This article seems to reflect a much more calm and serene view of this issue than is being portrayed here. Might be time for everyone to take a deep breath. This thing might just work out well.
I would refer you to the stated interest of groups like the nature conservancy to remove land like this from use as farming and any human habitation.
There is a stated interest of the WEF to herd humans into high density corridors and "re-wild" the land. The state could purchase it, but better if it stayed in private hands and responsible development occured with preserved farming and low density single family homes.
But the Nature Conservancy and WEF are no where involved in this. Some schmoe at a meeting says it should go to "indigenous peoples" and all of a sudden we are in conspiracy town. Makes zero sense.
By whom? Was an actual representative of Nature Conservancy there? Or was this just someone who attended suggesting that they might be helpful in acquiring the land?
There were multiple people there testifying that they wanted Nature Cinservancy involved. Doeant matter if they were not there in official capacity. They do projects like this all the tome and thier CEO was at WEF bragging about doing projects like this.
Now, do you want to keep allowing people to eat meat and dairy? Or do you want to impose cuts in consumption.
The same people could stand up at a meeting and say they want a Tesla plant built there, but that doesn't mean jack without Musk being involved and on board.
I want people to eat whatever they want to eat. But I have seen zero evidence that anyone who wants to restrict meat and dairy is anywhere near being able to pull that off. I simply don't feel like the sky is on the verge of falling.
Your answer is in the post above. Follow the references. Good day.
This article seems to reflect a much more calm and serene view of this issue than is being portrayed here. Might be time for everyone to take a deep breath. This thing might just work out well.
I would refer you to the stated interest of groups like the nature conservancy to remove land like this from use as farming and any human habitation.
There is a stated interest of the WEF to herd humans into high density corridors and "re-wild" the land. The state could purchase it, but better if it stayed in private hands and responsible development occured with preserved farming and low density single family homes.
But the Nature Conservancy and WEF are no where involved in this. Some schmoe at a meeting says it should go to "indigenous peoples" and all of a sudden we are in conspiracy town. Makes zero sense.
At both Town Halls, the Nature Conaervancy was offered several times as the group to help buy the land.
By whom? Was an actual representative of Nature Conservancy there? Or was this just someone who attended suggesting that they might be helpful in acquiring the land?
There were multiple people there testifying that they wanted Nature Cinservancy involved. Doeant matter if they were not there in official capacity. They do projects like this all the tome and thier CEO was at WEF bragging about doing projects like this.
Now, do you want to keep allowing people to eat meat and dairy? Or do you want to impose cuts in consumption.
The same people could stand up at a meeting and say they want a Tesla plant built there, but that doesn't mean jack without Musk being involved and on board.
I want people to eat whatever they want to eat. But I have seen zero evidence that anyone who wants to restrict meat and dairy is anywhere near being able to pull that off. I simply don't feel like the sky is on the verge of falling.
https://www.ajc.com/opinion/columnists/opinion-magical-forested-area-for-sale-got-300-million-and-change/4CZSDHAKFZADBFCZGYHHQFC5JA/