Our Klamath Basin Water Crisis
Upholding rural Americans' rights to grow food,
own property, and caretake our wildlife and natural resources.
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.
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