The current president has been hell bent on forcing America into a renewable energy waste bin, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is more than happy to participate. But the rush is on because the solar energy plan must be accomplished by 2035.
BLM land has been littered with solar panels since 2012. Because of this current president and his plan to "transition" America to renewable energy, the BLM has been working on updating its 2012 Solar Energy Development plan that involved six states. Now, along with four other states, Idaho is getting sucked into the mix. All of the documents pertaining to this agenda, which BLM has obviously been working on for months, can be found here. Graciously, the BLM has offered the opportunity to go through thousands of pages of information to understand how Idaho will be impacted along with the other four added states. Idahoans have been blessed by the BLM with the opportunity to "Provide input on the 5 action alternatives – including elements from all alternatives to be adopted in a Final Plan" by April 18th. There doesn't appear to be a "no action" alternative. Aside from the gobbledygook in all of the documents, the amount of reading required to go through all of the documents far exceeds what is reasonable. It is insulting how the BLM presents this for input. Cliff notes on the alternatives can be found here, and overall updates here, The Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement can be found here, all 538 pages. For those who really have a desire to go to sleep, there is the agonizing redundancy on Areas of Special Concern with only 760 pages, where one can wade through page after page to find something specific to Idaho. These are the proposed alternative areas to litter with solar panels in Idaho. All of the documents can be found on the National NEPA Register page, Input can be provided via the green Participate Now buttons, or on this page. Be patient, it takes a minute to load. It is bad enough the way in which the BLM abuses its power by tossing this out to Idahoans with no chance of receiving adequate input. Governor Little is no better, his cronies and corporate sponsors at the Western Governors Association (WGA) have supported this endeavor for years. Did he let Idahoans know? It is only going to get worse with the WGA decarbonization agenda. Since the BLM obviously doesn't have the skill set to place solar panels, just only providing the land, which corporation will they choose to cozy up to, and financially benefit from, to get the job done? Perhaps one it is already friends with? As a signatory to the International Solar Alliance (ISA) "to accelerate global adoption of solar energy", the United States receives support from the ISA "by helping to expedite solar deployment." Sounds like a military exercise. Yes, the U.S. is eager to be part of "Green Grids Initiative (GGI) One Sun One World One Grid’ operating in the U.S., thanks to its National Grid Partners. And it will benefit Brandon's friends as well. Returning to the BLM, just understand this expansion of solar panels on public land is being driven by the dark side of the government that everyone now lives under, corporatism. and also achieves the goal of reducing the amount of land that Idahoans will have access to for beneficial use. Idahoans should feel lucky the BLM has chosen to once again use the lawful process to placate the masses.
0 Comments
Sometimes the agendas come so rapidly it is difficult to keep them apart because at the core they all serve the same purpose.
Since the federal government no longer operates as three separate branches with the legislative branch assigned to creating laws, the Executive Branch and unconstitutional administrative rulemaking process now create laws that Americans are subjected to without any congressional involvement. Quite notorious are rules that are written under the Department of Interior (DOI). Given that the federal government now operates in bed with corporations and non-government organizations (NGO), many of the rules are created for the benefit of those groups and not us. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and its buddy corporations and environmental groups have been busy creating a new "rule" that will economically benefit the BLM, serve the ideology of environmental groups, and help the corporate world advance renewable energy projects. Not only are the Executive Branch and DOI handing over "public" land to corporations for renewable energy projects, but with BLM's full participation, this proposed rule also advances the White House 30x30 agenda, a goal of conserving 30% of land by 2030. It is the rewriting of a regulatory framework that will put public land under the 30x30 classification for land conservation. 30x30 isn't even a federal law passed by Congress, it is a dictate from the White House that meets an International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) goal, a United Nations participant. That alone should negate any participation in 30x30, or through illegal rulings by the BLM. However, the DOI is an IUCN member through several of its agencies, so the same ideology is probably applied to the BLM. The DOI announced its "Plan to Guide the Balanced Management of Public Lands" in March, putting "conservation on equal footing with other uses". Other highlights include identifying "areas in need of restoration or conservation", and building "on...clean energy deployment". Its three-pronged justification is to "protect intact landscapes, restore degraded habitat, and make wise management decisions based on science and data” while incorporating "land health assessments" in BLM decisions on land use. This proposed rule was released in the Federal Register on April 3, and folks are urging a rapid deployment before a possible flip in Congress in 2024. Now, if this were such a wonderful idea, why are they scared? Just a quick summary of this rule provides the fluff. "Manage the land for multiple use and sustained yield by prioritizing the health and resilience of ecosystems"; "protect intact landscapes, restore degraded habitat"; "apply land health standards" (now there's a scary thought); "clarify that conservation is a “use” within the FLPMA’s multiple-use framework"; and "revise existing regulations to better meet FLPMA’s requirement that the BLM prioritize designating and protecting Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACECs)." By "clarifying" conservation as a use, the BLM is changing the law without Congressional involvement. The Federal Land and Policy Management Act, as amended in 2021, does not address the classification of land for conservation leasing, instead emphasizing that land is used for its resources. Page 2(c) defines multiple use. Effect on existing rights, page 79(a), makes it clear that nothing can terminate the rights to use the land. Pretending that leasing land for conservation serves the purpose of multiple use is only a distorted fantasy. Through the DOI, the White House is revising the FLPMA law without any congressional involvement. Once again, the rule of law is ignored by the White House. Buried deep in this rhetoric is a plan that should raise the hair on the back of the neck, "conservation leasing". DOI's definition of this is a "time-limited lease" allowing "interested organizations conduct restoration or mitigation activities...to facilitate development projects". It will also "prioritize the identification, evaluation and designation of Areas of Critical Environmental Concern (ACEC) through land use planning." All of this means non-use. PERC probably describes it best, "creating markets for conservation". With this rule, the DOI is advancing public land as a commodity. The BLM will make an unknown amount of money because corporations can pay "to restore a degraded ecosystems" to "offset environmentally harmful activities". Same with NGOs. Through NatureVest, the Nature Conservancy already has the program to exploit conservation for profit. Opposite of what the DOI claims, that multi-use will continue in spite of this conservation, if a wealthy environmental group or corporation dumps their money into one of these leases, use can be denied, as either will hold the ability to "preclude the parcel from...grazing during the extendable 10-year term. The leases might also block future leasing for uses deemed incompatible with the conservation work." It might become a mad bidding war between corporations and environmental groups to see who can buy up the most "leasing". However, perhaps unbeknownst to some, it has always been illegal for environmental groups to lease public land. This proposed rule removes that problem for them and really opens the door to their bank vault, tying up land across America. No wonder they love it. Perhaps quid pro quo? Companies have also been "requesting conservation leases". No doubt, the DOI is serving its NGO and corporate constituents well. To offset the damage from a renewable energy project, corporations will use the excuse to lease land either surrounding the project or in another area to offset that damage by restoring the leased land. In some instances, it is called "carbon offsetting", which really appears to be more of a money game than making a real difference. The insane idea behind this is that leased land would be saved for more public use because it would somehow be healthier. As the BLM goes about making its "health assessments" of the land, there is fairly good potential that more land will be identified as unhealthy and needing repair, then sucked up for conservation and non-use. With powerful and wealthy corporations and their rich NGO pals, the whole BLM landscape could be sucked up in restoration and mitigation projects through leasing. "Science" will surely be used to justify the land's need for restoration. If NGOs love it, it has to be bad. Temporary restrictions on use are part of the rule for restoration of degraded land. Keeping the land available for multiple use through this proposed rule is a lie. Temporary restrictions while degraded land is restored can extend up to ten years. How long does land take to restore itself, or is that up to some bureaucratic technocrat? The rule also states it "would not override valid existing rights or preclude other, subsequent authorizations so long as those subsequent authorizations are compatible with the conservation use.” So cattle grazing would have to fit this new narrative or else, and with the hatred of cattle, no compatibility would probably ever be recognized. So in between all of the malarkey of how wonderful this is to improve the land and make it available for everyone's great-great grandkids, it is really a twisted way of taking land away from public use and making money off corporations and NGOs. For corporations, the excuse can be to offset greenhouse gas emissions they create, or "funding renewable energy projects" can be considered a carbon offset. How handy is that for renewable energy corporations? The regulation calls for an assessment of all public land, its state of degradation, and need for restoration, which includes grazing land. For now, grazing is spared from this rule until the land can be assessed, but it is still a threat to the cattle industry and is in the 30x30 crosshairs for conservation leasing. At least U.S. Senator John Barrasso (R-WY) and U.S. Senator Kevin Cramer (R-ND) understand this rule violates the law and will kill multiple use as land that is leased out for conservation will not be available for use under the Multiple Use & Sustained Yield Act (MUSY). He, along with Senator Jim Risch, have introduced a bill to stop this proposed BLM rule. Of note, comments are being made by individuals who don't even live in states where BLM land exists, many of whom live in eastern states. They think the idea of the BLM conserving the land is great without really understanding the full impact of this proposed rule, let alone understanding it is a violation of the Congressional role to create laws. This is borne out by the significant numbers of canned support letters the NGOs tell them to use, just accepting what is spoon fed to them without taking the time to understand the issue. It seems most of these comments originate from The Wilderness Society. This is the ignorance we are up against and the herd mentality. Because the sheep are following orders, most of the comments support this rule. All comments can be browsed here. Comments on this proposed rule can be made on this link and submitted by June 20, 2023. To review the proposed rule, go to this link. Let the BLM know that this rule is illegal, that it only serves its corporate and NGO buddies, and will destroy the purpose of FLPMA for multiple-use. County Commissioners hold more authority than they realize. Our Republic was built on a foundation of strength at a local level, where citizens can be engaged with those they elect to represent them. From that, citizens also have the responsibility for holding those elected officials to account for their actions. As already known, the federal government far exceeds it enumerated powers assigned by the Constitution. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is just one example of an infringement of the Constitution. Now, the BLM is attempting to exercise that blatant lack of authority in Idaho by cutting backroom deals with a corporation for money to build unwanted wind turbines on land that is protected by law for public use. The deal has a real pretentious name, the Lava Ridge Wind Project. All "public" land "managed" by the federal government lies in counties within a state. In the case of Lava Ridge, this project lies within Jerome, Lincoln, and Minidoka counties. Without going into the ongoing donnybrook about the federal government not "owning" public land that should be turned over to the states, or how the land is significantly mismanaged, or how the land has been incrementally taken away from public use, the focus should really be on the fact that whatever land is defined as public land, it sits in a state county. Along with Coordination, commissioners also have other available tools at their disposal to ban Lava Ridge. County commissioners have the authority to create and pass laws under local ordinances. In one Idaho county, Washington, the commissioners appropriately took note of the fact that public land sat in their county and, using federal law, chose to create ordinances that strongly reflect their authority to govern that land. Ordinance 88 defined that "the ranchers own the grass and the water rights on their allotments in Washington County" and "with any other private property rights, these rights on split estate land administered by the Federal Government are protected in the constitution." The Organic Act of 1897 ensured the "pasturing of livestock on public lands" would not be interfered with. The Lava Ridge project significantly interferes with grazing allotments. The Ordinance also references the Taylor Grazing Act that protects the grazing rights of ranchers, and is strengthened by Idaho Code 25-903 that anyone interfering with these rights is guilty of a misdemeanor. Another federal law, the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA) that protects the public's right to use the land, is referenced. It also gives the Washington county Sheriff the authority to protect these rights and a court to impose fines and other punishments to those who violate them. In Ordinance 87, the requirement for the federal government to Coordinate with the local authority is mentioned right off the bat. Also, mentioned again is the Organic Act of 1897 that "provides for State and Local Jurisdiction of Federal Lands". Specifically, #6 of the Organic Act states, "the intent and meaning of this provision being that the State wherein any such reservation is situated shall not, by reason of the establishment thereof, lose its jurisdiction, nor the inhabitants thereof their rights and privileges as citizens". That means the county holds the jurisdiction over the land, not the BLM. But the BLM doesn't want you to know this. Any BLM activity that interferes with the rights and privileges of citizens within a county must be held accountable to the local jurisdictional authority. The Ordinance also states, "The Sheriff has the authority under this ordinance", which again means jurisdictional authority. "Federal law enforcement officers operate under the Sheriff’s authority and shall not enforce any laws upon the citizens of the county without permission of the Sheriff." This is true for other actions by federal authorities, the permission of the local Sheriff is required. But the federal government has bullied and intimidated local governments and citizens into believing it holds supreme authority. It is time that stops. The federal government has been abusing its own laws, often against citizens. There are other documents that support these Ordinances. The BLM Mitigation Handbook states, "If siting compensatory mitigation on split estate lands, the BLM will ensure that the willing landowner consents..." (page 2-18). Has any rancher consented to the Lava Ridge DEIS mitigation measures? The BLM cannot move forward with this project without their consent.
The BLM is exploiting land for profit while abusing the lawful rights of those who use the land. It is time that the protection of these rights is exercised by county officials, and citizens of these counties should contact their respective commissioners and ask that these ordinances are put into place. It is also time that citizens, and local officials, stop being intimidated by the federal government and use the laws that have been established for their protection. The comment period on the Lava Ridge project ended April 20, but there is no reason to let that deter anyone from commenting. Voices still need to be heard. Let the BLM know that it is expected that they follow the law, first by the mandate that they Coordinate with the local county officials and second, that this project cannot go forward until the law is followed. Idahoans probably remember the 2014 standoff that occurred between Cliven Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) at Bunkerville, Nevada, and also involved Americans from across the U.S. coming to support Bundy. The press described the scene as a law-breaking rancher and inappropriately labeled supporters “domestic terrorists” and other derogatory names. These "terrorists" were blamed for causing problems with horrifically distorted news on the matter that really didn't expose what it was about. In spite of what BLM spokesman Craig Leff claimed, that there is "no connection" between the impoundment of Bundy’s cattle and solar energy development in Nevada", evidence points to a different conclusion. Former Senator Harry Reid, and his son Rory, had been working with the Chinese ENN Energy Group for solar projects on federal land, spurred on by the Reids as early as 2011, and LS Power since 2010. Over 50 million acres of public land, or 70% of Nevada, had already been designated for solar development in 2010, 5,717 acres in Clark County alone. In 2010, Reid was even able to get a pre-approved LS Power line stretched into Idaho. As part of the Dry Lake Solar mitigation plan, the Bundy grazing range was identified as an area that could be used for protection of the desert tortoise, but the cattle were in the way, in spite of the fact that cattle and tortoises benefit from existing together. The BLM called it "Cattle Trespass Impacts" that interfered with the project. Non-governmental organizations (NGO) also supported the notion that these trespass cattle were in the way for the tortoise. So began the BLM round up of the cattle, and the beginning of the standoff. However, eventually the cattle had to be moved anyway. "The BLM wanted Cliven Bundy out of the 600,000-acre Gold Butte area so the agency could use the land for future solar projects". Over the course of several weeks, the BLM, through its law enforcement program, implemented a series of steps that only encouraged an escalation of the situation. As supporters gathered, the BLM closed access to the public land and cordoned them off into a 1st Amendment area, which only inflamed the situation, and the BLM surely knew it would. Next, when citizens began to leave that designated area, the BLM chose to bring in more back-up with weapons and dogs in a show of force, again adding to the escalation. But that wasn't enough for the BLM, the next step they took was destroying private property including cattle, assaulting citizens, and even slamming a woman to the ground. This only caused both sides to become more agitated, inviting more citizens to lend support and bring weapons for their own protection. The last insult was a false report that the land was being opened back up and the BLM was leaving, with the BLM refusing to acknowledge the local Sheriff's authority in requesting them to leave. When it was discovered that was not the case, protesters gathered in a dry wash underneath an I-15 overpass. As a result, the BLM felt it was necessary to take up firing positions behind vehicles and on hilltops, with those rifles pointed at the protesters. By this time, it was clear the BLM had no problem overstepping its authority and increase the threat to American lives. But blame was placed on citizens for this escalation. It was finally the county Sheriff's office that was able to use its role to negotiate an end to the standoff with the BLM director, even though the BLM claimed it was the primary arbitrator. Now, ENN dropped its pursuit of this project in June, 2013, before the Bundy incident, claiming lack of buyers. The standoff began in April, 2014 so it appears the two had nothing to do with each other. However, "In May 2012, the United States filed a Complaint seeking declaratory and injunctive relief for Cliven Bundy’s trespass grazing within the Gold Butte area outside the Bunkerville Allotment." The Center for Biological Diversity even put the heat on the BLM in 2012 with "a notice of intent to sue the bureau for canceling a planned roundup of Bundy's cattle". The tortoise mitigation plan and removing cattle was being discussed during this time, before ENN dropped the project. Then, "On July 9, 2013, U.S. District Court of Nevada Judge Lloyd George permanently enjoined Cliven Bundy’s trespass grazing and ordered Cliven Bundy to remove his trespass cattle from public land outside the former Bunkerville Allotment within 45 days, stating that the United States is authorized to seize and impound any cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days." Because of the tortoise mitigation measures within the Gold Butte area for renewable energy projects, that land was still needed, without cattle. Sen. Reid and the BLM recognized that advancing this solar power agenda would eventually return to the same issue because of the SWIP line. So, it would make sense to move ahead with the removal of the cattle as "public land in Clark County’s Dry Lake Valley has been zoned for solar energy development. For any projects to proceed, developers would have to balance the damage by conserving tortoise habitat elsewhere." The 2012 Western Solar Plan, Approved Resource Management Plan Amendments/Record of Decision (ROD) for Solar Energy Development in Six Southwestern States, continued this problem for Nevada. The BLM also determined that continued cattle grazing would interfere with the Bureau’s plans to use the land as an environmental mitigation area for desert tortoise disruption caused by the solar facility, again even though cattle and tortoises do well together. Did "Environmental mitigation necessary for a planned solar power project" motivate, or serve as an excuse for the BLM to launch a "military style" enforcement action? It is rumored that ENN didn't want to pay for a tortoise reserve, and also saw the cattle as an issue. But it didn't matter, Sen. Reid had his hands in everything since 2010, using tax dollars to achieve his goals. Eventually, Reid ensured that federal legislation moved other solar projects forward by bringing in NV Energy and LS Power. The rehash of this standoff in 2014 serves as a reminder of the potential dangers with the Lava Ridge project. With this project, there will be a major impact on cattle and other resources, and a repeat of what happened in Nevada should be at the back of everyone's mind. There is high opposition to this project, and the potential for protests. LS Power and the BLM have literally zoned out the Magic Valley area for both solar and wind projects, just as in the Nevada case. If this project does move forward, Nevada should serve as a reminder to the BLM that citizens have the right to protest and there should be no interference with a staged and confined area for them to go in order to protest. Restricted areas are not within the First Amendment. The BLM should also acknowledge, recognize, and not mock the authority of the local Sheriff's office. Should Lava Ridge become a protest issue, the BLM needs to be reminded that a local Sheriff is elected to protect citizen rights. In Nevada, it was the county Sheriff's office that brought the situation to a peaceful end. Sheriff’s take an oath to uphold both the U.S. and state Constitutions, and is the first line of defense in preserving citizen rights. According to the Constitutional Sheriffs & Peace Officers Association (CSPOA), “law enforcement powers held by the sheriff supersede those of any agent, officer, elected official or employee from any level of government when in the jurisdiction of the county.” No less complicit is the media, framing the narrative as a cattle rancher conflict in order to disguise the involvement of corporate and federal deals. Journalists should follow their own Code of Ethics by not assigning negative labels to citizens or categorizing them into groups, embellishing stories, or printing exaggerated narratives. Journalists should be held responsible, and accountable, for reporting all facts. Both Bunkerville and Lava Ridge have to do with corporate powers that are in bed with the federal government along with powerful environmental groups, the money that can be made on both sides, and who or what can be bought. While there are some perspectives that the rancher won because he was released and continues to graze his cattle, in truth, nobody won because the same core problem exists. A federal government that is corrupt and out of control, engaging in corporatism, far exceeding its enumerated powers, and continuing to threaten the lives of citizens. It's just part of the World Economic Forum agenda, in which the BLM participates via the Department of Interior (DOI). In 2014, LS Power Chairman, Mike Segal, and former Senator Harry Reid, were working together to bring solar power to Nevada through the Great Basin Transmission South line, an LS Power “affiliate” and co-owner of One Nevada Transmission Line. This is part of the Southwest Intertie Project (SWIP), which also ties into Lava Ridge. Through all of these deals with the BLM, LS Power laid plans to build wind turbines, transmission lines, and other projects for a profit that have now reached Idaho, all the while not appearing to care much about what is in its way or how it clutters Idaho land. Because of these deals across “public land”, the BLM is more than complicit in this agenda, forgetting its role as stewards of land and as public servants. Magic Valley now faces the dilemma of stopping a wind turbine project from interfering with the cattle industry, a historical site, recreation, and use of airspace.
The Lava Ridge project is a threat that needs to be solved through legal means, there are laws that protect both ranchers and citizens, they just need to be used. Not that it's recognized anyway, the BLM is not within the enumerated powers defined by the Constitution. Elected officials at a state and national level should use their authority to legally intervene. County officials have the authority through Coordination to force the federal government to the table and resolve inconsistencies in land use plans, and it should be used. Final comments for the Lava Ridge Project will end April 20. From there, the BLM will make a decision on whether this wind turbine project can move forward. At this point it should be Alternative A, No Action (page 2-1). We really just don't want those turbines falling on cows. What’s it going to be BLM? Before one step further is taken, deny this project. Go back to the laws that prohibit the degradation of the land and the violation of ranchers and their grazing rights and public use of the land. As public servants that is your duty. Grazing Coordination Plan This is long, but more importantly, the need to get the information out exceeds the length of the article. In Part 1, the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) for the Lava Ridge Wind Project was reviewed for potential violations by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) regarding grazing laws. Contained within the DEIS documents is the Draft Appendix S: Grazing Coordination Plan (GCP), which details how much impact, and disruption, would occur to the cattle industry. Questions about federal grazing laws being violated by the BLM continue with the GCP. The GCP was developed by Magic Valley Energy (MVE), a front name for LS Power. Although not identified in the GCP, it is known that Jack Alexander, founder of Synergy Resource Solutions, was involved in the creation of this document. Why the secrecy MVE? Synergy Resource Solutions has some interesting connections. Mr. Alexander is a past president of the Society for Range Management, which supports the United Nations International Year of Rangelands. As a Certified Professional in Erosion and Sediment Control, International Erosion Control Association (IECA), he has some connections to the corporate world. While Mr. Alexander has many degrees, it is unclear how much time he has spent on a range herding cattle. It appears MVE engaged this person, or business, for the purposes of creating a grazing plan that suspiciously buys opinions on what LS Power wants, or needs, to build its project. There is no investment in the cattle, the ranchers, or what is ethically right. Apparently, LS Power thinks it is no big deal to shuffle cattle around while having the ranchers do the work. Ask any rancher how difficult it is to herd cattle to a new area for food and water, it isn't that easy. In Appendix S, page S-1 of the GCP, it states "MVE is committed to working with the local grazing permittees (ranchers)", yet the plan does not appear to have been developed with those ranchers. If MVE's "objective has been and will continue to be close coordination with the grazing permittees", then why do ranchers oppose this project? In MVE's FAQ, "What happens to the grazing/ranching operations during construction and once the project is in operation?" And the provided answer, "The range improvements installed by MVE will benefit the long-term management of the grazing allotments." There doesn't appear to be any range improvements in the GCP that will benefit grazing allotments now or in the long term. In fact, as stated in the DEIS, page 3-285, "BLM grazing allotments (the land permitted to be used for grazing) would be subject to long-term reductions in allotment acreage...some areas could remain permanently unavailable". Also on page 3-278, the project involves "altering forage conditions, altering the forage availability for livestock grazing, and altering existing range improvements." This clearly describes alterations that will result in reductions and/or permanent removal, not improvements. Page S-1 also states grazing permittees identified impacts from this project as the death of cattle, activities affecting range improvements, reduced permittee AUM, and livestock health being affected. Yet, the stated GCP purpose is to outline "how the Project will coexist with the grazing operations". Coexisting is an interesting term, as its perception of coexistence is really about shuffling cattle around at the convenience of project needs, disrupting the lives of cattle ranchers, placing the burden on them to do the work, and destroying productive use of the land for years. Page S-3 - "temporary fencing" will create "isolated “sub-pastures” and "gaps for access to water" that will be solved by bringing in up to 50 water troughs for the cattle. The expectation for ranchers herding cattle to these areas will be an ongoing burden, and it is doubtful cattle will have a positive response to their water source being moved. Plus, 40 CFR 1508.27(b)(7) states, "Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts." With the ongoing construction and removal of temporary fencing, creating small areas of disruption one at a time, the overall significant impact of these mitigation measures cannot be lessened. "For AUMs (the amount of forage needed for one cow over one month) that are unavailable during the construction and reclamation periods, MVE is committed to providing an equivalent feed source to affected grazing permittees. This may take the form of range forage at other locations, private ground forage operations, feedlot space, or other commercial arrangements that MVE may agree to" with ranchers (page S-3). This is more disruption and burden for the rancher. Is this just during construction, or is it also during decommissioning? Is this provision of feed an attempt to buy off ranchers? This is also not good for the cattle, changing a cow's diet can produce problems. "Cattle are creatures of habit and disruptions in their routine can lead to disruptions in feed intake" (pages 2-3 Bunk Management). This is just one reason the ranchers are concerned about the cattle's health. Listed on pages S-3 through S-10 is the impact on those allotments. There is also the plan to have the cattle share their range with sheep (page S-5-6), but putting cattle with sheep can be more complicated because of the differences in grazing habits. Are sheep ranchers okay with this? Do grazing permits include provisions for sheep? Two "preferred" alternatives have been chosen by the BLM, C and E. Below is a graph of the percentage of allotment that would be unavailable in Alternatives C and E (page 3-280). Maps showing how allotments would be affected in the alternatives are on page 3-275 in the DEIS. On the same page this chart shows the number of AUMs that would be unavailable in Alternative C and E. The DEIS has other charts showing the percentages of loss from 3-277 to 3-285, and even references "when Combined with Other Reasonably Foreseeable Renewable Energy Projects." Yes, the BLM has already mapped out its plan for massive areas of Idaho to be degraded. Pages S-9 through S-10 have charts on the number of AUMs affected on just one allotment.
There are laws that protect grazing and the public. 43 CFR § 4100.0-2 - to establish efficient and effective administration of grazing of public rangelands; and to provide for the sustainability of the western livestock industry and communities that are dependent upon productive, healthy public rangelands. (b) These objectives will be realized in a manner consistent with land use plans, multiple use, sustained yield, environmental values, economic and other objectives stated in the Taylor Grazing Act of June 28, 1934, as amended (43 U.S.C. 315, 315a); 43 U.S. Code § 1701 - "The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that, the public lands be managed in a manner that will protect the quality of...scenic, historical, ecological, environmental...values...will preserve and protect certain public lands in their natural condition; that will provide food and habitat for...domestic animals; and that will provide for outdoor recreation and human occupancy and use (a8); the public lands be managed in a manner which recognizes the Nation’s need for domestic sources of...food...from the public lands (a12)." Not only are those qualities not protected in this project, but outdoor recreation is also affected. The Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1901(b)(2)) requires rangelands are managed and improved to be as productive as possible. The Lava Ridge project does neither. It doesn't appear that ranchers were given opportunity to participate in any plan formulation for grazing (f). Rather, a consulting firm appears to have been paid by MVE to develop the plan, in its favor. 43 CFR § 4130.2(e)(1) - "The lands for which the permit or lease is issued remain available for domestic livestock grazing". Clearly, the land will not be available for grazing with temporary fencing that results in allotment reductions and eventual permanent damage. Section 102 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (43 U.S.C. 1701) (FLPMA) states, "(7) goals and objectives be established by law as guidelines for public land use planning, and that management be on the basis of multiple use and sustained yield (MUSY) unless otherwise specified by law". Not only does the project itself violate multiple use principles, but by intersecting allotments and reducing AUMs, sustained yield by the cattle industry cannot be achieved. The Lava Ridge project falls under the mandates of FLPMA and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) (16 U.S. Code § 824p(h)(6)(D)(iv)(v)). 43 USE 1712(c)(9) - "(9) to the extent consistent with the laws governing the administration of the public lands, coordinate the land use inventory, planning, and management activities of or for such lands with the land use planning and management programs of other Federal departments and agencies and of the States and local governments within which the lands are located, assist in resolving, to the extent practical, inconsistencies between Federal and non-Federal Government plans, and shall provide for meaningful public involvement of State and local government officials, both elected and appointed, in the development of land use programs, land use regulations, and land use decisions for public lands, including early public notice of proposed decisions which may have a significant impact on non-Federal lands. Land use plans of the Secretary under this section shall be consistent with State and local plans to the maximum extent he finds consistent with Federal law and the purposes of this Act." The BLM failed to initiate Coordination (42 U.S.C. 4331(b)), so it is up to the affected counties to start this process. The BLM is required to follow both the NEPA (42 U.S.C. 4331(b)), and the FLPMA (43 U.S. Code § 1712(9)) mandates for Coordination. Coordination is defined "as a government-to-government communication process, seeking consistency, in which local government has an equal negotiating position with the federal agencies. This government-to-government communication negotiating process allows local government to participate on an equal basis in all phases of planning and management of land, water and wildlife resources. Such consistency will allow local governments to once again protect the local tax base, sustain a viable and stable local economy, and protect the public health and safety. Clear direction exists for local governments to use coordination to fairly represent citizens in bringing back local control from runaway big governments." Coordination is NOT consulting, collaborating, or cooperating with local governments, nor is it a "subcommittee" that is nothing more than a spectacle of collaboration to placate and divert from the legal mandate to Coordinate. 40 CFR 1508.7 states, "Cumulative impact is the impact on the environment which results from the incremental impact of the action when added to other past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future actions regardless of what agency (Federal or non-Federal) or person undertakes such other actions. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor but collectively significant actions taking place over a period of time." With the current and stated future solar and wind projects by BLM, there will be massive, collectively significant, and cumulative impacts on Idaho land, including the ongoing temporary fencing disruptions. There is also CFR 43 4110.4-2(b) that states "when BLM land is devoted to a public purpose", in this case wind turbines, livestock grazing is precluded from any decrease in land acreage, which invalidates the GCP as it is written. In 2005, the BLM developed the Wind Energy Development Program. This required the BLM to create a Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) that evaluated potential land use impacts from wind projects. In its Record of Decision (ROD), there are protections for the cattle industry. "The BLM will not issue ROW (right of way) authorizations for wind energy development on lands on which wind energy development is incompatible with specific resource values...Additional areas of land may be excluded from wind energy development on the basis of findings of resource impacts that cannot be mitigated and/or conflict with existing and planned multiple-use activities or land use plans. To the extent possible, wind energy projects shall be developed in a manner that will not prevent other land uses, including...livestock grazing, recreational use, and other ROW uses" (page A-2). In the BLM Mitigation Handbook, it states the BLM might deny a project if the action would violate a law, or not conform to a land use plan. Or it can be denied if there are "legal, regulatory, land use plan, or policy protections that limit or prevent certain types of impacts" even after mitigation, or "result in unnecessary or undue degradation" to the land (FLPMA § 302(b), 43 USC § 1732(b)) (page 2-15). There is strong evidence that this project qualifies for a denial decision. And besides, how do you mitigate a livelihood? According to its own Wind Energy Program Policies and Best Management Practices (BMPS), BLM wind energy projects "shall be developed in a manner that will not prevent other land uses, including minerals extraction, livestock grazing, recreational use, and other ROW uses (1-1)." Removal of allotments and AUMs prevents land use, along with recreational use, for years. Has the BLM adequately addressed all grazing laws or complied with them? It is time to challenge the BLM on these laws, and encourage county commissioners to invoke Coordination. Much opposition exists, this project is not wanted anywhere in Idaho. For Idahoans who live outside the area, help Magic Valley with this opposition, challenge the BLM on these laws, and if there is data opposing BLM data, send it in. No Idahoan is safe from this energy transition agenda. Comments can be submitted here, just click on the green "Participate Now" button on the left, or comments can be emailed to [email protected]. Tell the BLM that the proposed mitigation measures for cattle are unacceptable and appear to violate federal law. The only option is to deny this project and select Alternative A, No Action (page 2-1). This is one of the most appalling and vile videos by the World Economic Forum (WEF), held as part of Davos 2023, Mastering New Energy Economics | Davos 2023. In this video they are discussing the urgent need to transform the world to renewable energy and how the United States is being used to make it happen. Some of the topics include: the need to speed up transition to renewable energy because of Russia; there is a lot of money to be made in doing this; the United States needs to borrow and spend a lot to make it happen; it is proven that with higher energy prices people will consume less; how important it is to use "demand management" via smart technology, or in other words them having the ability to automatically cut off energy supplies during peak times; using the United States Inflation Reduction Act so foreign countries can use the subsidies as incentives for investments in clean energy; and other eye popping statements. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Lava Ridge project is part of a clean energy agenda between government and corporate partnerships that will degrade Idaho land. Idaho is caught up in this agenda through LS Power which plans to bring wind turbines to the Magic Valley. When Magic Valley Energy (MVE) is mentioned, it is really LS Power talking, MVE is just its front name.
Several impact areas are addressed with this project, but there are two documents on the grazing issue: the Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS), Livestock Grazing, Section 3.9 (page 3-273), and the Draft Appendix S: Grazing Coordination Plan (GCP) that will be covered in Part 2. Part 1 will look first at the DEIS analysis in Section 9, page 3-273, where it was determined that the impacts on livestock management would occur during "construction through decommissioning (34 years) plus time for livestock forage to reestablish after final reclamation (estimated to be up to 5 years...)." Thirty-nine years of disruption to the cattle industry over Jerome, Lincoln, and Minidoka Counties, with land destruction taking years to heal. What is the economic impact of that? Page 3-278 states, "future development in the analysis area is likely to include construction of the SWIP-North transmission line and construction of the Gateway West transmission line...These projects would add more roads, fences, transmission lines, and human activity to the analysis area. The Invenergy Gem Vale solar facility would be just north of the Midpoint Substation on approximately 3,500 acres. Two Longroad Energy solar facilities would cover 3,200 acres each just east of U.S. 93 and south of (connecting to) the Midpoint Substation. All the solar facilities would have fencing surrounding the facilities...These trends and activities could cause changes in forage conditions, altering the forage availability for livestock grazing and altering existing range improvements." This would be in addition to the proposed Salmon Falls Wind Project and Taurus Wind Project. So the BLM is letting it be known that there is clear intent for future projects that would irretrievably affect not only the cattle industry, but ravage the Idaho landscape. In addition, it will take away multiple use that is required by law. When does the BLM plan to engage with ranchers, or even citizens, before they proceed with these future projects? On page 3-273 it states grazing permits would not be modified during this analysis, "If part of the action alternatives would require modifications to grazing permits, this would be addressed in a subsequent NEPA analysis and permit actions." That is illogical as those permits involve allotments and AUMs, and essentially the current DEIS proposes modifications to grazing permits in this project. Allotments are parcels of land in grazing permits, and AUM stands for Animal Unit Months, the term used to describe "amount of forage needed by an “animal unit” (AU) grazing for one month." Is the BLM and MVE saying in the NEPA analysis that grazing permits are under threat of permanent modification? Unacceptable because federal law protects grazing permits and rights. 43 USC 315b states holders of grazing permits "are entitled to participate in the use of the range". MVE is suggesting that those entitlements granted in permits can be altered or removed, and as will be seen, are being modified, which appears to be violating this law. Are MVE and the BLM also implying that future permit renewals and new permits will not be granted? 43 US Code 315o-1 outlines the requirement for an "advisory board of local stockmen in each such district" and offer advice on "any other matters affecting the administration of this subchapter within the district." Both BLM and MVE have a clear obligation to engage these local advisory boards if they exist, and ranchers, on any projects, current or future, and the impact it will have on grazing districts and permits. A few select individuals were placed on a subcommittee by the BLM to accomplish this task and who have recommended denial of this project. Federal law, 43 USC 315b, clearly states that "grazing privileges recognized and acknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded". In the DEIS, the safeguarding of these grazing privileges appears to be compromised. Fishing and hunting rights on grazing land will also be impacted as stated under the FAQ "Can we still recreate and hunt in those areas?" The answer, "Public lands will remain open for recreation and hunting after construction is complete". Does that include during decommissioning? By law, these rights cannot be interfered with. On page 3-285 it reiterates, "An irretrievable commitment of grazing resources and effects to the local grazing economy would occur over the 34-year life of the project, plus time for livestock forage to reestablish after final reclamation (estimated to be up to 5 years). Grazing permittees would experience both temporary...and long-term...AUM reductions." "BLM grazing allotments would be subject to long-term reductions in allotment acreage...some areas could remain permanently unavailable". This is a direct threat to the cattle industry in Magic Valley. It is no wonder since the cattle industry is already under attack, one reason being climate change. Maybe ranchers should just put masks on their cattle. Under the Taylor Grazing Act (TGA), MVE does not have the authority to reduce allotment acreage for its project, whether temporary or permanent. The TGA establishes "grazing districts", permits to improve rangeland conditions, and provides that grazing land will be protected and improved. There is nothing in the DEIS that shows protection of grazing lands, or improvement. TGA lands cannot be phased out of livestock grazing by reducing AUMs, that authority falls under the purview of the TGA law. Is the BLM in agreement with these reductions? Page 3-277 in the DEIS states, "The project would intersect up to nine BLM public land grazing allotments depending on the action alternative." Intersecting these allotments means the cattle will be cut off from grazing and water in the allotment. Permits, allotments, and AMUs are written into federal law for protection. Does this violate the following laws? 43 CFR § 4130.2(e)(1) - "The lands for which the permit or lease is issued remain available for domestic livestock grazing"; clearly the land will not be available for grazing in this project. 43 CFR § 4130.3-2(f) - "Provision for livestock grazing temporarily to be delayed" can be done for various reasons but wind projects are not listed as a reason, and 39 years isn't really temporary. 43 USC 315b - "grazing privileges recognized and acknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded". Grazing privileges that are part of permits are not being safeguarded in this proposed project. Reduction of allotments and AMUs prevent the full attainment of grazing privileges. 43 U.S. Code § 315a - The Secretary of Interior shall "preserve the land and its resources from destruction or unnecessary injury, to provide for the orderly use". Is the Lava Ridge project causing destruction and unnecessary injury? The Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (43 U.S.C. 1901(b)(2)) will "manage, maintain and improve the condition of the public rangelands so that they become as productive as feasible for all rangeland values in accordance with management objectives and the land use planning process established pursuant to section 1712 of this title." Were ranchers given "adequate notice and opportunity to comment upon and participate in the formulation of plans and programs relating to the management of the public lands" they use for grazing (f)? Or was a consulting firm paid by MVE for the formulation of a plan? MVE was incorporated in 2019. Were ranchers notified then about the future threats to their grazing rights with the rangeland being degraded? This project does not improve any rangeland it impacts. 40 CFR 1508.27(b)(7) "Significance cannot be avoided by terming an action temporary or by breaking it down into small component parts." With the ongoing construction and removal of temporary fencing, creating smaller areas of disruption one at a time, the overall significant impact of these mitigation measures cannot be lessened. The burden is on BLM to demonstrate what allows them to violate these laws, and should be challenged on these potential violations. There should be no compromises between MVE and the ranchers on these issues. Even more stunning, why did the BLM even let this impact on grazing rights get so far? To listen to the BLM Resource Advisory Council Subcommittee comments on the grazing impacts go to the 1'43" mark in this video. The BLM is violating other federal laws that mandate Coordination, and are circumventing these laws by placing county commissioners and some ranchers on a subcommittee when it should be initiating Coordination. But the BLM knows this and instead are distracting from the law by concocting an appearance of collaborating with local governments. Coordination is not consulting or collaborating, and will be covered further in Part 2. Part 2 will scrutinize the Grazing Coordination Plan for its possible violations of federal law on grazing rights, which is not the same as Coordination mentioned above. Share this information with cattle ranchers for their thoughts. Here is the link to give comments, just press the green "Participate Now" button on the left, or email [email protected] by April 20, 2023. Demand that the BLM select Alternative A, No Action (page 2-1). Stand with the ranchers in Magic Valley and do it for all of Idaho. Idaho has a crisis brewing in the Magic Valley area and every Idahoan in the state needs to pay attention. Lava Ridge is a proposed project on Bureau of Land Management (BLM) land that would build up to 400 wind turbines, 7 substations, 248 miles of collector lines, 19 miles of transmission lines, 486 miles of new roads, and several other land damaging installations. The turbines may have a maximum height of 740 feet. This will eventually expand to include the Salmon Falls Wind Project and the Taurus Wind Turbine Project. This is long but it goes deep.
All of these projects are for "energy in the west", meaning any state has access to the energy that is produced. There is no benefit to Idaho with this project and it is critical that all Idahoans boot it out. In 2017, the federal government removed over 10 million acres of Sage Grouse habitat protections for energy development. It is ironic that, with others, Governor Little expressed concerns about this project when he was the one who rearranged those sage grouse protections in 2022 so the land could be used for energy projects, including Lava Ridge. It is also interesting that some LS Power "individual" donated money to Rep. Simpson in 2022. The BLM Idaho Resource Advisory Council, in 2021, created a subcommittee with several interests represented, "to compile information and conduct research regarding the proposed Lava Ridge Wind Project" for recommendations to the Council on the project, its last meeting being held March 9, 2023. The BLM completed its Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) in January, 2023, the comment period being extended to April 20. Information on how to comment can be found here or here. All DEIS documents can be found here. Magic Valley Energy (MVE) was incorporated as a Foreign Limited Liability Company in 2019. The last filed annual report in 2022 indicates it was signed by Paul Thessen, President, LS Power Development. Luke Papez, who introduced the project under the guise of MVE, is really the Project Manager for LS Power. In essence, MVE is really just a front name for what is actually LS Power, not an affiliate as stated on its website. MVE's Development Plan doesn't include the damage it will bring to the Magic Valley area or the disruption it will cause. In its "Purpose and Need" statement, this project will "have the ability to serve multiple power markets in the western United States, including those accessible through use of the Southwest Intertie Project transmission corridor" that runs through Nevada, part of the financing program Transmission Infrastructure Program (TIP). This is MVE's insulting response to the Idaho Delegation and Local Legislator’s Letter Regarding the Lava Ridge Wind Project, and to the Twin Falls County Commissioner's resolution. MVE also has a blog raving about the positives of what they are doing. The plan suggests "The need for the Project arises from regulatory, utility, and consumer driven objectives to incorporate increasing amounts of renewable/carbon free energy sources into energy supply portfolios." It lists the states with those needs as Idaho, Nevada, California, Arizona, Utah, Oregon, Washington, Montana, New Mexico, and the City of Los Angeles. This is not the full truth. For one, it is not consumer driven by Idahoans. LS Power, a multibillion dollar multinational corporation, was founded by Mikhail (Mike) Segal in 1990. He began his career by receiving his education at the Kharkiv Polytech Institute in Ukraine, then immigrating to the U.S. from the former Soviet Union in 1978, having obtained his U.S. citizenship somewhere along the way. His work history includes working for the Department of Energy (DOE) in the former Soviet Union; serving on the Center on Global Energy Policy Advisory Board, and holding other positions in companies such as Dynegy, among others. Mr. Segal serves as the Chairman of LS Power, with his son, Paul Segal, serving as its CEO. LS Power "is a development, investment and operating company focused on the power and energy infrastructure sector." In more simple terms, it is a private company that invests, develops, and operates power generation and electric transmission infrastructure in the United States. Paul Segal is an Advisory Board member of the Institute for Policy Integrity, "a non-partisan think tank dedicated to improving the quality of governmental decisionmaking", primarily focusing on climate and energy policy. Its collaborators are environmental groups. In 2019, he was selected to serve as an Electric Power Supply Association (EPSA) Chair. Apparently, LS Power made much of its fortune on gas powered plants, but since 2020 its focus has turned to "renewable" energy. This corporation became so wealthy, it needs no funding from other sources for projects, it funds its own. Mr. Segal does have moments of reality, so he continues to invest in natural gas. He understands renewable energy cannot meet energy needs but, "Our fleet is well-positioned to help accelerate the clean energy transition by managing the intermittency of renewables."...and "keeping the lights on when renewable resources are unavailable due to weather conditions or when extreme weather events destabilize the grid," After all, "maintenance of sufficient fossil-fuel infrastructure" is needed "to ensure continued energy security, affordability and reliability," However a buck needs to be made. Paul Segal has a Paul and Jenna Segal Family Foundation. Paul's wife, Jenna Segal, is a Broadway Producer with quite an extensive involvement in several progressive projects and philanthropy, including the establishment of a fund for scholars in Ukraine following the outbreak of war. Along with his father Mike, Paul and his wife have made donations to the same organizations. They have three children and live in New York. They seem like a nice family, but live a life that is a far cry from Magic Valley lifestyles, having no problem coming to Idaho for a profit. Maybe in New York they aren't bothered by a skyline of buildings, lights, and noise, but it isn't wanted in Idaho. As for LS Power, it has really amassed quite a portfolio. Most recently in November, 2022, it was set to complete a deal to buy 42 run-of-river hydro facilities across 11 states, fortunately none in Idaho. This deal adds to its already large portfolio that includes corporations it has bought or formed such as EVgo, Endurant Energy, REV Renewables, Rise Light & Power, CPower Energy Management, and Primary Renewable Fuels, LLC. The corporation has also had its hand in battery projects. All of these LS Power owned outfits have been used to build grids that generate and transmit power across the United States with additional projects in the works. South Korea is helping by investing in this corporation to "accelerate the expansion of REV's portfolio of renewable power and energy storage projects". They know where money can be made. LS Power also uses the Environment, Social, and Governance (ESG) metrics for its work, which they probably think makes them a responsible corporation. Nothing in that report comes close to recognizing the environmental and social damage they bring with the Lava Ridge project. While it claims to meet the needs of communities, protect the environment, and most laughable, "work with local communities" to bring "sustainable energy" to the area, which nobody asked for in the first place and in which massive local opposition exists, perhaps LS Power and Mr. Segal should rethink what his corporation is really proposing in reality. While Governor Little and Congressional leaders have expressed concern about the project, it is interesting that Rep. Simpson received money from an individual(s) at LS Power in 2022. Apparently, LS Power has ruffled feathers in Idaho before. In 2010 it wanted to erect a a high-transmission line that would have bisected the Minidoka National Historic Site (NHS), but it was successfully lobbied to have it relocated outside of the NHS (pg 10). So LS Power has known about this area for quite some time, and it looks like they have lawyered up for this project already. Power grids built by LS Power are located across the United States, in California (CAISO), Texas, (ERCOT), the midwest (MISO), midwestern to eastern states (PJM), and New York (NYISO). Its utilities include Republic Transmission, SilverRun Electric, Cross Texas Transmission, DesertLink Transmission, and One Nevada. Idaho has three major power grids, will LS Power share its grids with those? It appears in this article Mr. Segal is complaining that regulations prevent him from expanding even further. This corporation trots across the United States and builds "clean" energy projects and grids with the help of the White House. With all of its wealth why the incentive to continue doing it? Well, maybe because its pockets go just a little deeper, and with those pockets comes more power and control, just part of the global corporate takeover of our world. The Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is well known for its education and research. One of its initiatives is called MITei, or the MIT Energy Initiative to "transform the world's energy systems" and "develop low- and no-carbon solutions". This is right up the alley of LS Power, so it is a member of the initiative. Among the other corporate MITei members, are World Economic Forum (WEF) members Chevron, Equinor, ExxonMobil, and Shell, and MIT itself, to name just a few. LS Power is sitting right there in the middle along with the many other top dogs. Poppy Allonby, a WEF Young Global Leader, sits on the external advisory board for MITei, works for BlackRock, and is head of environmental, social, and governance (ESG) enablement for T. Rowe Price. Martha Broad, MITei Executive Director, is another female devoted to the WEF. MITei has created its Future Energy Systems Center (FESC), in which LS Power is a member, to "reshape the landscape of energy supply and demand." LS Power is doing its part with building wind power and transmission lines. Since its inception, MITei has been spreading its destructive agenda across the world, these over-educated, pompous elitists who have decided how the masses will obtain energy, regardless of the destruction to the land with turbines, solar panels, and batteries. It does not bother these elitists to tear up land, disrupt people's lives, or dictate how others should live, none of it is in their vocabulary. They really believe they know best. There is no greater population who loves their land more than Idahoans, and what these people are doing is irresponsible and unacceptable. But it doesn't stop there. WEF partners with the International Energy Agency (IEA), in which the United States participates, and whose goal is to work "with governments and industry to shape a secure and sustainable energy future for all." This group also works to create "sustainable energy systems". It is all part of the WEF energy transition plan to implement Sustainable Development Goal #7.A, "promote investment in energy infrastructure and clean energy technology", and #7.B, "expand infrastructure and upgrade technology for supplying modern and sustainable energy services for all". Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman of WEF, talks about this energy transition at the 3:25 mark. Paul Segal can see this future, the wealth to be made, and probably why he has a portfolio that includes most of these systems. Idaho is an easy target for him to make his money. How much money does one have to make before it is enough? These projects will have a negative impact on the area, some of which may be long term. This claim for clean energy comes with its own set of negative aspects as well such as killing birds, and dumping turbine waste. If those who live outside this area think this information isn't relevant to them, think again. With Idaho's vast uninhabited, and federally owned land, the government and corporations have already studied where they can lay their projects down, the agenda is clean energy and no area in Idaho is safe from its intrusion. More information on this project can be found in an article written by the Magic Valley Liberty Alliance (MVLA) including resources to express opposition to these projects. There is also a Facebook page, Stop Lava Ridge, and website. Capital Clarity gave a presentation on this project. This link has information on FAQs with contacts for other questions, and on page 8 the best way in which to provide a comment. This February 24, 2023 video by the BLM provides an explanation of the DEIS, including the alternatives. At the 1:2:04 mark, it was stated that energy produced by Lava Ridge would be traded to purchasers on western markets, depending on where the transmission lines are capable of sending it. Purchasers could obtain a power purchase agreement that would require an approved authorization, which needs to be completed prior to the BLM giving a notice to proceed on the project. Out of state money will be put into a system that damages Idaho land and livelihoods. This transformation to clean energy is an agenda that has been set by the government in partnership with global corporations, who are marching over Idaho with lofty ideas on how they think we should be living, with no representation by citizens. It is the Great Reset being implemented in real time. The time to become engaged is now. If LS Power gets their foot in the door there will be no deterrent to them trying again, or others coming into the state to do the same. Now is the time to say No. Help Magic Valley stop LS Power from ruining the area and our state before April 20. Include comments about scientific studies that show the damage turbines cause to the environment, kill birds, create more waste that is hard to dispose of such as the blades and batteries, and the negative effect they have on the human environment. Flying under the radar, as most critical news does today, was a statement released by the White House on January 10, 2023, labeled the Declaration of North America (DNA) after leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. met in Mexico City for the 10th North American Leaders’ Summit (NALS). No, it is really the White House traitors' summit. There are frightening details in this statement identifying the three countries as regional with commitments in six pillars: 1) diversity, equity, inclusion; 2) climate change and the environment; 3) competitiveness; 4) migration and development; 5) health; and 6) regional security. The false claim made to justify this was that "Our people share bonds of family and friendship and value – above all else – freedom, justice, human rights, equality, and democracy." Behind the caption of Diversity, equity, and inclusion, these three traitors committed to "protect civil rights, promote racial justice, expand protections for LGBTQI+ individuals and deliver more equitable outcomes to all" while promoting "innovative and sustainable solutions that honor traditional knowledge, foster Indigenous-led growth and drive job creation" for others. Details on exactly how this would be done are lacking. For climate change it is the usual rhetoric, with an added renewed emphasis on reducing "methane emissions from all sources" which is a side reference to gas stoves. You know, that odor in your home that smells like a cattle yard. It will only be a matter of time before all natural gas is eliminated. A new investment potential was cited, waste methane which is already being practiced in several Idaho counties. Again the disastrous 30x30 land grab is reinforced to rob Americans of land use for anything. Competitiveness is to "forge stronger regional supply chains, as well as promote targeted investment, in key industries of the future such as semiconductors and electric vehicle batteries, which will be critical to advance electric vehicle development and infrastructure." This commitment to batteries flies in the face of their vow to protect children under human rights. It is also an obvious effort to forward the movement of electric vehicles in which Idaho is already doing its part with infrastructure. In the backroom there will be the back slapping, cigar smoking "public-private dialogues" creating more corporatism and master plans. Idaho's precious mineral deposits will probably be included in the plan to "review and map out existing and potential reserves of critical mineral resources". Migration and Development might be the most devastating. Apparently, participation in the Los Angeles Declaration on Migration and Protection from June, 2022 has already been happening, with a renewed "joint commitment to safe, orderly, and humane migration" which hasn't exactly been happening at the Southern border. This commitment also includes "promoting migrant and refugee integration; providing protection to refugees, asylum seekers, and vulnerable migrants; strengthening asylum capacity in the region; expanding and promoting regular pathways for migration and protection" and countering our "xenophobia" attitudes. According to the traitors, all of this migration is for the labor force. Perhaps a letter to them explaining why providing everything free would assist in clearing up their confusion and help them understand there is no need "to identify and address the root causes of irregular migration and forced displacement", the answer is obvious as to why there is a flood of illegals coming into America. Since Health continues to be on the radar, the other illegal North American Plan for Animal and Pandemic Influenza (NAPAPI) will be updated, "including a strong health workforce" even though those migrants for the workforce aren't mandated to be jabbed. Neither did this plan seem to do anything for the latest Covid event, it is difficult to really know who is making the decisions. It is certainly not the federal government anymore. Regional Security is to "focus on strategies to bolster our shared continental security against domestic, regional, and global threats" but these aren't really the biggest threats, it is threats that continually come from the White House traitor and his two other totalitarian buddies. Yet, all of us domestic terrorists are easily being tracked through the Passenger Name Record (PNR) via an agreement and melding with the European Union law. The use of the term "agreement" rather than "treaty" is enough to bypass the Senate as the only Congressional body that can ratify an agreement between the United States and other countries. Just the release of a statement is all it takes now to erase jurisdictional boundaries between countries, without one iota of input from constituents, or Congress. The "Three Amigos Summit" is a more appropriate name for these tyrants. Their renewed commitment to "address the growing global synthetic drug threat" doesn't seem to be working very well as illicit drugs keep pouring into America. Maybe in that letter to them it can be suggested that a border closure would help halt or significantly reduce this problem, these dingdongs can't seem to make the connection. Holding hands with our Northern and Southern borders is such a comfort, knowing one neighbor is in full mode of the Great Reset and the other one a criminal infested society. By the time they are done with us there will be no distinction between the U.S. and those two other countries with the intertwining of direction and rules. It would be fair to say that the U.S. is now living under a tyrannical dictatorship threesome. |
Concerned Idahoans:This website is non-partisan and is solely dedicated to removing the harmful controls placed on our state and nation through associated programs of Agenda 21, Agenda 2030, and the Great Reset. We invite all Idahoans to join us in this fight for freedom! Categories
All
Archives
March 2024
|