September 24, 2023

UN Agenda 21 Sustainable Development and Biodiversity

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

By George Dovel

*Editor’s Note* This article is republished on this blog with the permission of the author. Please respect intellectual property ownership. I encourage all readers to subscribe to the printed version of The Outdoors. You can find information in the right side bar of this blog. Thank you.

In 1948 when Wildlife Management Institute President Ira Gabrielson was directing WMI staff studies of the organization, authorities, and programs of wildlife agencies in 31 states and two Canadian provinces, he was also helping UNESCO form the “International Union for the Preservation of Nature” (later IUCN).

Thirteen years later he helped UNESCO form the “World Wildlife Fund” and served at a high level in both organizations for many years. Is it just a coincidence that these and other so-called wildlife conservation groups he belonged to or worked with, have been promoting the UN “Agenda 21 Sustainable Development” and “Biodiversity” agendas since they were presented at the UN Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992.

Several years ago, I attended an SFW membership drive banquet in Boise as an observer and found a small group at one table quietly discussing the UN agendas that were being promoted by Idaho and Utah wildlife managers. SFW Utah founder Don Peay invited one member of this group to address the audience but said it was too early for him to reveal some of what he knew.

Sadly, the fear that divulging how state wildlife agencies promote and follow the UN agenda might subject knowledgeable people to ridicule, apparently stopped them from informing the general public for too many years.

Conley Attacked Citizens for Telling the Truth

In 1996 IDFG Director Jerry Conley resigned and was hired by the Missouri Dept. of Conservation (MDC) as its new Director to implement a “Coordinated Resource Management Plan to sustain our natural environment.” The Plan, introduced by MDC in 1995, also endorsed creation of a “UN Biosphere Reserve” in the lower Ozarks.

Property owners convinced their legislators that the state management plan was identical to the UN Agenda 21 plan for sustainable development, and would allow non-governmental groups to disburse federal funding. Conley denied the citizen allegations but was forced to withdraw the plan on March 19, 1997.

But in a March 27, press release Conley ridiculed citizens’ groups that had expressed concern about the United Nation’s influence on the CRMP as “pure unadulterated bunk.” He also said concerns about shifting governmental authority over to non-elected groups was “absolute hogwash.”

That is exactly the type of character assassination that people who reveal hidden facts get from state F&G agencies. Yet three years later, the Missouri citizens’ fears were confirmed when Congress gave the Assn. of Fish and Wildlife Agencies control of the new State Wildlife Grants.

Congress Is Unwilling to Correct Its Mistakes

A representative from the anti-hunting group, Defenders of Wildlife, was part of the 3-person AFWA committee that established the criteria and determined when they were met in order to receive the SWG matching grant funds. And then Congress went a step further and gave AFWA six million dollars of dedicated P-R and D-J excise taxes each year called Multi-State Conservation Grants, and allowed it to give the money to groups of its own choosing.

The only stipulation was that any group accepting the MSG money must submit a signed statement that it did not spend that specific money opposing regulated hunting, fishing or trapping. However the MSG grants were used for such purposes as funding a survey of mostly non-hunters to see if they supported F&G funding “Watchable Wildlife” and other nongame programs.

I thoroughly documented all of this and a lot more six years ago in the July-Aug 2007 Outdoorsman. But I have no way of knowing how many of the several hundred legislators and several members of Congress I sent it to even read it. Many of them rely on staff to select what they believe is important but they do respond to letters from constituents – if readers take the time to contact them.

Agenda 21 and Biodiversity are Already Implemented

With virtually no voiced opposition, state wildlife agencies continue to implement new UN Heritage Sites and discourage rural dwellers from living on land that may have been in their family for generations. They make sure that each wild big game animal that is harvested costs more then it would to pay someone to breed, raise, feed and process that same animal.

But, in my opinion, the worst crime of all was their convincing Western Governors to put them in charge of implementing the UN Biodiversity Agenda to prevent natural resource development and lock up vast tracts of public land from reasonable use by humans. With all the tools at their disposal if wildlife biologists can’t or won’t stop the decline of game populations that are worth millions of dollars to their state’s citizens, what qualifies them to impose severe restrictions on landowners and the general public to allegedly halt that decline?

Despite the U.S. Senate’s refusal to ratify the Agenda 21 Biodiversity Treaty President Clinton signed two decades ago, it has been implemented with legislation by so many state and local governments now that we have a nightmare to unravel. Isn’t it about time for you to break the silence and discuss this issue with your elected officials who still have the power to undo this madness?