Our Klamath Basin
Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
In
Depth Profiles of Anti-Consumer Activist Groups forwarded from a KBC visitor September, 2006
I just
came across this site and did not kow if you
were aware of it. It gives background on many
“environmental” organizations and individuals.
It is a real eye-opener. The address is:
http://www.activistcash.com/
I added an
excerpt on the Sierra Club below.
I
especially found the information on the Humane
Society of America interesting. I withdrew
support from this organization for their views
many years ago. Little did I know it is not in
any way associated with our local humane society
shelters. That is something that is so
incidious about these organizations they feel
free to steal the names of respectable
organizations or websites and turn them to their
own uses. I am sure you must have visited http://www.klamathbasincrisis.com
it redirects you to http://www.klamathforestalliance.org/
These
organizations are playing many Americans for
fools. One would think that if the ordinary
citizens were aware of how they are viewed by
these arrogant elitists they would react to stop
supporting these organizations and spread the
word to their friends. Unfortunately most
individuals are too lazy to even investigate the
organizations to which they give their hard
earned cash. Some folks, I am sure, even donate
to organizations that are out to deny them
rights or close the very industries they work
in.
Not Just a Club, But a Law Firm
In
1971, the
Sierra Club Legal Defense Fund was
founded as a nonprofit law firm to serve as a
legal arm to the Club's grassroots operation. In
1998,
its name was changed to
the EarthJustice Legal Defense Fund. (It now
operates simply as "EarthJustice.")
EarthJustice exists to use the courts as a
weapon against businesses and public agencies,
in the hope of forcing them to operate in a
manner acceptable to the Sierra Club.
EarthJustice's aggressive legal posture
regarding everything from livestock farms to
mining doesn’t harm the Club’s reputation as
much as it might, since few members of the
public realize that the two groups work hand in
glove.
Earthjustice sued on behalf of the Sierra Club
38 times in 2003 alone.
Not
even something as critical as military training
can escape the Earthjustice legal machine. In
early 2004, Earthjustice filed suit to stop
Marine training exercises in the Makua Valley
(Hawaii) citing concern for supposed endangered
species habitat. The Army issued a terse
statement in response to Earthjustice's
irresponsible legal maneuver: "To win the war
against terrorism and get ready for future
battles, the U.S. military must be prepared. The
conduct of realistic live-fire training in Makua
is part of that preparation." In 2000,
Earthjustice also sued to stop military training
on the small, uninhabited island of Farallon de
Medinilla, citing concern for migratory birds.
Bashing Ranchers
Just
as the Sierra Club is no friend of farmers, it
has also made enemies of ranchers.
Sierra Club board member Lisa Force once served
as regional coordinator of the Center for
Biological Diversity, which brags of prying
ranchers and their livestock from federal lands.
In 2000 and 2003, the two groups sued the U.S.
Department of the Interior to force ranching
families out of the Mojave National Preserve.
These ranchers actually owned grazing rights to
the preserve; some families had been raising
cattle there for over a century. No matter.
Using the Endangered Species Act and citing the
supposed loss of "endangered tortoise habitat,"
the Club was able to force the ranchers out.
Not
to be outdone by its former parent group,
EarthJustice has sued the federal government to
curb grazing on more than 13 million acres of
public land in New Mexico and Arizona.
Suing for Profit
The Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology
notes that one of Sierra Club executive director
Carl Pope's "major accomplishments" is his
co-authorship of California's infamous
Proposition 65. "Prop 65"
requires any product containing one of several
hundred "known carcinogens" to bear a warning
label -- even if the chemical appears in
concentrations so low that adverse health
effects are essentially impossible.
Prop 65 has a "bounty hunter" provision to
encourage frivolous lawsuits by trial lawyers
looking to cash in on any product containing a
listed "carcinogen" and lacking a warning label.
Prop 65 "violators" can be fined up to $2,500
per day, per violation, and plaintiffs can
collect up to 25 percent of the total take.
Between 2000 and 2002, one California group
called As You Sow (AYS) reaped more than $1.5
million playing the Prop 65 lawsuit game.
|
Page Updated: Thursday May 07, 2009 09:15 AM Pacific
Copyright © klamathbasincrisis.org, 2006, All Rights Reserved