Close this search box.

Biden’s Land Grab: Dramatically Increasing Federal Land Ownership to Fight ‘Climate Change’

Fifteen Republican governors Wednesday put the White House on notice regarding concerns over Joe Biden’s “30 X 30 Plan,” the goal of which is to place 30 percent of U.S. lands under government conservation by 2030. Right now, only 12 percent of U.S. acreage is under federal ownership and management.

The new plan would infringe on “the private property rights of our citizens and significantly harming our economies,” the governors said in a letter sent to the White House. “We encourage your Administration to focus on better management of the lands the federal government already controls and to be more proactive in working with the states.”

Biden’s January 21 Executive Order illustrates that, like so many other socioeconomic systems in the U.S. under Biden, agriculture, and with it private land ownership, is under attack.

It matters not how far agriculture has come in showcasing its ability to achieve environmental stewardship. It matters not how many times farmers, ranchers and livestock producers explain that they are feeding, clothing, and providing energy to the citizens of the world.

It doesn’t even matter how loudly they shout that they have more incentive than anyone in protecting the health and resiliency of private and federally permitted land because they can only sustain a ranch or farm by caring for the environment.

Regardless of all that, agriculture is still condemned by those with no knowledge of agriculture. It is obvious there is no one currently in the executive branch who has any working knowledge of the industry, not even in the Department of Agriculture.

Titled “Executive Order on Tackling the Climate Crisis at Home and Abroad,” Biden’’s plan has been largely shrouded in secrecy as to how it would be implemented.

While there are a lot of things in the Executive Order that are major causes for concern, the most alarming is the ridiculous view that the ownership and use of private property and the multiple use of federal land — in the administration’s view — is antithetical to protecting the world from climate change and preserving “biodiversity,” a totally made-up and meaningless term that supposedly defines the variety of plants and animals in a macroenvironment.