Who Really Controls our Forests?
The UN created the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in 1945 having 3 goals, one of which is the "sustainable management and utilization of natural resources". Forestry is one FAO department which promotes "sustainable forest management (SFM)", a "toolbox" that outlines proper forest management, and Fire Management guidelines. The FAO has been monitoring forests since 1946 with the first Forest Resources of the World report completed in 1948 and includes U.S. forests with an FAO post-2015 plan under #15. This new plan includes conservation of ecosystems, halting loss of biodiversity, protecting and preventing loss of endangered species, and integrating biodiversity values into national and local planning which they have already accomplished. The U.S. joined with the FAO in 1946, and provides reports to the FAO, here is the 2010 report. Another FAO goal is re-inventing the USFS. The North American Forest Commission (NAFC), of which the USFS is a member, carries out its assigned FAO "mandate" as one of six regional forestry commissions. This FAO 2010 Global Forest Resources Assessment defines how forests should be managed globally.
The FAO also developed a list of Criteria & Indicators (C&I) for "Sustainable Forest Management" in line with Agenda 21 Forest principles and also supported the concept of certification originally created by the FSC, actually tracking certification, pg 40. The C&I are being implemented through the Montreal Process of which the U.S. is a member and which the USFS uses. The FAO Model Code of Harvesting Practice can be used for policy and legislation by members which the USFS also uses. The USFS openly partners with the FAO.
The International Union of Conservation of Nature (IUCN), founded in 1948, is another UN NGO that influences global policy on conservation including forests. The USFS is a corporate member of IUCN.
In 1972 the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) adopted a treaty called “The Convention Concerning Protection of the World Cultural and Natural Heritage". Among other things Article 4 and 5 call for the conservation and preservation of natural heritage sites, meaning wilderness areas and national monuments which environmental NGOs advocate. Once a wilderness area or national monument is under federal control it becomes easier to further restrict access and use.
Established by the UN in 1983, the Bruntland Commission released Our Common Future: Report of the World Commission on Environment and Development (WCED) in 1987, which proposed "legal principles" for environmental protection and sustainable development", a forerunner to Agenda 21. The goal of environmental assessments, conservation, maintaining ecosystems, and environmental protection standards are just a few principles that have already been achieved in the United States.
In 1992 G.H.W. Bush signed the UN Agenda 21 sustainable development plan, then implemented by W.J. Clinton in 1993. Chapter 11 discusses strengthening forest related national institutions; enhance management and SD of forests; strengthen institutions for forest education and training as well as forestry industries; protect endangered species; prepare national forestry action plans; accelerate research for a better understanding of problems relating to the management and regeneration of all types of forests; strengthening UN organizations for technical support; carry out environmental impact analysis; plus a cadre of other ideologies. Chapter 12 covers ecosystems. Chapter 13 goes further with goals to generate and integrate forest data bases (started by the USFS in the 1998 Farm Bill); establish natural reserves and protective areas; exchange information with the World Bank and NGOs; promote education on SD; assess the environmental and socio-economic impacts of projects; and support and establish partnerships with NGOs. A more condensed 1992 report can be found here. All current forest management includes these objectives. The 1994 Montreal Process started the process for international forest standards. Referring to the International Forestry program in the booklet USDA Forest Service - The First Century, it states, "The 1992 signing of the Forest Principles and Agenda 21 at the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) - "The Earth Summit" - was coordinated by this new branch of the agency."
The Global Biodiversity Assessment (GBA), created by the UN in 1995, gave justification for biodiversity assessments in forests and other landscapes.
The UN Forum on Forests (UNFF) was created in 2000 of which the United States is a member. The goal of the UNFF is to promote “… the management, conservation and sustainable development of all types of forests and to strengthen long-term political commitment to this end…”, is based on Agenda 21, and uses UN accredited NGOs to implement their objectives. They require national reports, here is the 2005 U.S. report to the UNFF on progress towards implementing UNFF objectives. Under their Global Forest Watch they can track Idaho forests.
Four Global Watch Objectives on Forests were agreed upon by the UNFF and member states in 2006, one of which is increasing the area of protected forests (wilderness areas and national monuments), sustainably managed forests (certification), and increasing products from sustainably managed forests (certification). No wonder Boulder-White Clouds and Island Park are targets and certification is promoted.
As a side note the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), UN NGO, reviews U.S. progress from 1996-2004 for meeting international objectives, with recommendations for progressing further on forest management practices and SD.
Non-Governmental Organizations (NGO)
NGOs originated with the UN. UN NGOs "Play a major role in advancing United Nations goals and objectives". One of the other responsibilities is networking and supporting other UN NGOs and UN business partners. The following Pdf lists the previously mentioned UN NGOs who partner with the federal government and other organizations, who have been responsible for influencing the changes in forest management, and who are instrumental in putting our forests under UN governance. The Society of American Foresters (SAF), which certifies foresters is also a UN NGO. Not only does the UN capture our forests, they have a mechanism to capture our foresters for the promotion of SD.
In meeting Agenda 21 and other UN organizational objectives to establish natural reserves and protective areas, several agendas have been underway by environmental groups, with both federal and state governments, to designate land for limited or even banned use. UN NGOs have made tremendous progress in meeting the UN objective for establishing protected areas and reserves through many schemes. This Pdf lists some of those agendas related to Idaho forests.
As previously noted, UN accredited NGOs network with other UN NGOs and UN business partners. Both are responsible in advancing UN goals and objectives, primarily SD goals, based on Agenda 21. An example of another UN generated certification scam, which the forestry industry is most likely unknowingly involved, is explained.
UN NGO, FSC, partners with Home Depot, a UN business partner. As UN partners, Home Depot works with FSC by selling FSC certified products, even boasting about it AND referencing the UN!
The U.S. Green Building Council (USGBC) has been a UN NGO since 1997 and in 2000 started a "certification" program, Leadership in Energy & Environmental Design (LEED), which promotes "green building leadership". USGBC and LEED promote the use of FSC products. Construction companies, such as the Gardner company in Boise, promote their LEED certification and have been heavily contracted by Boise for downtown development. Here is the cost for certification. In 2002 the US Department of Interior even signed an MOU with the USGBC to build federal buildings with LEED standards and support "green building standard design and practices". Another UN business partner, Coca Cola, commits to FSC products. But it goes farther than that.
As an UN NGO, the USGBC mission is, "To transform the way buildings and communities are designed, built, and operated, enabling a sustainable, socially-responsible, and prosperous environment that improves the quality of life for all." Members who belong to the USGBC include organizations such as US Airforce, US Army, Target, Kohler, Waste Management, Weyerhaeuser, UPS, even Ada County, and other UN business partners. The goal, to change "the way buildings and communities are designed, built and operated." That means changing buildings to how the UN wants them built, supporting more UN programs and businesses, and the UN having a monopoly on businesses. Idaho even has a chapter.
The United Nations Environmental Program (UNEP) launched the Sustainable Building and Construction Initiative (SBCI) in 2006 to promote environmentally friendly construction which promotes LEED certification. In an effort to broaden this UN agenda of promoting "green" buildings, Green Globes certification was licensed for use under the "green building" initiative, a UNEP program, and will capture SFI and ATFS certified products Like LEED, certification is required. The Department of Energy approved Green Globes for building in 2014. Your tax dollar going to UN managed programs. EPA is also there to support "green building".
The UN Global Compact and IUCN now have a "framework" for business partners to incorporate "biodiversity and ecosystems services" (BES) into business activities to increase profits, and establish partnerships with NGOs and other businesses. The IUCN openly supports BES. This booklet explains how businesses can accomplish that task. The UN Global Compact is a conglomerate of huge corporations who advance UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) and plan to transform businesses. Members can be searched here.
This former World Wildlife Fund (UN NGO) scientist, Lara J. Hansen, created EcoAdapt, which appears to be based on the UNEP "Ecosystem-based Adaptation” strategy to help humans brace for climate change disasters, which the USFS is integrating into forest management. Of course this group has a multitude of UN NGO partners, even working on projects such as Y2Y.
In summary, Idaho forestry businesses and family forest owners are "encouraged" to voluntarily become certified by UN NGOs. As a result, more money is put into UN programs; more certified products are sold at a higher cost benefiting Home Depot; construction companies pay UN programs for certification in order to compete; all of which ultimately promote UN ideology and objectives. The other planned effect not discussed here, through UN business partnerships, is the goal of "corporate governance" as defined by the UN. Because of this UN monopoly through partnerships there is a negative impact on smaller businesses who are unable to compete. It has been suggested this is a form of corporatism, forcing Americans into a "green economy".
Whether knowingly or not, the Idaho forest industry has been taken over by UN scams within federal laws, USFS regulations, certification programs, protected areas, products and businesses. The consumer has been indoctrinated into believing that sustainable forestry and certified products should be preferred, wilderness areas and national monuments are the right thing to do, and building "green" is the way to go, when all the while the real story is they are supporting UN goals and objectives, their tax dollar and money are taken to promote those scams, and the UN is becoming more powerful. Their goal? Global environmental and economic governance which is monitored by The Federalist Society through Global Governance Watch. The majority of climate change science is generated by UN scientists such as the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), UN NGO, and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Climate change is the scam being used to promote the justification for sustainable development and transforming the world economy, as stated by Christiana Figueres, the Executive Secretary of UNFCCC. The lodgepole has long since been forgotten underneath this massive agenda ridden ideology. Concluding remarks will be in Part 5.