Agenda 2030 Is Taking Our US Land - 30x30

SENATOR Kamala Harris co-sponsored a bill to enact 30 x 30 in 2020. Will this be a focus of her administration?

Marlo Oaks and Policy Expert Margaret Byfield
What is 30 x 30? It is a massive land grab by the US government in connection with the United Nations' 2030 agenda. Six days into office, the Biden Administration signed an unauthorized Executive Order to carry out 30 x 30.

The US Government, Land Trusts, and several billionaires are buying up the land in the United States. Why?

 Raw Transcript

so as we continue to cover pressing issues that rear their ugly head in a
civilization and culture that is Shifting at break neck speed there are few issues more important than the idea
of private property and land use and you would think that this would not be an issue for anybody but you'll be shocked
to hear about what's happening even here in the United States with land use and federal government purchasing up land
for nefarious purposes that are tied directly to control Power and a climate
agenda my friend Marlo Oaks joins us the Utah State Treasurer along with Margaret
bfield who I just recently met a policy expert in this field you're going to learn something new and very important
here this episode is brought to you by fathom the good fathom the good is homeschooling High School curriculum
that teaches teenagers the best ideas underlying our Western Civilization
focused on the American founding I believe these are the best classes your kids will ever take from kindergarten
through seniors in high school and you know what depending on where they go even Beyond into the universities if you
go to Fathom theeg good.com you can check out their free sample courses here we
[Music]
go all right welcome to Quick show my name is Greg Matson and I am your host in this episode episode we bring on
Marlo Oaks the Utah State Treasurer and Margaret bfield executive director of American stewards of Liberty and a
natural resource policy expert welcome to the show hey thank you uh Margaret
we're gonna start with you uh this is by the way to me very concerning topic I I am really surprised that this is not
being discussed more uh but let's start off with this very basic broad question
what is 30 by3 what is this so 30x30 is an intern National agenda to permanently
protect 30% of our lands and Oceans by 2030 now it's been implemented in other
nations uh many you know 20 plus years in front of us and and it really wasn't
able to get established here in America until the Biden Harris Administration came in and six days into the start of
that Administration they initiated the 30x30 agenda in America through
executive order through presidential Fiat and so what 30x30 really means what
they are after is they are saying we're in a nature crisis and to solve that we
must set aside 30% of our lands in their natural state meaning no human use no
food production but left to Nature in order to save Humanity so that's their
argument and it's all tied into the climate crisis narrative and so um in
America it was very difficult for them to get this established because we're very different from other nations we
actually own our property you know we don't have a sovereign King the individual is Sovereign and so when we
own our property we own our property and in America 60% of the land is still owned by the people so that's one of the
the big hurdles that they've had is how do they get control of our private property when the people own it as
opposed to other nations where you have kings that own it or the governments that own it and it's a lot easier to put
in policies to say Hey you now need to set aside land uh 30% so um it really
took a very aggressive Administration that wasn't so concerned about uh
following the law to get this input to get this implemented in America because
couple things about 30 by3 it's unauthorized there's no Congressional author unauthorized it means there's no
Congressional Authority for it and there's no constitutional Authority for it so directive like this a National
Environmental Policy to set aside 30% of the land would be would need to be something that Congress passed and the
states agreed to but none of that happened they just did it through executive order so it's um it's been
they they have been implementing it they've been using the the existing programs and the existing funds that
they already had authorized in order to implement this uh on American American soil so we've seen over the the course
of their Administration we've seen everything from a real increase in conservation programs because they
create a a federal Nexus on the private lands we've seen a huge increase in conservation easements that's another
thing that permanently protects the lands that qualifies under 30x30 and then we've seen them really lock down
lands that uh the federal government already owns so like our multi multiuse
multiple use lands that are managed by the Foresters in the BLM we've seen them really lock those things down and
restrict them to the point that the BLM has just issued new a new uh finalized a rule where they now are going to be
giving conservation leases instead of grazing grazing leases or Timber cells
or any of those things on our what are supposed to be our productive lands that that we the people get to use and and uh
support our economies from now do they really need a a does this need to be authoriz PR I mean can't they doesn't
the government just go out the federal government say well we're going to go out and we're going to purchase this land or we're going to set this land
aside and I don't know I mean it's kind of a uh kind of like a zoning of this land if it's BLM or anything else do
they have to authorize this in order to accomplish this Con the Constitution delegates Congress to be the manager of
our federal Holdings not administrative agencies so Congress has delicated some
of that authority to the administrative agencies but uh to put it in perspective
Whenever there is a special use category or or lands are to be set aside for a special use like say a national park or
a Wilderness Area or a National Wildlife Refuge those are designated by Congress
so that is our representative body goes deliberates and decides this is very special land we want to protect it we're
going to make it a park and they withdraw it and they make it a park but that is done through our representative government
what we've seen in the Biden Harris Administration is they're not they're not going that route what they're doing
is uh as we've seen here in Texas most recently is they issued a new land
protection plan an acquisition area that they have self designated around a
6,440 acre National Refuge there's no there's no acquisition area around it
now that Congress designated and sometimes they will on a National Wildlife Refuge there isn't one on this
so they self-designated it and their their acquisition area is 7 million
Acres covers 15 counties in Texas and five in New Mexico and out of that they
are planning to acquire 700,000 additional acres in in private
fee simple land so they convert that to federal or in conservation easements so
again uh up until the Biden har Administration those are things that
Congress has delegated so whenever they're making a special designation of land they're withdrawing it from the
public domain to be utilized as multiple use lands that has been congress's decision in the past this Administration
has decided that they are going to self- authorize themselves through their administrative agencies to uh take what
land they want uh to acquire without that authorization Marlo Margaret had brought
up this has kind of tied in with the climate change initiatives um is it I
mean it it seems to me like these types of things are always LED with kind of this bleeding heart compassionate type
of agenda of well we've got to protect the wildlife we've got to protect the uh the environment pollution uh the ozone
layer etc etc etc right these things get piled up on this how much of this land
acquisition by the government is is really a sincere effort to to control
things I guess from from an environmental perspective and if it's not if there's a percentage of that
that's not what is the purpose of this well I I think we're seeing the use of
Crisis narratives to to Really push agendas the biggest like Margaret said
is is the climate change um you know this is really uh at the heart of of
things like environmental social governance uh in the corporate world um this is clearly what's driving this
30x30 agenda it this really originates from the UN um 30 by3 uh and so it is
kind of all roads lead back to this climate crisis uh narrative and so
absolutely that this is really using that um existential threat to to try and
push uh people to to um to do things that otherwise we wouldn't do and and in
this case you know protection we're talking about protecting land well that sounds really nice except for it's
really more like Walling off land it's it's it's basically taking land away from us um and I think people need to
understand that that really this isn't about uh protecting land as much as it
is about controlling uh land and and stopping human impact on land and that's
where it becomes very problematic because you know big part of the United States and our founding was about PR
private property that is a key element that protects us from the government is
is our ownership of land and so when we move into a government really trying to
lock up and and uh keep people off of land we're talking about a very
different country uh Margaret going back to the Biden Harris
Administration back in 2020 there was a resolution filed in house in the house
by uh or or filed by co-sponsored by Senator kamla Harris and representative
Deborah Harland okay this is fascinating to me I think there were only 15 people involved with this or Representatives
that were involved with this it wasn't like really backed up much but this would be during the election year and I
don't know if Senator uh Harris had already been chosen as vice president at this point Point uh to run with with
Biden I mean I would imagine this would have already been the case I don't know but but and and I'm not a Washington
Insider so I don't know a number of these things but is there a connection between her involvement with 30x30 here
or she is pushing this 30x30 resolution and and her being brought into the
administration and and what is the inv what is what is why is she involved in this is this
because the Biden Administration had tapped her as a senator to take a look at this as they were believe hoping to
come into uh to to the White House or is it the other way
around yeah I don't I don't really know um you know what came first what we do
know is that she's been a True Believer on this on this agenda from the very beginning so I think when I first first
saw that resolution that was filed there were only five Senators on it and she was one of them so like you said it was
not a popular idea and it was just a resolution they didn't even try to file it as a bill but I
think what it's what it did was it probably set her up to signal to the
powers that pee that you know want these un agendas adopted in America to say to
realize okay she's our gal because she's going to push these agendas so um yeah I
do think that it probably was a very strategic decision to go to go forward with it but you know they're True
Believers in this and Deborah Holland you know she as a a freshman
representative co-sponsored it in the house and now she's Secretary of the Department of interior and has been
throughout that's very Administration yeah like wow wait a minute here so one of the two sponsors is vice president
now running for president the other sponsor is the Secretary of the Interior yeah
exactly and that I'm not going with a conspiracy here but that just is kind of
that that's kind of interesting well and it also tells us that if Harris
is to win the election this is going to get worse for for land owners in America
yeah because if this because this is how this usually would work I know this much right she's got certainly ties with
lobbyists and others that would be with organizations that are having her or or
helping to push her support this resolution to push this through someone
she's talking to or numerous organizations that she's talking to with this that she had has ties with that you
would think she continues those ties with now and uh and so you would think that yes this is just going to become a
bigger and bigger deal if she is uh going to be put in as president so Marlo
what you know there is aside from there there the the the
push for land goes beyond even the federal government I mean you've got Bill Gates buying up all of this
property everywhere and other land trusts and all these things happen they're buying all this property there's
no food being grown on it there's no agricultural happening with it there's no production of any sort that's going
on where they're using you know the L the land uses in a positive manner at all why why are they doing this why are
they involved with the same type of thing if if they're are they helping to try and accomplish this 30 by3 or what
are they doing uh it's that's a great question and I'm not sure I really have a a solid answer it is is troubling when
you have uh any organization or or even other other countries coming into our
country buying up land and then letting it sit fow I mean that clearly is not um
in society's best interest uh if we if we have agricultural land it should be
producing um that that's that's how Market works if the market were truly um
you know trying to meet the demands of society uh then then the land would be
put to some kind of use that has benefit for society and so to have um large uh
actors like uh large investors come in and and buy up land uh and not use it
for economic purposes that that clearly is um is a
very troubling uh development because it says that their agenda uh that they are
willing to to uh bypass you know economic benefits to push their agenda
it's it's very counter to to what any of us would think would be in the best
interest of of that land owner so it it should concern everyone in society when
when those kinds of activities are taking place and and land is is essentially being used as as a pawn in a
uh in this um existential climate uh discussion um you know basically taking
resources and and and making them unavailable for society and it harms all
of us yeah that is really interesting all three of us were at a meeting recently and there was a uh a statement
I haven't verified this but there's a statement made that uh maybe one of you two can but a statement made that we are
now in the negative in terms of of Import and Export on food in other words we we import more food than we export at
this point which is a very odd thing if that is true with so much land open land
that we have available for agriculture uh that would be a very odd thing position to be in why would you
ever want to be in that position of all things food you would think would be an important resource isn't that right
Margaret oh yeah absolutely and and that is correct I mean the recent numbers
that came out on the our trade numbers is we are exporting less than we are
importing so we have become a net importer food America I mean we have we
can grow everything here we can raise everything here we're not you know a single Market that just specializes in
one product like some countries you know we are so diverse but our resources are
being locked up and it is um I think it is very deliberate and when you see the
big players um buying up the land we I really kind of liking them to are robber barons in
the old days you know it's they're the new climate crisis robber barons because they're the same people like the gates
and the Jeff Bezos they're the same people who are fending funding these real radical agendas internationally so
the 30x30 agenda uh the attack on food the getting eliminating beef and going
to plant-based food products instead um they're behind all these things at the
same time they're buying up our real assets our land and they're also people
that don't have to make the land productive in order to survive they already have a lot of money
so they can hold on to the land and starve everybody else out as they're in the cat's position to buy up this land
as they're pushing other people off the land through these agendas like 30 by3 and natural asset companies and the
different things that we have had to fight over the last four years so you
know I think there's I think there is a deeper agenda there I think they do know what they're doing and I you know Marlo
knows this I'm sure but if you want to become wealthy you watch people who are wealthy what are they
doing and what I'm seeing is they are buying up the real asset and they are
not encumbering them with these Federal conservation programs or conservation easements like they're encouraging
everybody else to do and so one of the things that that I think is that the real commodity of the future is going to
be private property without these incumbrances and that's what they're fine what Margaret what is the what is
the relationship would you say between land and our Liberty what what
is the relationship there they are absolutely equal you
can't have one without the other and this is what makes our nation so unique and our Founders understood this that
after you know passing the Constitution and it it's you know obviously we're given rights that other countries don't
have but there are other countries that have similar constitutions to ours the difference is our Founders understood
that that it was only a piece of paper unless they gave us a way to protect it and so the way that that was to be
protected is that the people would own the land if the people own the land the
people can control their own livelihoods they can grow their own food do all the basics grow their own food support their
own family defend their property and um at the same time contribute to the
economy so build a strong local economy which then builds a strong National economy and having that ability then
they could limit government which was always the intent of the founders the founders never looked at government as a
good thing the Constitution is all about how do we put as many constraints on the federal government as possible so that
they never overtake the power of the people so key to that was the people had
to own the land and to put it in a modern perspective look at the two Wars we're in right now Russia and Ukraine
what is that about that's about more land Israel that's about more land so
all of the all of the others understand our opponents understand that who owns
the land controls the government you know another way to put that in perspective is when Jefferson
made the Louisiana Purchase 540 million Acres every acre of that was disposed of
to the people and he didn't call up the Bill Gates of the world and say how much do
you want or China every acre was disposed to the settlers and it was
proportionate to the area that they were settling in so they could settle maybe in one state it would be 120 Acres
because that's what you needed to have a an economic unit to feed a family in other places it could have been 640
acres but there was a limit on what a settler could acquire because as
Jefferson said in a great letter that we've published many times over the years because it's one of my favorites
that he said um it's the small land owner that is the most important part of the state and if the land is dispersed
among the people and not owned by a conglomeration or Consolidated then the
people will always be able to control their government and we the people will all always have the ability to self-rule
which of course is the DNA of America yeah so when you talk about land
you have to talk about Liberty you cannot have one without the other well and just I'll add to that you know this
is really highlighting our economic system is bottom up it's very different
from from other countries you know we got away from sort of this top down structure in Europe um we come to
America and really trying to protect the individual and it's it's the individual rights that are god-given we are
sovereign as individuals in the marketplace it's the same thing the marketplace is really driven by consumer
decisions and and what we're seeing now is this top down uh effort to control
resources to control who gets um Capital uh and same thing in in the land these
land issues when we're talking about coming in and and and grabbing huge swats of land and and and taking it out
of basically public use you can see that this is clearly a top- down agenda and
again it's justified by this existential threat that we're all going to die unless we do x y and z um and so uh
hopefully you know people will start seeing this for what it is and and and it's not just happening in the land it's
happening with corporations and and the government coming in and or activist shareholders coming in and telling
companies you have to do X Y and Z which clearly not in the best interest of shareholders you know we're turning so
many of of our institutions upside down and it really is basically bringing in a
topdown element uh that is completely counter to our our economic system and
certainly what's in the best interest of individuals and our freedom ultimately Marlo there was uh recently I
think it was squelched back in uh January earlier this year but uh there was an effort to get something past
called the natural assets uh was it Securities company natural asset companies okay so natural
asset companies that would be formed as a security I believe right and it was used in a way that was you know it could
be any kind of land and there would be value attached to
this I think that this is important to understand because of what's now being
uh uh brought to us which is the sustains act but tell us a little bit more about those nac's yeah so this was um and this is
why I I got involved is because it it's is in the capital markets and as a state treasurer I operate in the capital
markets um and oversee Investments for the state um and and so what happened
was the New York Stock Exchange went to the Securities and Exchange Commission requesting a rule and and that rule
would essentially allow uh these companies to manage land they didn't
have to own the land they could just manage the land to maximize basically
Mother Nature ecologic iCal services so um they needed a rule uh because it
requires different accounting it's not you know the value of the company isn't based on traditional economic activity
it's based on what is the value of public goods like clean air and and and
soil composition things that that we think of as just common everyday sort of
positive public goods that don't have a a Value Place on them because there's
not economic activity associated with them and so uh when the New York Stock
Exchange requested that rule uh that the the implications were huge because if if
this were allowed then a company could be formed and capital could be raised
from investors any any investor that could invest in in the United States today could invest in such a company and
that money could then be used to lock up land essentially taking the these uh
this money and and buying the management rights to land they don't have to buy the land itself you could take uh a
national park or or you know Federal a BLM or or Forest Service land and say
okay we're this natural asset company is now going to manage it for the purpose of maximizing Mother Nature you could
also do this with conservation easements private land um you could roll that conservation easement on private land in
a natural asset company which then that company would manage that that land for
ecological purposes but but maximize the land natural resources is that from
production just an an intrinsic madeup value yeah it's
basically trying to maximize for example photosynthesis and and in the production
of clean air or you know pollination or any kind of natural process that's
happening on land that's really what they're talking about and trying to create a value for that uh and so
that so that there is now this artificial Market that's been created for things that you and I would think of
as just common everyday uh public goods that shouldn't be valued because once
you value that once you quantify and put some value on these public goods then
they can be bought and sold and traded and and you know people can be charged
uh for them it it opens up a Pandora's Box uh that that could be incredibly
dangerous and so um I was very grateful that that the New York Stock Exchange ultimately pulled the rule uh and so the
natural asset company did not come to fruition um but you know we're seeing
the same themes of trying to uh BAS
basically lock up land uh to to prevent human impact because one of the worst
Parts about the natural asset company is you have land today for example in Utah
we have about 67% of our land that's owned by the federal government and we
have multiple leases on land it could be for mineral extraction or oil extraction
or grazing um you know Recreation whatever it is that could all happen on that land
with these different leases um with a natural asset company the goal would to be be to prevent that kind of economic
activity because it is completely counter to maximizing ecological Services
maximizing the value of Mother Nature so but there is no value to the ecological Services well there's no how is that how
is that I mean I understand for example you've got solar energy and you create panels and you're creating energy out of
it there's something being produced from nature right but you're talking about actually putting a an economic value on
the process of nature that does not produce anything specific for anyone to
purchase well and and frankly these are invaluable right I mean if we don't have
if we don't have um trees that are that are uh involved in photosynthesis then
we're not going to have enough oxygen so um clearly there is value but it's not
traditional economic value where you have money ex exchanging hands right and
and and assigning value that way which is basically what our economic system is based on and so that that was the
argument that we're not valuing nature enough and so therefore we need to put a
value on it because otherwise we're going to destroy nature and we're all going to die it's sort of that same idea
but is it putting a value on it or is it controlling it it because well they go we're going to own these Securities who
owns the Securities that actually produce oxygen as an example right right
well these are producing the oxygen for the Earth and we own it yes right and how many how many millions of Acres can
we own with these nac's where we have you know hey here's 1% of the total
production of oxygen on the earth and and and it's owned in a security that is really concerning to me oh it's it a
huge problem and and and and on the other side you could you could see companies being forced uh maybe it's an
oil company or or somebody that has a lot of of large carbon footprint um they
could potentially be forced to invest in a natural asset company to offset their carbon footprint right and so you can
see how this this Market could be artificially created but you're right it it it it opens up a Pandora's Box that
then allow was buying and selling and trading and and charging people for
these Goods that today are just common uh benefits for all of us because we
live on this planet yeah you were gonna follow up with that yeah I think so one
of the I think the the fundamental flaw in what they're trying to do by monetizing these natural assets is these
assets don't qualify as property so property that can be bought and sold is something very specific a very simple
way to understand it is it's something that can be contained and something that you can exclude others from so land you
can contain and you can keep people off uh water you can contain you can decide
who who gets to utilize that even the energy from solar panels whoever
produced that that is their property and they get to decide whether they're going to sell it and who they're going to sell
it to if they decide to do that but we're talking about things like air and pollination and photosynthesis things
that you cannot contain and you canot exclude others from so that's where we really cross a
moral line by trying to kind of back door make these things at the same level
as real property rights that somebody can own and somebody can control and
what that really and the other part of that too is that is another reason why it's not property is because because the
value of it isn't derived by the consumer so it's not derived because the consumer wants to buy it that they're
going to go into their grocery store and say hey I want to buy some carbon credits today that's not a product people buy
the only reason that carbon credits are sold is for the reason that Marlo just discussed companies are forced into
having to do that in order to be able to get a permit or to operate so it's been manufactured the value for it has and as
he talked about the the new New York Stock Exchange needing these unique accounting rules um they needed to adopt
a un accounting system which basically is a methodology that has bureaucrats
sitting in a room deciding that the air you breathe is worth X the air Marlo breathes is worth why and the air I
breathe probably has a completely different value and that is going to change that value is going to change
based on who's sitting in the White House not based on what the consumer wants to buy or selles so that's why we
you know we kind of have to get back to the fundamentals on this these are not property and when we when we give them
the color of property and interject them into our markets we create real problems
not only for property rights but for our our economic system as well Marlo was
this something that that was close at all or was it easily squelched or I mean I remember you know we talked about this
actually uh I think end of last year and uh before it had gotten squelch but was
it was it close was it a massive threat was it just a little bit of a threat and and where where did it end up oh I I
think it was a massive threat I think um only because of folks like you uh who
who um you know talked about it and got other people U more people you know
learned what was going on uh that that ultimately um that the message got out
and the consequences people started understanding the consequences and and ultimately it was
the New York Stock Exchange that that pulled the rule thankfully uh I was very
concerned that unless they did that if it went through the the whole process
and and got up and going I mean it could it could create a lot of problems uh
even if ultimately um they stopped trading um you know it was a very very
difficult situation we had no idea you know where things were at and and we
just had to you know go out and talk as much as we could on it and and thankfully um that the message got to
the New York Stock Exchange but we're clearly seeing that this effort um to lock up land to to push this ecological
um you know valuation and and and putting a a value on Mother Nature this is not going away these efforts to to
really um change private property ownership in America this is not going
away they're all related and and you know more people need to understand what's going
on Margaret talking about it not going away there's now the sustains act uh can
you cover that a little bit tell us what this is what are they trying to accomplish is it the same thing I I had brought up that made this is kind of
like nac's 2.0 what what is it so sustainance act is actually a
republican Le bill that was was passed in the 23 Omnibus Appropriations bill
and I think on the surface it's one of these ideas that kind of sounds good on the surface but now in light of knack
and that whole battle I think I I would guess that some of the the people who voted for that bill are wishing they had
not because it was hard to foresee where this was all going but what the sustains act does is it allows a contributing
entity a private entity to contribute to the federal conservation programs that then are placed on private property to
help land owners do more do better with their land um mitigate the climate
crisis I mean all these climate smart ideas is all wrapped into this this conser these conservation programs and
and so the the conservation program creates a federal Nexus on the private land that's one of the first concerns
but now that you have private money being interjected into these programs um the act itself directs the
secretary to figure out now who owns the environmental services
so what we were just talking about that they were trying to do with KNX was monetize those natural processes this is
like a backdoor way of accomplishing the same thing because the statute says that
the contributing entity is supposed to prescribe the percentage of those
Environmental Services they now own on private land because they contributed
funds to the conservation programs and that that valuation and that
percentage is determined between the Secretary of the Interior or of USDA
Agriculture and the contributing entity it is not determined with the
landowner so you have them creating a financial struct structure basically
validating a new property right on somebody's private land that the
landowner doesn't have a say in on what that's going to be and that's that's where we again are crossing that line
it's a very dangerous line that we're crossing by saying we're going to monetize these natural processes and
somebody is going to own them and so you know uh proponents of Life idea like to
say well we're just you know we're we're kind of making it sound a little bit
more extreme and of course you know this wouldn't be used to control the property but it absolutely is tailor made to do
exactly that and again it all comes down to who's sitting in the White House and if it's
Harris a Harris Administration we are in for a very troubling for years and it
it's just a matter of time before they get complete control of the property so this is to both of you then
I'm going to ask again coming back to this because this is what most people are going to say and whether you're on
the left or the right many not most but at least many people are going to say well this is all just a conspiratorial
idea there's no real threat in place we're not going to lose our property what is the big deal there's been parks
and National you know BLM and everything for a long state-owned property for a very long period of time what what is
the big issue so the the question I have I I always like to go back and look at what the motives are and and and what
the what the power structure is because power is power and if power is there
it's going to happen that's just the way it works if the power is given it's going to happen so the question is is
how much of this really is sincere about the environmental issues on this again
and how much of it is a power grab is this really all about we want to own the
property as much as possible uh whether it's a a go you know a a federal issue
right the federal government wants to own all of this property because they want the power and and and if so what
why what what what is the purpose of the Federal government wanting to own all of
this power what does that do well I think you know we can go to to
Claus Schwab who is really the head of the world economic forum and he has said
it very plainly we will own nothing and we will like it um you can go right to
uh KL Marx when he defined socialism it's the abolishment of private property
I mean our opponents understand those who who seek power and money understand
that in order for them to have control of all of that um they need to take the
private property away from us surfs I mean we're the little people um
that's absolutely essential for them having the kind of control that they really seek over the rest of us is they
have to acquire the private property so you have all these little kind of schemes on how they're going to get
there and that also though then you do have people involved in this movement
who are true believers who really believe you know we man is destroying the environment and I think they
honestly believe that I disagree with it but I think that there are some out there that honestly believe that and
they are the ones who are really being used as kind of the pses in all this um it's their emotional fervor behind this
that is driving a lot of this and those who are controlling the strings are making good use of that um so you know
you kind of have you have a lot of different agendas coming together with different motivations but all working
towards the same end goal and you know really this isn't anything new I me our
history shows us time and time again you always have people who think that they are wiser smarter and should be
dominating the rest of us you know hitan Hitler Napoleon I mean we've we've gone through this many times before so this
isn't something new it's part of human nature and that again gets us back to
the Brilliance of our constitution because our Founders understood that's part of human nature and they tried to put in as many safeguards as possible so
that our government would never be controlled by people like that so you know I think there's different ways to
answer that but um I there's there's one
one thing that my dad said that kind of puts it all in perspective and has put it all in perspective for me and that is
either you have the right to own property or you are property they understand that we need to
make sure we understand that and really fight to protect our property rights at every level it's not just land it's our
gun rights it's our freedom of religion it's our freedom of speech those are all property rights they are all absolutely
invaluable to a self-governing nation yeah I think uh you know the
reason I I asked that question is because I think a lot of people don't understand that that what you have in these kind of
movements is is a small group of powerful dedicated ideologically
possessed individuals right that have the tools and they have the power and they have the knowhow of how these
things change and what you need to do but the majority of people are somewhere in the Spectrum from their out to well
yeah I mean I don't like pollution and and and that's where most people lie so so people think well
there's not a real problem here there there is not this evil because they're thinking of those individuals that are
on that spectrum that that that are listening to these things but the problem
is people don't identify the source they don't identify the sources of those that
are the actual movers and shakers that actually make these things turn and these individuals that
are these are the theologians so to speak of these things they are
the ones that actually put all of the ideas out there they're the ones that actually get things changed and move it
and they are the revolutionaries they want Revolution nobody else has to want
that they want the revolution they know how to get it done but this is why so many people look at this and they think
well this is a conspiracy theory or or it's not because I look around and and I don't see these individuals as being
these crazies and radicals that you're talking about but but it's all on a spectrum yeah and I and I think um one
of the more interesting things that that I've certainly learned is the the power of language in in getting people to
adopt or or to become proponents of something that that could have some
pretty negative consequences so we're seeing the corruption of language um in
a lot of cases you know the the the powerful element of of sort of the
environmental movement is is the you know language around stewardship and and
and wanting to protect our our resources and and you know these things that most
everybody agrees on the problem is is that when you start digging
deeper um and you see what are they really trying to do for example in
America the Beautiful uh the 30x30 in America we're talking about stopping
human impact on the land which is different than what most people would would think they understand right of of
sort of the message that's that's being um talked about and so that that's where
I think a lot of people get tripped up and and and people think well it's just about stewardship but it's not um and
that's I think that's where I would say um you know that's where people need to
read more closely and look more closely what are the implications whether
whether the um motive are pure or not what are the implications for what they're uh what is going to happen uh if
we go in this direction and that that's really where I try to to focus on is what what are the implications here and
I I don't necessarily need to know people's motives although it becomes clear um that that somebody's motives
are not positive here right they're trying to take over all this land um but
you know it's really the the language and understanding how termin terminology
is being used to drive an agenda um that that really goes beyond what maybe
people understand that terminology to mean it's really the um kind of having uh one word with two different
definitions yeah you need a new language and understand what's what's being communicated what uh you know for both
of you what what needs to be done here with all of this I mean for me when I talk about these types of issues I I I I
I go all the way back to awareness it's like that people need to be aware nobody knows about this nobody knows about
these things that we're talking about right here I I didn't know about them until a year ago or so right I what
there's no awareness that these things are even happening there's no awareness that there is a power grab there's no awareness of of of honestly the the
importance of land ownership even to that degree right we we don't have that so what I try to do is focus on
awareness and education at a minimum but is that enough you know what to to say
that we need to overhaul our education system is is a truth but that's a major
issue and to talk say we need more Civics and we need more understanding of Liberty and the founding of the United
States what but we are where we're at and and so is awareness enough what
what do we need to do well awareness I think is a good start you know our Founders said we have to have an
educated citizenry and and here's the thing that I actually think is is more powerful about what we're doing and just
just like conversations like this is people recognize truth truth is a sword
and so you can you know make a strong case for all of this and um I know the
groups that I talk to it doesn't matter if they are that they lean conservative or liberal by the time we're finished I
they're nodding their heads and they're they're going to walk out of that room the next time they hear a candidate say well we need to put in these
conservation programs the hair goes up on the back of their neck because they now know that that may not be the right
path and so it's hard to it's hard to really gauge how that's being multiplied
but um but I think definitely the educational component I mean programs like this are really important but that
also has to happen at every level not just with the citizenry but with our elected leaders as well so you know as
people get their arms wrapped around these issues I think it's really important to make sure you're from the
very local level your County Commissioners are aware of this and that's one of the reasons that when we
started fighting 30x30 we started with uh resolutions that counties ask counties to pass not necessarily because
it was going to stop it but because it meant the whole Community had to get organized and understand what 30x30 was
to get behind it and stop it and we know all these programs are implemented locally so if a County you know you have
a group of County Commissioners that understands what 30 by3 is and they see programs come in they know they know we
need to fight this and then you've got a chance but that education I mean
everything that we're talking about right here has to happen at every level of our our policymaking so the state
level and of course that's where Marlo is and he's done an exceptional job at bringing his colleagues up to speed um
you know through the Knack issue he alerted so many of our of his colleagues not just Financial officers but attorney
generals that didn't have this awareness and then we also do a lot of work back in DC and we have a lot of policy makers
in DC that are really um really understanding this in depthly so I think
you know is education enough no is not enough but it's a really good start and
um we are building an educated citizenry around around these truths and um at
some point you just you basically have to say the good Lord is going to uh you
know help drive this ship as as it's been doing it the whole time and um we
do our part and we work tirelessly towards it but uh I think you know we
look at The Knack issue and how that was stopped I mean that definitely from my perspective was the hand of God was in
that and that was just one of those issues he said nope you're not going to go this far and um so I think we've
we've seen that his work uh just this year actively in our nation when he stopped KNX so um I do think we ha
people have to get involved I there's another thing that my my dad said that actually we are in the process of
getting printed on a t-shirt because I think it's such a powerful statement that everybody needs to remember which is you only have the rights you are
willing to defend sure so that's all of us I mean we can sit by and watch these things
happen or we can get involved Marlo do you have any input on this to to wrap us up here yeah I I think um you
know we're talking about education and you know the the term conspiracy theory is often used to discredit people um I I
really think one of the biggest challenges we have as a country is the pursuit of Truth are we committed to
pursuing the truth and finding what is what's real and what isn't um and and
that's a big part of education and and you know our country was founded on pursuing the truth markets work based on
information and and the accurate the accurate flow of information and and
getting information into participants hands and and it's up to us um
individually uh in each of our roles whatever it is that we are committed to
pursuing the truth um and when you hear somebody say oh that's just a conspiracy
theory um maybe that should be reason to start digging a little bit deeper and
find finding some of these documents that are out there U you know that's where I had to go with the natural asset
companies um really getting up to speed a lot of the information was was on government websites you just read that
and and suddenly it's not a a conspiracy theory there's a lot of Truth and and
and uh that's really where we need to be committed um instead of trying to tear each other down and and saying oh you're
you're just a conspiracy theorist maybe see if there's some validity there uh
and looking and and being committed to finding out what is what is accurate
what is in inaccurate and and and really uh being committed to um to some of
these fundamental values that we as Americans have shared uh over the century the centuries of our country
yeah well Margaret Marlo thanks so much for your time really appreciate it I hope that we can do something like this
again follow up with what's going on especially with the land use issues here I I think again it's just we've it's got
to get out there we've got to have people understanding what's going on and and and be educated in terms of oh what
am I going to vote for what am I going to defend what what needs to be uh taught to my kids and my grandkids Etc
and and so I appreciate your efforts on this well thank you for having us on
yeah and appreciate yours too I don't underestimate what you're doing yeah it's very important so thank you for
your interest thank you both