OCR Text |
Show THE ZEPHYR/ APRIL-MAY 2003 NPCA, gets substantial funding from the biggest NPS-concessionaire in America (Delaware North Corporations) is sometimes lost on people, as is the fact that NPCA’s other corporate funding comes from such sources as Georgia Pacific, PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, ADM, The Coca-Cola Company, Anheuser-Busch Companies, Bank of America, etc... SILVER BULLETS From http://www.npcea.org/support_npca/corporate_support.asp The fact that NPCA’s president, Tom Kiernan, served on Bush’s Interior Transition team (along side of PERC’s Terry Anderson---"Mr. Privatization’)is sometimes also long on folks. Fortunately, these facts were NOT lost upon Jeffrey St. Clair who, in January ‘01 posted the message I have appended. Jeff identified what he called "sell out greens” ... though he, unfortunately, failed to similarly identify and fully expose the very most yee Penal Neve ried tee obvious and obviously-evil privatization /anti environmental members of Bush’s team. I suspect Jeff assumed we all knew who those villains were and what they wanted. First on the list is Terry Anderson of Political Economy Research Center. Anyone wanting to learn more about the driving force behind Bush’s privatization of the parks agenda would do well to start at the top of the list with Mr. Anderson. Oo eae Anderson's SCOTT SILVER everything. #1 agenda Putting item America’s is privatization--privatization public lands on a cash-carry of anything basis (and and especially putting recreation on a cash-carry basis through the widespread imposition of userfees) is only his #2 agenda item. His second agenda item relates directly to the first--ie., user fees are simply a tool of privatization. Bush is working feverishly to implement both of Mr. Anderson’s agenda items. But BUSINESSES FOR WILDERNESS...AN OXYMORON? “Business, for Wilderness’ (B4W) is a PEW-funded project of a trade association let’s not forget---those agenda items are shared by Democrats such as Clinton/Gore/Lieberman/ Gephardt etc. and by organizations believed by some to be “environmental watchdogs"! called "Outdoor Industry Association" (OIA) which is itself a member of the wise-use, anti-wilderness, American Recreation Coalition. Rather significantly, B4W’s program Why do we permit corporate-lapdog "watchdog" groups to speak for the grassroots environmental community when these groups have been bought and paid for by the very interests they are supposed to be watchdogging... WHERE IS THE INDIGNATION? director serves as OIA’s representative to the ARC. The outdoor recreation industry is officially supporting more wilderness and better wilderness management... or are they? Business for Wilderness is lending support to various wildland campaigns, but only if those campaigns seem likely to increase access for their customers, who will then buy more recreational items. It appears they may be more than willing to compromise wilderness qualities as long as it results in greater access to outdoor experiences for their customers---but do they really support preservation of WILDERNESS qualities and experiences?? B4W says, “Business for Wilderness will promote the new American land ethic that demands we BALANCE protecting special places and preserving access to recreational opportunities, and do it in a way that enhances economic growth.” (emphasis added)" The following is what B4W says in their currently-featured Mone = oe Nevada Wilderness Project: tp:// wilderness.org/campaigns/ “Campaign of the ae top-quality recreation experiences for human-powered outdoor consumers is a high priority for outdoor industry. Wild and undeveloped lands, and the special outdoor recreation experiences found there, are essential for the health and longevity of the $17.8 billion human-powered outdoor industry. Protection of the wild lands of Nevada is essential to the vitality of the recreation experiences they provide." oe SO ie THE FOLLOWING: tt wilderness.org/campaigns/#know "Know Your Customers! We strongly recommend that you always evaluate the priorities and beliefs of your customers in deciding whether to engage your business in a conservation campaign. For example, mountain biking is not allowed in designated Wilderness areas and many mountain bikers are concerned that new Wilderness designations will permanently close popular trails. Business for Wilderness encourages and applauds collaboration between the mountain biking and conservation communities who continue to work together to protect public lands. For more information on the mountain biking community’s position on Wilderness, visit IMBA.” FINALLY...WHERE IS THE INDIGNATION? From: Lance Olsen Privatization of the national parks will be a subsidized one. The companies will make money not for their capitalist ingenuity but because they know that Bush will pay them with taxpayer dollars. This is more socialism than capitalism. This is use of tax dollars for social Let’s never forget that though fee-demo was born of Ronald Reagan's President’s Commission on Americans Outdoors in ‘88, it was first introduced as legislation by New Mexico’s Pete Dominici in ‘92 and later by Utah’s Jim Hansen in 96. And feedemo was always one of Al Gore’s favorite "reinvention" programs. Let’s not forget that the National Parks Concessions Reform Act of ‘98 was supported by Clinton/Gore and by much of the name-brand environmental community! WHERE IS THE WHY DO WE Fee Demonstration Program passed in ‘96. That was, perhaps the second most offered by Michael Frome at the 2000 Pacific NW Wilderness conference. Frome said for all of us to hear.... "These and other national environmental organizations, I fear, have grown away from the grassroots to mirror the foxes they had been chasing. They seem to me to have turned tame, corporate and compromising, into raging moderates replacing activism with pragmatic politics, and a willingness to settle for paper victories. “It grieves me deeply to read a statement by a Wilderness Society representative calling the new management plan for Yosemite National Park ‘an elegant balance between park protection and visitor use and enjoyment.’ It sickens me when this plan clearly would turn Yosemite Valley into a pricey crowded commercial resort benefiting above all the park concessionaire, the multinational Delaware North, better known for its facilities at race tracks and baseball parks.” Takeover of America’s National Parks could easily become President Bush’s crowning public lands “environmental” achievement. If he accomplishes what he sets out to do, all but a few cynics will believe he saved and restored our nation’s Crown Jewels---the corporate media will, no doubt, ensure that his efforts are given the correct spin as will the corporate greens! If Bush Association (NPCA). NPCA has now, so it appears, had second thoughts about what they allowed to as members of our community, persons or organizations support??? Are we really on the same team working for the same goals??? AND WHY HAVE SOME MANY FORGOTTEN or perhaps ignored the warning important development. The biggest development was the National Parks Concession Reform Act of ‘98 passed during the Clinton era with the support of National Parks Conservation ACCEPT listed on Bush’s transition team? Is there one person on that list who deserves our The Corporate National Park privatization to have occurred in recent years was not the Recreation from within the grassroots environmental WHY DO WE PERMIT corporate-lapdog “watch-dog” groups to speak for the grassroots environmental community when these organizations have been bought and paid for by the very interests they are supposed to be watch-dogging?? experiments, social engineering. All you say is true---and there’s more. The biggest development promoting INDIGNATION community??? accomplishes what he sets out to do, which is nothing less than a public treasure of incalculable value---a treasure we, as Americans, currently own and stand poised to lose. 5 Let’s not allow that to happen. happen. Today NPCA acknowledges that many of their worst fears about that Concession’s legislation have come to fruition. They knew from the start that the bill was flawed---but they saw progress. Only a handful it as a cup half full, as a good start and as a work in of grassroots groups declared that legislation to be horrendous and denounced it without reservation. It’s important for environmental activist to remember that privatization of the National Parks agenda pre-dates Bush and was already moving forward under Clinton/Gore with the cooperation of the largest and most influential environmental "watchdog" organization(s) in the USA. The fact that the biggest such National Park Service watchdog "The Malling of the National Parks", we will have allowed the private sector to escape with organization, PAGEI5 For more Silver Bullets, go to the web site: www.wildwilderness.org |