All Episodes
Previous Next
Oct. 12, 2023 - Epoch Times
22:15
Secret ‘Land Grab’ Plan Being Implemented in US
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Agenda 21 is the United Nations 100-year-long master plan for humanity, the agenda for the 21st century.
And this 100-year-long agenda is then broken down into shorter 15-year-long plans.
The first 15-year plan was called Agenda 2015, or the Millennium Development Goals.
And then currently, right now, we are living in the second 15-year plan of Agenda 21, the so-called Agenda 2030, which, according to UN documents, is the agenda to, quote, transform our world for sustainable development.
Now, for the past 10 or so odd years, this broad agenda from the United Nations has been trickling down and getting implemented as concrete policies in countries around the whole world.
Because what happens is that you have these different organizations, these environmental groups, and these different coalitions, they all go back to their respective countries, and in order to save the planet, they take advantage of the unique political and the unique legal situation in their home countries to get Agenda 2030 implemented at the local level.
And so, for instance, right here in America, one of the biggest manifestations of this United Nations Agenda 2030 is the Biden administration's Corollary Agenda 30 by 30.
This is a plan by the U.S. government to take 30% of America's land completely out of production by the year 2030.
This would mean that 30% of the land in this country would be placed into federal conservation and it would essentially be idled.
There would be no grazing, no farming, no drilling, no fishing, no developing, basically just no human activity at all.
And while the current aim is to take 30% of America's land by the year 2030, once that's actually achieved, the next step will be to take 50% of America's land by the year 2050, the 50 by 50 plan.
It's sort of a rolling project with the ultimate goal being for the federal government to own the majority of the land in America and to make that land inaccessible to the people, in order to, of course, save the planet.
Now, the U.S. federal government is achieving Agenda 30 by 30 in a myriad of different ways.
They use the Endangered Species Act.
They use the Waters of the U.S. Act.
They have the President invoke the Antiquities Act in order to establish national monuments.
They use federal money to convince private landowners to put conservation easements on their land.
And so while it's technically still private land, you're not allowed to develop it.
And then, besides all these different methods, well, there's now a new approach that the federal government is taking in order to push this agenda through.
Hidden behind even a year of bureaucratic red tape, the BLM, which is the Bureau of Land Management, they are pushing through a backdoor rules change which would effectively sell out our public land to the highest bidder in order to achieve the goals of the 30 by 30 agenda.
Essentially, They are working to create a system wherein these extremely well-funded environmental groups will be able to come in and purchase what would be called conservation leases on otherwise public land.
And in so doing, these different environmental groups will be able to restrict all other uses on that so-called public land, meaning that there will be no more recreation, no more mining, grazing, fishing, hunting, or anything of that sort.
And so, in order to make sense of how the federal government is going about this, while I was down in Texas, I took the opportunity to sit down and speak with Ms.
Simone Griffin.
She is the policy director over at an organization called the Blue Ribbon Coalition, which aims to fight back against these different federal land grabs.
And she broke down for us exactly what's happening, what it means for the common citizens of this country like you and I, as well as what can actually be done about it.
And take a listen.
Simone, thank you so much for joining us.
Thanks for having me.
So, you know, this is the Stop 30 by 30 Summit.
And we were talking, you know, last night, and one of the things I realized after speaking with you is that it's not just about taking the physical land, right?
It's sometimes about Controlling what you can and cannot do on land that the government doesn't necessarily own, but they control.
Can you discuss, tell the audience about some of the attacks on grazing that public lands are facing?
Yeah, and we're facing a lot of attacks.
So in the West, there's a lot of public lands, whether it's managed by the National Park Service, Forest Service, BLM, and through the Taylor Grazing Act, Grazing allotments have been issued on these public lands.
And so, even though the BLM, for example, the Bureau of Land Management, they are mandated to manage these lands for multiple use and to allow these allotments And these grazing allotments, they're private property.
I mean, even though they don't own the actual land, they do own the allotment.
And they've purchased it, so it is a private property, right, that they have to graze on their allotments.
And what we're seeing is these land agencies, they're enacting policies and management decisions that are greatly going to reduce and have reduced grazing and access on public lands.
For example, Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument was designated over 20 years ago, but we've seen the reductions through that management decision of cattle and sheep grazing over the years.
Just right now, actually, they're undergoing NEPA process to We're going to re-evaluate the management plan and essentially we're going to see lots of proposals within this management plan that are going to reduce grazing and the allotments.
So they're proposing to cut the area and it's 1.9 million acres just to this one national monument.
And they're proposing to cut the acres available for grazing in half, and the AUMs, basically the amount of cattle that's allowed to be on each allotment, they're going to cut that in half.
So these ranchers that have been there for eight, nine generations, It's their history.
It's their family culture.
That's just getting slashed out from underneath them.
And it's hurting our economy.
It's hurting education.
I mean, it's such a ripple effect of how it affects these small communities.
And that's just one plan and one national monument.
And we're seeing More national monuments designated.
We're seeing management plans all over the western United States that are hurting these ranchers that have been doing it and have been the true stewards of the land for generations.
I mean, you mentioned a few things, but I can also imagine the investment you put in, assuming you have access to this public land.
Let me ask you, why are they doing this?
What's the, at the very least, surface level reason that they're taking away this land from the U.S.? So they want wilderness.
They want the lands to be designated as wilderness.
And even though the land is already protected by dozens of laws, such as the Endangered Species Act and the Water Act, and there's so many laws already protecting the land, and then they create a national monument to protect it even more so, so they claim.
But eventually they want it to be wilderness, and they don't want any use.
They don't want roads.
They don't want access.
And so if they can start cutting down grazing and access in general, Then they can hopefully get it designated by Congress to be wilderness, and then nobody will be able to touch it forever.
And that land will be permanently locked up.
And 30 by 30, they say they want these lands protected.
They never define how they want it protected, because you could argue that 30% of lands and water are already protected through the various laws and executive orders and regulations that we already have.
But they want to stake it a step further.
They want it protected by wilderness, which is designated through Congress.
So let me back up and try to tell you what I understand.
You said, because I'm sure a lot of people in the audience who maybe live in cities, they're not necessarily, you know, dialed in with what's happening in the rural countryside.
So you have public lands that are owned by the federal government, right?
Or a state government, or is it only the federal government?
So, for example, in the county that I live in, we only have 3% private land in the entire county.
91% of the county is federally owned, and then about 5% to 6% is state owned.
So you do have some lands that are owned by the state, but the majority is owned by the federal government.
Okay.
So then, let's say you have a ranch, so you obviously need your cattle to go graze somewhere to eat the grass.
So you would buy an allotment, and an allotment is sort of like saying it's a permission slip for you to be able to graze in this particular area, correct?
So when you buy that allotment, that's sort of your area.
Like another farmer can't also say, well, I also get this piece of land.
Is that correct?
Yes, that is their property.
They own that allotment.
And you can sell it.
You can exchange it.
I mean, it is an actual right, and it's an asset that you now own.
And so something that is happening when a president comes in and uses the Antiquities Act to designate millions of acres of land as a national monument, then these ranchers No longer have this private property to graze on.
So then they buy these allotments, like you said, to graze cattle on.
And what we're seeing is special interest groups.
They're coming in and they're trying to buy these allotments up from the longtime ranchers.
Because then once they buy the allotment, they have no intentions of ever putting cattle on the allotment.
And then they want to have the allotments permanently retired to completely remove cattle from ever being on that piece of property ever again.
Completely diminishing the history of the western United States.
And then once there's no cattle, once there's no improvements in fences and roads, then they can designate it as wilderness.
So back to that earlier example.
So let's say I'm a cattle rancher.
I buy this allotment on the public land near my ranch so I can bring my herd over there to graze.
The government then changes the rules.
Is it such that the allotment is no longer allowed to use the allotment?
Or is it like a percentage thing?
Like how does it actually work in practice?
So it's through different management plans.
So, for example, all public lands, they have to have a resource management plan done.
Or the Forest Service, they have a forest management plan.
And that's the overarching plan that dictates How it's going to be ran.
And it addresses things such as mining, such as recreation roads.
I mean, there's a lot of things that go into this huge plan that governs the land for like 20, 30 years at times.
And so what they'll do is they'll create areas that they say are Not permissible for grazing and even if your allotment falls in that area then it's going to be removed and you will no longer be able to have your cattle go in that area and sometimes these areas encompass an entire allotment and can the government legally do this?
I don't believe so.
I believe it's unconstitutional.
I believe there's litigation that will need to happen if they truly try and do this.
But instead of just completely closing it off their allotments, how they're doing it is they're reducing AUMs that they're allowed to have.
So they're reducing the number of cattle that they're allowed to have.
They're making it difficult for the ranchers and the grazers to do any type of improvement projects.
So they're putting all this red tape up to build fence or to get water to their cattle.
So there's these roundabout ways that they're frustrating the grazing operation rather than just...
Because these ranchers, they have the rights.
They're protected by the Taylor Grazing Act that protects their allotments.
They can't just come in and completely take it unless Congress does that.
And so there's these roundabout ways that they're using...
To really restrict their cattle and grazing operations.
That's how they do it.
Because that was my question.
Would they reimburse the person?
But I guess they can't take it, but they just make it almost impossible to operate.
Right.
They make it unprofitable for them.
And so we have seen a decline in grazing operations.
And they frustrate these long-time stewards of the land.
They look to a new profession at some point, and it's really sad.
You know, yesterday you told me that this is very similar to what's happening in the Netherlands, much more than what we discussed before.
It sounds like it, because if you have a property next to a designated nature preserve, then you are actually screwed, right?
Yes, yeah.
What's the trend?
What percentage of public land is being right now reformatted and is having this red tape regulation put in?
Or would it be a blanket across the country?
So it's not blanket, but we are seeing a lot of areas, Bureau of Land Management, Forest Service, we're seeing a lot of these big planning processes come through with the current administration.
And so they're looking to get these management plans pushed through Within the next few years to restrict access and grazing.
And so, for example, in southern Utah, there's a plan for about 2 million acres.
There's another one I'm expecting to come out any day that's another 2 million acres.
There's one in southern Wyoming currently that's 3.7 million acres that they're looking to cut grazing in half as well.
And so they come piece by piece depending on the area, but we're seeing an onslaught of them right now that they're trying to reduce these.
And that's coming because of the administration.
It's coming because these environmental groups are really pushing for it.
The environmental groups, they hate cattle.
They call ranchers welfare ranchers.
They think they're stealing from the American people.
They think they're the main cause of climate change.
There's even, in southern Utah, there was a leader of one of these environmental groups that she was actually caught closing a private fence on an allotment that was blocking cattle from getting to their water source.
Killing cattle.
And so there's just this onslaught of ranchers are horrible and cows are hurting the environment when it's the complete opposite.
But we are facing an onslaught right now from this push of updating management plans that dictate how they manage the lands and what is allowed with grazing.
That's actually amazing in a certain sense.
Without any new pieces of legislation, they're just using rules and regulations to just put onerous restrictions on farmers and ranchers as well.
But is it really just limited to ranchers?
Because I can imagine like...
If you just live in that area and you want to use the land recreationally, if they're trying to rewild it, will that also be affected?
Yeah, so like I said, this plan affects lots of different things, and then they'll go into smaller planning after.
So this is the resource management plan in this example I'm talking about.
But then after, they'll have travel management where they look at each additional roads.
But just in this resource management plan that we're seeing in Grand Staircase Escalante National Monument, they're proposing to restrict gathering wood.
Most of the locals heat their homes through wood-burning stoves.
So they're not going to be able to gather wood.
You can't go and camp and have a fire in this 1.9 million acres.
You can't go out and do recreational target shooting.
They're closing OHV areas that have been open for generations that people Recreate on, and it helps the local tourism economy that they have pushed on the locals because they've closed so many other industries through the creation of the monument.
And so, yeah, it affects anybody who wants to use these lands, whether you're just camping, whether you're grazing, whether you're a mining claim owner.
They want to restrict everybody.
They don't want people on the land anymore.
They want everybody off of it, and it's devastating.
Well, what's crazy from what you're saying is that, okay, they want this or they want that, but they actually have a mechanism to get that done, and they're using that mechanism.
What's the timetable here?
When are some of these effects going to go, well, regulations going to go into effect?
So the planning process for these management plans takes several years because they have to go through the National Environmental Policy Act.
And so we saw the first stage a year ago and we're in the second stage.
For it to actually be implemented will take probably another year or two, but you never know.
They're trying to ram these things through, so it could come up in about six months.
But there's no legal timeline that's given, and that's what makes NEPA so difficult, is it's not standard on how long this process takes.
So I imagine, though, for a lot of them, because they're greatly restricting access for all users and they're Limiting multiple use.
There'll be litigation with these management plans and so we'll see what happens.
When you say NEPA, what does that stand for?
So the National Environmental Policy Act and it's the law that requires agencies and anything that's going to affect the environment to go through this NEPA process where they have to analyze the effects on the ecosystem and on the environment of any potential project that's going to happen with federal agencies.
Okay, so now that you outline, I think, the problem very well, is there any solution?
Let's say somebody's watching this, they live in the area, they wake up to the fact that this is happening.
What can people do?
So they can engage through NEPA. So that's one part of NEPA is it requires public comments.
So the public can submit comments Saying if they support the proposals or not and so that's one way to get engaged and when you do that you create legal standing.
The environmental groups have been able to push their agenda to close off ranching and grazing and multiple use because they litigate and so We need to submit public comments and be prepared to litigate decisions that restrict use.
The other things that we're starting to see is legislation that actually defunds these planning processes.
So it would require Congress to actually give approval for these agencies to move forward with spending money on the planning process, which would help a lot as well.
So that would be like a proposed piece of legislation at the federal level?
Yes, and there is legislation proposed for certain of these planning processes, but it would be great if all the planning processes had the same legislation that requires Congress to...
Now, if you'd like to dig deeper into the subject, to dig deeper into Agenda 2030, its specific manifestations, as well as how it appears to really be putting farmers around the whole world out of business, well, my team and I spend the better part of the last year researching, traveling the globe, and putting together a phenomenal research project in the form of a documentary called No Farmers, No Food.
Here's a trailer.
Food prices are skyrocketing around the world.
And if you listen to world leaders, they'll tell you it's due to climate change.
Climate change is the biggest threat for the human beings.
And their solution might surprise you.
There are 1,900 edible insect species on the planet.
The European Commission has officially declared mealworms to be food.
Yes, it's the future of food.
The people in charge have determined that by switching our diets to crickets, ants, and mealworms, we'll be able to stop temperatures from rising, lower the price of food, and possibly to even save the planet.
It's never about innovation, it's always about getting rid of farmers.
Agenda 21 was meant to be the agenda for the 21st century.
Some of the goals sound nice, ending hunger.
Who could possibly be against ending hunger?
It requires total power from the state.
I think it's a scam.
A lot of this came about in the early 70s, the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, which were good things, but it's been abused from what the original tent is.
No, maybe not this one.
No, not a farm anymore.
No, there's also not a farm anymore.
So all these people shut down because of the government policies?
Yeah.
I'm the sixth generation of farmers.
Yeah, I'm the fourth generation.
How many years have they owned this pile of land?
Forty years.
I think we're the last generation.
They're shutting down the small and middle-sized family-run farms.
We either own property or we are property.
I don't think we can trust the government anymore because they want the land.
And our founding fathers understood that the land would be distributed among the people so they could always control their government.
Right now things have tripled as far as cost.
I think you're going to see across the board higher food prices.
Has anybody been held accountable for screwing up?
No.
As every communist tyrant in the last hundred years has understood, if you control the food, you control the people.
Everything is falling apart.
There's a shortage of food.
We're heading for a world food crisis as we hear all the time.
Do you see any hope for the situation?
We have to continue fighting for it.
No farmers, no food.
They will know it.
If you'd like to check out that awesome documentary in its glorious entirety, you can find it over on Epic TV, our no-censorship video platform.
I'll throw a link to it.
It'll be right there at the top of the description box below.
I hope you click on it, and I hope you check it out.
And then, until next time, I'm your host, Roman from the Epic Times.
▲
Export Selection