corporation. APWE was formed in 2008 in response to the outrage of New Mexico and Arizona residents and business owners over the callous disregard for the welfare and safety of human beings by the Mexican Wolf Program.
“CBD also wants a critical habitat designation for the wolves,” Wehrheim said. “This means expansion of the existing designated Mexican wolf area, closure of our trails and roads, denying human access, and hunting and grazing restrictions. In other words, our public lands will be closed to the public. ”
The 22 page petition (with additional 10 pages of citations) claims that the Mexican wolf’s historic range is not precisely known, and that wolves can live anywhere that hosts an adequate prey base of ungulates, yet also claims that these wolves occur in an unusual and unique ecological setting.
“The only unusual and unique setting for the Mexican wolves is that this is a low human population area, so CBD figures that the people don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “Americans for Preservation of Western Environment intends to set CBD straight on that issue.”
APWE’s first annual meeting is being held in Reserve, NM on Saturday, October 10, 2009, at 10 a.m. at the Reserve Community Center. APWE’s board will present an accounting of its work on behalf of the people who live in the Mexican wolf recovery area over the past year, and talk about plans for future actions. Everyone is welcome to attend.
“It’s not as if humans weren’t here, as if humans don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “We’re citizens, we have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, just like anyone else. We don’t intend to be run over by environmental litigation groups like CBD.”
"After ten years, more than $400,000 per wolf and untold damage to our communities, they’re trying to blame their own failure with the Mexican wolf program on us, the people who live here in the program area," Wehrheim said.
# # #
PO BOX 612
RESERVE NM 87830
Ed Wehrheim, Chair
Contact: Ed Wehrheim FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Phone 575.533.6687
Email: info@amprowest.org
APWE CHALLENGES MEXICAN WOLF PETITION
Group Asks Is Mexican Wolf Really Worth The Cost
RESERVE, N.M. On August 11, 2009, the Tucson-based environmental litigation group, Center For Biological Diversity (CBD), filed a petition with Department of the Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.
“The petition calls for taking the Mexican wolf off of its current experimental, non-essential” status and putting it on fully endangered status,” said Ed Wehrheim, Chair of Americans for Preservation of Western Environment (APWE), a citizen-based New Mexico non-profit corporation. APWE was formed in 2008 in response to the outrage of New Mexico and Arizona residents and business owners over the callous disregard for the welfare and safety of human beings by the Mexican Wolf Program.
“CBD also wants a critical habitat designation for the wolves,” Wehrheim said. “This means expansion of the existing designated Mexican wolf area, closure of our trails and roads, denying human access, and hunting and grazing restrictions. In other words, our public lands will be closed to the public. ”
The 22 page petition (with additional 10 pages of citations) claims that the Mexican wolf’s historic range is not precisely known, and that wolves can live anywhere that hosts an adequate prey base of ungulates, yet also claims that these wolves occur in an unusual and unique ecological setting.
“The only unusual and unique setting for the Mexican wolves is that this is a low human population area, so CBD figures that the people don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “Americans for Preservation of Western Environment intends to set CBD straight on that issue.”
APWE’s first annual meeting is being held in Reserve, NM on Saturday, October 10, 2009, at 10 a.m. at the Reserve Community Center. APWE’s board will present an accounting of its work on behalf of the people who live in the Mexican wolf recovery area over the past year, and talk about plans for future actions. Everyone is welcome to attend.
“It’s not as if humans weren’t here, as if humans don’t matter,” Wehrheim said. “We’re citizens, we have a right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, just like anyone else. We don’t intend to be run over by environmental litigation groups like CBD.”
"After ten years, more than $400,000 per wolf and untold damage to our communities, they’re trying to blame their own failure with the Mexican wolf program on us, the people who live here in the program area," Wehrheim said.
# # #
Monday, August 31, 2009
Who’s The Terrorist?
copyright (c) 2009 CR Edmunds
www.onestillfree.com
Also published in Glenwood Gazette Sept. 2009 (Gale Moore, pub., Silver City NM)
The other day I got thinking about terrorism. So much of our lives these days are dictated by the fight against terrorism. We’ve all come to accept the invasive tactics of the US Government everywhere around us in the name of security. We even have a branch of government, Homeland Security, that has in a short time secreted its tentacles into everything in order to keep us safe from terrorists. We have to accept wands and pat-downs and X-rays of our person and our belongings in airports and public buildings, we have travel restrictions and passports to visit neighboring friendly ally countries, phone taps, email taps, credit checks, security cameras on street corners, photo-traffic citations on and on, all in the name of public safety.
Of course, doesn’t this all assume terrorism is something external to the US, that it comes from bad guys from other countries who want to render the US helpless?
I got thinking about how a bunch of bad guys that were really organized and very well financed could most effectively pull the US or any country down. (I want to point out to Homeland Security that I read a lot of fiction and much of what I’m writing here is already in print don’t come busting my doors down while telling me free speech doesn’t count because of the Patriot Act). Anyway, it has become clear to me that, logically, terrorism really would be just a first step. A kind of softening up a country for the real blows that will bring it down. The KO, if you will.
What would weaken a country more than flying planes into landmark buildings? Homeland Security and/or the media would have us believe that it would be nuking a big city. But really, would that take down the US? Were a resilient bunch of citizens I think that wiping out LA (for instance) would just make us all really, really mad once we got over being really, really sad (think of how sad and mad - wed be at losing our Famous Faces in such an attack).
No, I think what would really work to weaken a country would be to literally weaken its people. And it seems to me that the traditional ways of weakening a people would be just as effective now as they have been throughout history: Starvation and disease and isolation.
Here’s the thing: People who eat well are healthy and they don’t get sick as easily. So, if you think about it, wouldn’t the smartest thing be, if you were terrorists and wanted to take down the US, to destroy the food supply, thereby make people dependent on bad food so they’ll get sick more easily?
My thinking goes like this: The US agricultural base is being destroyed by factory farming and by more and more restrictions on small farming (NAIS, anyone?). Our forests, the biomass from the thinning of which could probably replace the use of petroleum for transportation fuel in 10 years, are being burned up because of more and more restrictions on hazardous fuels reduction projects and a push to expand wilderness and create roadless areas on public lands.
Where are our environmental groups in this picture? Are they supporting local production of healthy foods, which is so much less destructive to Mother Earth than factory farming? No, they work hard to destroy small farmers and ranchers. Are they supporting forest restoration that would result in reduced carbon pollution of our atmosphere by reduction of forest fires? No, they work hard to suppress the cutting of any trees at all. Are they supporting use of biomass to create an alternative to petroleum based transportation fuels? No, they fight efforts to develop sustainable, renewable energy.
What do environmental groups do to make our planet a healthier place, where humans and all species can thrive?
Well, actually, when you add up what they are doing, the answer to that question is: Nothing. In fact, when you look at the big picture of environmental efforts by the Big Name Environmental Groups (whose board members are mostly attorneys, not scientists), what that picture really looks like is a series of well-coordinated actions that are aimed to weaken the citizens of this country through starvation, disease and isolation.
Its so plausible: Destroy the family farms and ranches in the name of endangered species. Further destroy local production of healthy foods in the name of pure water. Destroy the possibility of alternative energy sources by attacking wind farms and use of biomass from forests. Destroy the forests themselves by not allowing restoration work, thereby encouraging massive wildfires only one of which can in a few days or weeks dump as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as one big city does in a year. (Ironically, the supposedly endangered species' habitats are destroyed as well by wildfire). And when things go down the tubes on our planet because of the success of the above actions, blame it on small farmers and ranchers and you and me, average Joe and Jane US citizen, and file even more lawsuits in the name of environmentalism, because, don’t you know, they’ve got to save the planet.
And then… TKO?
www.onestillfree.com
Also published in Glenwood Gazette Sept. 2009 (Gale Moore, pub., Silver City NM)
The other day I got thinking about terrorism. So much of our lives these days are dictated by the fight against terrorism. We’ve all come to accept the invasive tactics of the US Government everywhere around us in the name of security. We even have a branch of government, Homeland Security, that has in a short time secreted its tentacles into everything in order to keep us safe from terrorists. We have to accept wands and pat-downs and X-rays of our person and our belongings in airports and public buildings, we have travel restrictions and passports to visit neighboring friendly ally countries, phone taps, email taps, credit checks, security cameras on street corners, photo-traffic citations on and on, all in the name of public safety.
Of course, doesn’t this all assume terrorism is something external to the US, that it comes from bad guys from other countries who want to render the US helpless?
I got thinking about how a bunch of bad guys that were really organized and very well financed could most effectively pull the US or any country down. (I want to point out to Homeland Security that I read a lot of fiction and much of what I’m writing here is already in print don’t come busting my doors down while telling me free speech doesn’t count because of the Patriot Act). Anyway, it has become clear to me that, logically, terrorism really would be just a first step. A kind of softening up a country for the real blows that will bring it down. The KO, if you will.
What would weaken a country more than flying planes into landmark buildings? Homeland Security and/or the media would have us believe that it would be nuking a big city. But really, would that take down the US? Were a resilient bunch of citizens I think that wiping out LA (for instance) would just make us all really, really mad once we got over being really, really sad (think of how sad and mad - wed be at losing our Famous Faces in such an attack).
No, I think what would really work to weaken a country would be to literally weaken its people. And it seems to me that the traditional ways of weakening a people would be just as effective now as they have been throughout history: Starvation and disease and isolation.
Here’s the thing: People who eat well are healthy and they don’t get sick as easily. So, if you think about it, wouldn’t the smartest thing be, if you were terrorists and wanted to take down the US, to destroy the food supply, thereby make people dependent on bad food so they’ll get sick more easily?
My thinking goes like this: The US agricultural base is being destroyed by factory farming and by more and more restrictions on small farming (NAIS, anyone?). Our forests, the biomass from the thinning of which could probably replace the use of petroleum for transportation fuel in 10 years, are being burned up because of more and more restrictions on hazardous fuels reduction projects and a push to expand wilderness and create roadless areas on public lands.
Where are our environmental groups in this picture? Are they supporting local production of healthy foods, which is so much less destructive to Mother Earth than factory farming? No, they work hard to destroy small farmers and ranchers. Are they supporting forest restoration that would result in reduced carbon pollution of our atmosphere by reduction of forest fires? No, they work hard to suppress the cutting of any trees at all. Are they supporting use of biomass to create an alternative to petroleum based transportation fuels? No, they fight efforts to develop sustainable, renewable energy.
What do environmental groups do to make our planet a healthier place, where humans and all species can thrive?
Well, actually, when you add up what they are doing, the answer to that question is: Nothing. In fact, when you look at the big picture of environmental efforts by the Big Name Environmental Groups (whose board members are mostly attorneys, not scientists), what that picture really looks like is a series of well-coordinated actions that are aimed to weaken the citizens of this country through starvation, disease and isolation.
Its so plausible: Destroy the family farms and ranches in the name of endangered species. Further destroy local production of healthy foods in the name of pure water. Destroy the possibility of alternative energy sources by attacking wind farms and use of biomass from forests. Destroy the forests themselves by not allowing restoration work, thereby encouraging massive wildfires only one of which can in a few days or weeks dump as much greenhouse gas into the atmosphere as one big city does in a year. (Ironically, the supposedly endangered species' habitats are destroyed as well by wildfire). And when things go down the tubes on our planet because of the success of the above actions, blame it on small farmers and ranchers and you and me, average Joe and Jane US citizen, and file even more lawsuits in the name of environmentalism, because, don’t you know, they’ve got to save the planet.
And then… TKO?
Sunday, May 31, 2009
Lawsuits Are Not Environmentalism
The truth about Center for Biological Diversity
Copyright © 2009 CR Edmunds
When the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) asks for donations, most people likely think they’re contributing to projects that will improve the environment. But it just ain’t so. CBD has become a money-making litigation machine. They aren’t out there with shovels and seeds, working on the environment, they’re paying lawyers, sneaking onto private property to spy on conditions and – if they don’t find the conditions sufficiently bad to claim the property owner is ruining the environment- they’re publishing phony photos of "environmental devastation". No actual environmental work going on that CBD is doing - just about everything they do these days is rather to support litigation.
Yeah, it may seem like CBD’s litigation is for the good of endangered plants and animals, but when you start looking at the results of what they do you start noticing the real cost to humans and environment alike. This is because CBD activities, particularly litigation, are not environment-driven, but rather CBD agenda-driven. They’re not shy about their plans to evict private property owners from their own land, to create Gardens of Eden in their Sky Islands. No matter that some of the species in the areas being touted as endangered aren’t endangered (or never even lived in the place – look at the weird Mexican wolf situation). No matter that so much of the litigation results in grinding the US Constitution into the dirt. When they win note that someone else always has to bear the burden of environmentalism – never CBD. No, CBD lawyers and CBD personnel are all living nice, safe, well-funded lives, while the rest of us pay and pay and pay – either by losing property, losing our rights, or by being scammed for the donations CBD says it needs to “protect the environment”. All that money, effort, suffering by property owners – and none of it for actual environmental work, just lawsuits. Paperwork, that’s all it is – but it’s not solving problems, it’s causing more.
Humans are a legitimate species on this planet, too – a fact that CBD and other radical, terrorist environmental groups ignore. None of their projects, their agendas or their litigation truly take into account the human right to live and thrive on this planet.
God created the Garden of Eden to have people in it. It was Satan who caused people to have to leave that Garden. Kinda makes you think about CBD, doesn’t it?
---
Here’s a list of articles about recent litigation by CBD. I might add to it over time – I can only look at this information for so long before it makes me sick. Not that the critters involved don’t need protecting, but CBD is doing nothing for them, only filing lawsuits. Lawsuits are not environmentalism!
Loggerhead turtles lawsuit with Oceana Inc. and Turtle Island Restoration Environmental Law360 - http://environmental.law360.com/
Two ocean species of turtles lawsuit with Oceana and the Turtle Island Restoration Network Twilight Earth - http://www.twilightearth.com/
Ocean acidification impacts lawsuit Switchboard, from NRDC - http://switchboard.nrdc.org/
Desert Lizard lawsuit http://www.yumasun.com/news/lizard-50356-habitat-yuma.html
Global warming impacts lawsuit against six (6) federal agencies. Global warming is a THEORY, people! http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/global-warming-01-15-2009.html
Coal-Fired Power Plants lawsuit www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/05/13-4
Improper jaguar killing lawsuit www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/jaguar-05-12-2009.html
Stop beach driving lawsuit www.rzrforums.net/public-lands-advocacy/11153-center-biological-diversity-lawsuit-oceano-dunes.html
Desert tortoise lawsuit with the Sierra Club, and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility www.globalclimatelaw.com/tags/center-for-biological-diversit/
Force the DOI consider listing the American pika as threatened or endangered lawsuit http://greenoptions.com/tag/center-for-biological-diversity
Snowy Plover http://bit.ly/pJWb1
California red-legged frogs and San Francisco garter snakes; notice of intent to sue. http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/5035
Nevada water project lawsuit. http://www.lvrj.com/news/39421007.html
Protect wildlife and roadless areas in CA, with 6 other environmental groups. http://tinyurl.com/nodgau
Block thinning of trees in AZ lawsuit (note that because the thinning was stopped, the result was one of the largest forest fires in the US) http://www.forphoto.com/issues_info/local/thinning_lawsuit.php
North Fork Eel River lawsuit http://www.wildcalifornia.org/pressreleases/number-20
Raptor habitat (as compensation for wind turbine kills) lawsuit https://www.earthislandprojects.org/news/new_news.cfm?newsID=649
Bighorns lawsuit http://www.mydesert.com/article/20090325/NEWS01/903250314/1144/news01
Ely NV travel management appeal http://tinyurl.com/ccwdop
Freshwater turtle harvest lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/naorbl
Not enough land designated “critical habitat” lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/n4th92
Enough! I can’t stand to look at more of these.
Copyright © 2009 CR Edmunds
When the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) asks for donations, most people likely think they’re contributing to projects that will improve the environment. But it just ain’t so. CBD has become a money-making litigation machine. They aren’t out there with shovels and seeds, working on the environment, they’re paying lawyers, sneaking onto private property to spy on conditions and – if they don’t find the conditions sufficiently bad to claim the property owner is ruining the environment- they’re publishing phony photos of "environmental devastation". No actual environmental work going on that CBD is doing - just about everything they do these days is rather to support litigation.
Yeah, it may seem like CBD’s litigation is for the good of endangered plants and animals, but when you start looking at the results of what they do you start noticing the real cost to humans and environment alike. This is because CBD activities, particularly litigation, are not environment-driven, but rather CBD agenda-driven. They’re not shy about their plans to evict private property owners from their own land, to create Gardens of Eden in their Sky Islands. No matter that some of the species in the areas being touted as endangered aren’t endangered (or never even lived in the place – look at the weird Mexican wolf situation). No matter that so much of the litigation results in grinding the US Constitution into the dirt. When they win note that someone else always has to bear the burden of environmentalism – never CBD. No, CBD lawyers and CBD personnel are all living nice, safe, well-funded lives, while the rest of us pay and pay and pay – either by losing property, losing our rights, or by being scammed for the donations CBD says it needs to “protect the environment”. All that money, effort, suffering by property owners – and none of it for actual environmental work, just lawsuits. Paperwork, that’s all it is – but it’s not solving problems, it’s causing more.
Humans are a legitimate species on this planet, too – a fact that CBD and other radical, terrorist environmental groups ignore. None of their projects, their agendas or their litigation truly take into account the human right to live and thrive on this planet.
God created the Garden of Eden to have people in it. It was Satan who caused people to have to leave that Garden. Kinda makes you think about CBD, doesn’t it?
---
Here’s a list of articles about recent litigation by CBD. I might add to it over time – I can only look at this information for so long before it makes me sick. Not that the critters involved don’t need protecting, but CBD is doing nothing for them, only filing lawsuits. Lawsuits are not environmentalism!
Loggerhead turtles lawsuit with Oceana Inc. and Turtle Island Restoration Environmental Law360 - http://environmental.law360.com/
Two ocean species of turtles lawsuit with Oceana and the Turtle Island Restoration Network Twilight Earth - http://www.twilightearth.com/
Ocean acidification impacts lawsuit Switchboard, from NRDC - http://switchboard.nrdc.org/
Desert Lizard lawsuit http://www.yumasun.com/news/lizard-50356-habitat-yuma.html
Global warming impacts lawsuit against six (6) federal agencies. Global warming is a THEORY, people! http://www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/global-warming-01-15-2009.html
Coal-Fired Power Plants lawsuit www.commondreams.org/newswire/2009/05/13-4
Improper jaguar killing lawsuit www.biologicaldiversity.org/news/press_releases/2009/jaguar-05-12-2009.html
Stop beach driving lawsuit www.rzrforums.net/public-lands-advocacy/11153-center-biological-diversity-lawsuit-oceano-dunes.html
Desert tortoise lawsuit with the Sierra Club, and the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility www.globalclimatelaw.com/tags/center-for-biological-diversit/
Force the DOI consider listing the American pika as threatened or endangered lawsuit http://greenoptions.com/tag/center-for-biological-diversity
Snowy Plover http://bit.ly/pJWb1
California red-legged frogs and San Francisco garter snakes; notice of intent to sue. http://www.ewire.com/display.cfm/Wire_ID/5035
Nevada water project lawsuit. http://www.lvrj.com/news/39421007.html
Protect wildlife and roadless areas in CA, with 6 other environmental groups. http://tinyurl.com/nodgau
Block thinning of trees in AZ lawsuit (note that because the thinning was stopped, the result was one of the largest forest fires in the US) http://www.forphoto.com/issues_info/local/thinning_lawsuit.php
North Fork Eel River lawsuit http://www.wildcalifornia.org/pressreleases/number-20
Raptor habitat (as compensation for wind turbine kills) lawsuit https://www.earthislandprojects.org/news/new_news.cfm?newsID=649
Bighorns lawsuit http://www.mydesert.com/article/20090325/NEWS01/903250314/1144/news01
Ely NV travel management appeal http://tinyurl.com/ccwdop
Freshwater turtle harvest lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/naorbl
Not enough land designated “critical habitat” lawsuit http://tinyurl.com/n4th92
Enough! I can’t stand to look at more of these.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
