The Nature Conservancy is notoriously recognized in the "Cold, Dead Fish Awards in 2008" for their actions contributing to the decline of U.S. fish populations. Indybay.org reports that this year's competition was fierce "as corrupt politicians, agribusiness leaders, corporate polluters and their allies launched a full-scale offensive on the imperiled fish populations of California and the West".
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2009/02/06/18568658.php
Saturday, February 7, 2009
Friday, January 16, 2009
Paniced municipalities blame The Nature Conservancy
Only hours after The Nature Conservancy announced that it is reacting to property tax increases by refusing to pay them, local governments are responding by warning of the coming financial problems within their communities. Municipal governments pay for schools, roads and local services through property taxes. In some municipalities The Nature Conservancy is both the largest landowner and the largest taxpayer. If they don't pay their fair share, the community can be financially devastated.
The Nature Conservancy is the world's largest real estate broker with earned revenues and cash reserves that exceed the amounts of most of the nation's largest for-profit businesses. There is no doubt that The Nature Conservancy could afford to pay its tax bill. Municipal governments do not have the legal authority to force The Nature Conservancy to pay taxes on property it owns so some people are now calling for federal legislation to force The Nature Conservancy to pay.
When private citizens and for-profit companies do not pay their real estate tax bill, the property can be seized and sold at auction in a process known as a "tax sale". This procedure does not currently apply to non-profit corporations like The Nature Conservancy. We support proposed federal legislation that would extend the same procedures to land owned by The Nature Conservancy.
http://www.wiscnews.com/spe/news/432892
The Nature Conservancy is the world's largest real estate broker with earned revenues and cash reserves that exceed the amounts of most of the nation's largest for-profit businesses. There is no doubt that The Nature Conservancy could afford to pay its tax bill. Municipal governments do not have the legal authority to force The Nature Conservancy to pay taxes on property it owns so some people are now calling for federal legislation to force The Nature Conservancy to pay.
When private citizens and for-profit companies do not pay their real estate tax bill, the property can be seized and sold at auction in a process known as a "tax sale". This procedure does not currently apply to non-profit corporations like The Nature Conservancy. We support proposed federal legislation that would extend the same procedures to land owned by The Nature Conservancy.
http://www.wiscnews.com/spe/news/432892
Thursday, January 15, 2009
The Nature Conservancy cuts local WI school revenues
The Nature Conservancy announced that it will stop paying taxes on the land it owns in some rural communities- taxes that local government use to fund schools, roads and other critical local services.
Rural communities that are locates in areas where The nature Conservancy is the largest landowner know that they cannot financially survive without TNCs support, so this could be the beginning of the end of these communities. We suppose that after some years of struggle these communities will deteriorate financially, people will move out, foreclosures will increase, and property values will fall.
But have no fear, once the communities start to look like ghost towns then The Nature Conservancy will be there to buy up the remaining properties from the former residents for at pennies on the former dollar value and then sell this land back to the state's taxpayers at a big profit.
http://www.wiscnews.com/bnr/news/432811
Rural communities that are locates in areas where The nature Conservancy is the largest landowner know that they cannot financially survive without TNCs support, so this could be the beginning of the end of these communities. We suppose that after some years of struggle these communities will deteriorate financially, people will move out, foreclosures will increase, and property values will fall.
But have no fear, once the communities start to look like ghost towns then The Nature Conservancy will be there to buy up the remaining properties from the former residents for at pennies on the former dollar value and then sell this land back to the state's taxpayers at a big profit.
http://www.wiscnews.com/bnr/news/432811
Monday, October 13, 2008
13% of earth now protected by environmentalists
The Nature Conservancy turned heads earlier this year by announcing an ambitious plan to protect 10% of the world's total land. This appeared to be a strikingly ambitious land acquisition endeavor; in fact the largest real estate acquisition proposal in history. But with declining land prices and a worldwide credit crunch, the cash-rich Nature Conservancy has often the only available buyer to farmers and landowners who need to sell. It is not surprising that conservation land deals are moving forward at a record pace this year. Still, no one expected to find such a dramatic change in land conservation totals so quickly.
Now Mark Spalding, senior marine scientist with The Nature Conservancy announces that 13% of the world's land surface is now protected open space in a new book "The World's Protected Areas, examines the relationship between people and protected areas". Mr. Spalding says that the amount of protected land is now equivalent in size to the total amount of the world's croplands. It is not clear whether TNC underestimates the amount of land previously under conservation prior to announcing its goal or whether the land acquisition project has progressed beyond its stated goals.
In the past The Nature Conservancy has relied primarily on a strategy of purchasing open land from private landowners and selling the land back to local governments at higher prices. This strategy vaulted TNC the world's wealthiest organizations. More recently, TNC began promoting a conservation easement program that allows farmers and rural landowners to continue to own and use the land, but prevented future development. Purchasing easements is less expensive than purchasing land and may be better for preserving the stability of rural and agricultural communities.
No comment has be issued by The Nature Conservancy about how this recent announcement of 13% will affect its plans for future land acquisitions. It seems reasonable possible given the current worldwide real estate market that environmental groups like TNC could continue to acquire land at a rapid pace and possible boost the total amount of protected land to 15% to 20% of the earth's surface. It seems unlikely that attainment of the 10% goal would deter TNC from future land acquisitions.
Mr. Spalding points out that our waterways and oceans are not equally protected, with only 1/2 of one percent of the world's oceans under conservation easement. Freshwater protection is even lower. This might represent the next major "growth market" for TNC acquisitions with potential consequences on water users and fishing industries. Noting that this major announcement is made by a marine scientist lends credibility to my suspicion that TNC is gearing for an increase in oceanic and waterway ventures. The fact that Mr. Spalding's announcement was strategically published overseas in The Daily Telegraph rather than in more critical U.S. news sources (due to the current political debate on use of offshore oil reserves) also makes me believe that this book announcement is part of a larger strategic maneuver by TNC.
Now Mark Spalding, senior marine scientist with The Nature Conservancy announces that 13% of the world's land surface is now protected open space in a new book "The World's Protected Areas, examines the relationship between people and protected areas". Mr. Spalding says that the amount of protected land is now equivalent in size to the total amount of the world's croplands. It is not clear whether TNC underestimates the amount of land previously under conservation prior to announcing its goal or whether the land acquisition project has progressed beyond its stated goals.
In the past The Nature Conservancy has relied primarily on a strategy of purchasing open land from private landowners and selling the land back to local governments at higher prices. This strategy vaulted TNC the world's wealthiest organizations. More recently, TNC began promoting a conservation easement program that allows farmers and rural landowners to continue to own and use the land, but prevented future development. Purchasing easements is less expensive than purchasing land and may be better for preserving the stability of rural and agricultural communities.
No comment has be issued by The Nature Conservancy about how this recent announcement of 13% will affect its plans for future land acquisitions. It seems reasonable possible given the current worldwide real estate market that environmental groups like TNC could continue to acquire land at a rapid pace and possible boost the total amount of protected land to 15% to 20% of the earth's surface. It seems unlikely that attainment of the 10% goal would deter TNC from future land acquisitions.
Mr. Spalding points out that our waterways and oceans are not equally protected, with only 1/2 of one percent of the world's oceans under conservation easement. Freshwater protection is even lower. This might represent the next major "growth market" for TNC acquisitions with potential consequences on water users and fishing industries. Noting that this major announcement is made by a marine scientist lends credibility to my suspicion that TNC is gearing for an increase in oceanic and waterway ventures. The fact that Mr. Spalding's announcement was strategically published overseas in The Daily Telegraph rather than in more critical U.S. news sources (due to the current political debate on use of offshore oil reserves) also makes me believe that this book announcement is part of a larger strategic maneuver by TNC.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
conservation at any cost
Coverage of The Nature Conservancy's brokerage of Grandfather Mountain in North Carolina mentions by Triangle Business Journal completely ommitted the financial details of the deal. Taxpayers would likely be shocked at the hefty price they are paying for the brokerage services of The Nature Conservancy. Yet if news reporters like this one at Triangle Busines Journal take their coverage facts solely from the press releases put out by The Nature Conservancy, we are certain to avoid focus on the cost to taxpayers or the huge brokerage payments paid for the deals. Clearly The Nature Conservancy relies on a "conservation at any cost" mentality of Americans today to continue to accrue hundreds of millions of profits (sorry, TNC is "non-profit" and non-taxable so we don't call the money "profits"). The ability to sell to taxpayers and governments makes TNC the world's largest and richest land broker.
We are not saying that this deal is not in the best interest of taxpayers or that the motives are suspect, but we are saying that full disclosure and reporting of the financial aspects of these huge transactions is absolutely essential.
We are not saying that this deal is not in the best interest of taxpayers or that the motives are suspect, but we are saying that full disclosure and reporting of the financial aspects of these huge transactions is absolutely essential.
Tuesday, August 5, 2008
Partnering with Poisoners
The Nature Conservancy takes more heat for its partnerships with the largest and most motorious large corporations including:
"Alcoa — massive polluter and consumer of energy
American Electric Power – coal burning (73%) electricity producer
Bank of America — will invest in anything, regardless of impact
BP – oil giant and greenwasher supreme
Cargill – food giant, GMO user on massive scale
Caterpillar – provides military equipment to repressive regimes"
http://thesietch.org/mysietch/keith/2008/04/19/the-nature-conservancy-partnering-with-poisoners/
"Alcoa — massive polluter and consumer of energy
American Electric Power – coal burning (73%) electricity producer
Bank of America — will invest in anything, regardless of impact
BP – oil giant and greenwasher supreme
Cargill – food giant, GMO user on massive scale
Caterpillar – provides military equipment to repressive regimes"
http://thesietch.org/mysietch/keith/2008/04/19/the-nature-conservancy-partnering-with-poisoners/
Funding for the Environmentalist Industry
Perception v Reality Blog wrote about the funding of the environmental movement:
"In a dazzling display of raw power, foundations with interlocking directorates funded the Nature Conservancy in 1996 to the tune of $203,886,056, or 60 percent of its annual revenue. Initially the foundations banded together under the name Environmental Grantmakers Affinity Group of the Council on Foundations. Under the umbrella of Rockefeller Family Fund 136 foundations formed the Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) in 1987 which has grown to over 200 by the end of the twentieth century. Congressman RichardPombo (R-CA) claimed in 1999 that there are "3,400 full time employees,including leaders who often make $150,000 or more, as well as a small army of outside contractors such as scientists, lobbyists, lawyers, and public affairs specialists" in Washington DC. Citing a 1999 Boston Globe article, Congressman Pombo said: …"foundations invest at least $400 million a year in environmental advocacy and research. The largest environmental grant-maker, Pew Charitable Trusts, gives more than $35 million annually to environmental groups ".....When the additional 2,300 foundations that donate to environmental activism are considered, plus the billion dollars or so contracted to environmental organizations by various agencies of the federal government, the Boston Globe [newspaper] estimates the total funding for environmental activism to be around four billion dollars annually!"
We suspect that the U.S. public is largely unaware of the tremendous size and awesome power of the environmental advocacy industry.
"In a dazzling display of raw power, foundations with interlocking directorates funded the Nature Conservancy in 1996 to the tune of $203,886,056, or 60 percent of its annual revenue. Initially the foundations banded together under the name Environmental Grantmakers Affinity Group of the Council on Foundations. Under the umbrella of Rockefeller Family Fund 136 foundations formed the Environmental Grantmakers Association (EGA) in 1987 which has grown to over 200 by the end of the twentieth century. Congressman RichardPombo (R-CA) claimed in 1999 that there are "3,400 full time employees,including leaders who often make $150,000 or more, as well as a small army of outside contractors such as scientists, lobbyists, lawyers, and public affairs specialists" in Washington DC. Citing a 1999 Boston Globe article, Congressman Pombo said: …"foundations invest at least $400 million a year in environmental advocacy and research. The largest environmental grant-maker, Pew Charitable Trusts, gives more than $35 million annually to environmental groups ".....When the additional 2,300 foundations that donate to environmental activism are considered, plus the billion dollars or so contracted to environmental organizations by various agencies of the federal government, the Boston Globe [newspaper] estimates the total funding for environmental activism to be around four billion dollars annually!"
We suspect that the U.S. public is largely unaware of the tremendous size and awesome power of the environmental advocacy industry.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)