The EPA dropped a subtle hint of furthering UN Agenda 21. It’s so subtle that even outraged conservatives don’t recognize it.

UN Agenda 21 – review

The United Nations describes UN Agenda 21 as “a comprehensive plan of action” to promote “sustainable development.” That’s supposed to mean development that does not affect the environment long-term. It actually means limiting population growth and expansion, and controlling where people live and work, how and what they eat, etc.

Mike Opelka, writing at The Blaze, describes UN Agenda 21 more honestly. It directly threatens the concept “private property,” by proving yet another ground for eminent domain. The usual “sustainable development plan” includes:

• High-density, mixed-use condominiums (“dingbats”) that replace single-family homes.
• A city plan “allowing” a person to live within walking (or bicycle) distance to shopping and his work. Failing that, it expects a person to live within an easy walk of a bus, train, or subway station.
• Seizing vast tracts of farmland and other land to “return it to the wild.”

Results:

• Dormitory-style living.
• No place to park your car—so that you will give it up.
• Limiting travel to a very narrow or closely-defined range.
• Cornering the food supply.

Mass demonstrations would be very difficult to arrange. Worse than that, this could kill churches, private schools, and any sort of club that holds private meetings. No dictator could ask for a better set-up.

The EPA hint

The EPA "Save Our Species" coloring book. Photo: US EPA (public domain as per Copyright Act of 1973)

Last week, the author of the Guns and Religion blog wrote of getting an interesting item in the mail. It was a coloring book titled Save our Species! Many of the animals it depicts are not “species” at all, but variants on a common theme. (An aside: evolutionists like to talk about natural selection as the engine for the diversity of species. But these same people suggest that man could threaten that diversity. It is almost as if they now say that natural selection no longer works. Some people should get their stories straight.)

The publisher of that coloring book: the United States Environmental Protection Agency. The front cover lists the programs that produced the book:

• The Endangered Species Protection Program
• Pesticide Programs

The G&R author made two points. First, he did not have anyone in his immediate family who would enjoy a coloring book. Second, the cost of mailing easily approached $1 a copy. Why is the EPA sending coloring books by bulk mail when the country is nearly bankrupt? The ARRA News Service agrees.

The real agenda

But G&R and ARRA News miss the point. Any waste of government money is bad enough. But whether the EPA prints hard copies and sends them through the mail, or publishes it on-line, doesn’t matter. What matters is the work itself. It is a propaganda piece for children. The message is plain: the grown-ups are killing all sorts of lovely, multicolored animals! People must do something to stop it!

Something, maybe, like UN Agenda 21? Something like returning vast tracts of farmland and forest land to the wild, and forcing us all to live in cities with college-campus-style plans?

Where might this lead?

Americans have “managed” their wildlife almost since America won its independence. Sometimes the government has miscalculated, with disastrous results. The near loss of the mule deer in the West is a prize example.

Not all wildlife management programs end in tragedy. Pennsylvania officials reintroduced elk, or “wapiti,” to their western lands in the last century. Officials plant “herbs” that elk love to feed on, define and protect a range for the elk, and allow limited hunting. The elk herd has grown to more than 700 head. The local economy benefits from visitors who come to Benezette, PA, and other towns in the elk range, to watch elk from afar and hear them during the rut season.

UN Agenda 21 would change all that. The most likely “sustainable development” plan would force Benezette and the other towns to evacuate. It would allow only authorized rangers (and, perhaps, well-connected civilians) to view the elk. The elk herd could grow larger than the land could support. And then the wildlife planners would introduce another, dangerous element: the gray wolf. In fact, gray wolves have decimated elk herds in the Rocky Mountains. Pennsylvania officials brought their first elk specimens from those mountains. What will they do when the wolves threaten to kill all the elk? (Wolves do not kill only when they’re hungry. They kill for sport, and often bury their kills to eat later.)

Conclusion

But of course, real wildlife management has never been the point of UN Agenda 21. The point is human management and human control. The un-worthies at the UN don’t care what happens to the animals. If one animal kills another, and for sport, that doesn’t matter. The idea is to limit human beings’ choices of where and how to live, work, shop, eat, and travel.

A pretty coloring book does not change that. And when the government prints it, it becomes an instrument of propaganda. That, and not the costs of printing and mailing, is the real threat.

Featured image: A bull elk (Cervus canadensis) bellows a warning to his fellows to steer clear. From a viewing blind near Hicks Run, PA. Photo: CNAV.

Related:

• UN Agenda 21 – even Democrats hate it
• UN Agenda 21 – abolish private property

[amazon_carousel widget_type=”ASINList” width=”500″ height=”250″ title=”” market_place=”US” shuffle_products=”True” show_border=”False” asin=”B00375LOEG, 0451947673, 0800733940, 0062073303, 1595230734, 1936218003, 0981559662, 1935071874, 1932172378″ /]