Public-Private Partnerships: A Backdoor for Extremism and Anti-Animal Agriculture Ideologies

A proposed ballot initiative opens the door for radical environmental and "animal-rights" groups to become operational partners in Colorado conservation policy. In recent years, we have witnessed anti-animal agriculture policies implemented by bureaucrats in the U.S. and across Western Civilization. Colorado is now in the sights of the “Bureaucrats” (read Communists).

From AGRO-Professionals

The Colorado Wildlife and Biodiversity Protection Act and What It Means for Livestock Producers and Landowners

On April 18th, 2025, the Colorado Legislative Council staff received language for a Colorado ballot proposal that is of significant concern for livestock producers and landowners in the state of Colorado. Currently, it has been assigned the number 2025-2026 #82 and a name. It is pending review and a comment hearing.

Colorado farmers and ranchers have always been stewards of the land. But now, under the banner of wildlife conservation, this sweeping new ballot proposal threatens the livelihoods, property rights, and the future of agricultural production in our state.

The proposed Colorado Wildlife and Biodiversity Protection Act may sound noble, but dig a little deeper, and it becomes clear that it is about ideology, control, and political agendas pushed by fringe groups far removed from the realities of rural life.

A New Unelected Commission with Sweeping Authority

At the heart of this proposed ballot initiative is the creation of the Wildlife and Ecosystem Conservation Commission (WECC). It would become a powerful new agency with almost no democratic accountability. None of its nine members will be elected. Instead, they will be appointed by universities, environmental groups, and policy institutes, with a requirement that no member may have any financial ties to agriculture, energy, or development.

That’s right: if you’re a rancher, farmer, or anyone who makes a living from the land, you're disqualified from participating in the very commission that will regulate your land.

This group will have enforcement authority with the power to inspect properties, conduct investigations, issue subpoenas, and refer landowners for prosecution by the Attorney General. Under Section 4, the language reads:

2. Powers and Responsibilities

a. The WECC shall serve as an advisory and enforcement body, operating in collaboration with CPW, USFWS, and other entities.

b. In the event that CPW (Colorado Parks and Wildlife) or another relevant agency is legally disbanded, defunded, or judicially determined to be nonfunctional, the WECC shall assume all statutory wildlife conservation functions previously assigned to such agency until a lawful successor is designated.

c. The WECC may:

i. Designate state-listed endangered species;

ii. Conduct independent ecological impact assessments;

iii. Require mitigation for any project determined to harm endangered species or wildlife corridors;

iv. Develop voluntary conservation programs for private landowners and businesses;

v. Issue investigative subpoenas, inspect ecological sites, and refer cases for prosecution.

Wildlife Corridors: A Trojan Horse for Government Control

One of the most concerning aspects of the Act is the creation of a statewide Wildlife Corridor Network. While the program is framed as “voluntary,” the language shows that participation comes with strict oversight. For farmers, ranchers, and landowners who sign up for incentives, WECC will:

• Require approval of a site-specific conservation plan to continue agricultural or grazing activities.

• Conduct annual monitoring and compliance verification.

• Revoke benefits if they decide you’re not following their guidelines.

• Issue new rules at any time, including habitat benchmarks, land-use limits, and fencing restrictions.

In other words, once you enroll, you’re handing control of your land to a commission stacked with anti-agriculture interests. Traditional uses like grazing will likely be declared incompatible unless they pass WECC’s environmental test.

Infrastructure Strangled by Environmental Red Tape

The Act also mandates that any new infrastructure project intersecting wildlife corridors, or near wildlife corridors must include wildlife overpasses, underpasses, fencing, and buffer zones of undeveloped land. Roads, pipelines, transmission lines, even private developments will be impacted.

Developers can request a waiver—but only if they submit mitigation plans that offset all ecological impacts and gain WECC approval. This puts the power to halt or delay projects directly in the hands of an unelected, ideologically driven board.

Even if local governments approve a project, if this proposed ballot initiative becomes law, its newly created commission, the WECC will have the authority to override it. This could become a powerful tool to block rural development and energy projects under the guise of protecting “habitat connectivity.”

The Dangerous Incentive: A Self-Funding Bureaucracy

The funding for this new commission is where it gets even more alarming: Under this proposed ballot initiative, WECC is designed to fund itself through fines, penalties, and impact fees. That means the more violations they find or define, the more money they make. According to the document submitted:

• 20% of every fine goes straight into WECC’s operating budget.

• 30% is earmarked for land acquisitions, enabling the state and its partners to take more land out of private hands.

• Impact fees of at least 0.5% of total project cost will be charged to anyone building on more than 50 acres, or near a designated corridor.

WECC can raise that percentage whenever it wants, using vague criteria like “ecological severity” or “economic feasibility.” All fees must be paid before construction begins, creating a significant financial barrier for rural development.

This is a recipe for abuse: an unelected body with financial motivation to penalize landowners, backed by enforcement authority and immune from agricultural oversight.

Public-Private Partnerships: A Backdoor for Extremism

The proposed ballot initiative also opens the door for radical environmental and animal-rights groups to become operational partners in Colorado conservation policy. Through so-called “public-private partnerships,” WECC can channel money and authority to nonprofits that promote rewilding, predator reintroduction, and anti-animal agriculture ideologies.

They’re even authorized to apply for and spend federal and private grants—provided they align with the Act’s goals, which include rewilding, emissions offsets, and land conservation efforts. That means groups with political agendas could gain regulatory control over your land and operations, all with taxpayer support.

The Colorado Wildlife and Biodiversity Protection Act is being presented as a science-based conservation measure. In truth, it’s a radical shift in land governance, a threat to private property rights, and a tool for ideologically motivated outsiders to reshape the rural West without our consent.

This initiative appears to be part of a larger strategy to flood the 2026 ballot with measures tailored to the Front Range’s environmental conscience, regardless of the cost. If you’re a landowner, a farmer, now is the time to get informed.

Links to references and the proposed ballot initiative language can be found in this article on our website.

How to Win a Boundary Dispute Case

From an article in xyHt digital magazine by Jeff Lucas

Legal Boundaries

There are many players in a boundary dispute case, the judge, perhaps a jury, the parties, the attorneys, and maybe some witnesses. When a surveyor is hired as an expert in such a case, it is not the surveyor’s responsibility to win a boundary dispute case, but the surveyor can play a significant part towards that end.

Even if not hired as an expert, a surveyor could also be called upon to defend a boundary determination previously made. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the practitioner to make every boundary determination as if going to court and defending that decision. With this assumption in mind, let’s look at a few things the prudent practitioner might want to consider.

To begin with, you need to assume there will be a competing survey performed by a competing surveyor if you go to court. This means that one surveyor is going to be a winner and the other will be a loser. If it’s not already obvious, you want to be the winner. Losing the case can have other negative repercussions.

If you are the only surveyor in court this is not necessarily a positive sign. It could mean one of two things: the other side can’t afford a surveyor or they think your survey is so bad they don’t need a surveyor. There are many example cases where there was only one surveyor in court and the client still lost the case–the primary reason being the surveyor didn’t make a boundary determination that could win in court.

You need to keep the ultimate objective in mind when you prepare any survey of property. It needs to be almost self-explanatory. This is a big job because few people outside of the surveying community can read a map of survey let alone understand the results, and your survey could end up in court before you or without you. Keep things as simple as possible. Use appropriate notes, accentuate the important, explain the results, and make sure your survey passes the commonsense test. For example, are you attempting to move that which should not be moved? That will not pass the commonsense test.

Once in court, the ultimate objective will be to lead the judge out of the case. Trust me, when it comes to boundary disputes and surveyors, judges want out. This objective is as applicable whether you are in court voluntarily or if you are there involuntarily. If you didn’t expect to be in court, then you were summoned because your survey is already part of the litigation and, at that point, your survey is what it is. If your survey is self-explanatory with well-reasoned results, it will come to your aid and not to your detriment. In any event, once in court you and your survey will need to make common sense out of what is often nonsensical.

You need to understand that any boundary dispute case can be solved by a judge with a plaintiff and a defendant. In a boundary dispute case, no attorneys are required, and surveyors are not a necessity. Now, most people wouldn’t go to court without an attorney and in a boundary dispute many feel they need a surveyor. Good for them. But neither is required which tells us volumes about resolving boundary disputes.

In a pure boundary dispute case, there are no legal arguments and measurements are not necessary for a resolution. An adverse possession case on the other hand is a title fight, but a pure boundary disputes case is a factual question of location. So, the ultimate test of your property boundary determination is: Did you correctly answer the factual question of location? That’s the only question.

Too often the surveyor in court can’t supply the way out for the judge because they can’t see the forest for the trees—trees being a metaphor for the measurements. The parties don’t have that disability and can focus on the issues that matter. This is why surveyors aren’t needed in a boundary dispute case and are often counterproductive when they are.

Surveyors try to explain the “what” and the “how” of the survey, and in the process tend to lose credibility with the court. When you lose credibility, the case is over. It is much more important to explain “why” the resulting boundary determination was made. Next time around we will look at addressing the “why” issue.

Black people miss the last leader of Rhodesia and are starting to realize they were better off under White rule.

Unfortunately, it's far too late now. That said, we built Rhodesia once... we can bring it back.

Just show a little fucking appreciation next time.

METHYLENE BLUE BENEFITS THE TRANSHUMANISM AGENDA

Methylene blue is industrial poison. It’s a toxic chemical that was initially manufactured in 1876 as a synthetic textile dye. This industrial dye was later studied by the Rockefeller Institute as a pharmaceutical treatment and was the first synthetic, or man-made, medical treatment used in humans.

- Methylene blue assists in the genetic modification of cells.

- Methylene blue degrades and mutates human DNA.

- Methylene blue acts as a catalyst to activate graphene oxide.

- Methylene blue is used to feed the tissue scaffolding technology that produces the long, white fibrous clots embalmers have found in the veins of dead vaxxed persons (the tissue scaffolding technology is graphene oxide based).

- Methylene blue enables graphene oxide nanoparticles to regulate the growth of synthetic biology within the body from the COVID-19 technology.

- Methylene blue is a synthetic dye that synthesizes sharp poisonous nanomaterials inside our bodies for Biodigital Convergence.

- Dr. Young explains how methelyne blue enters the interstitial fluids and "tattoos your organs," staining them blue. Yes, methylene blue causes distinctive blue-green staining of organs. This staining is often described as "pistachio" green or "avatar" blue, and it has been observed in organs such as the brain, heart, liver, and kidneys. (This explains why your pee turns green from methylene blue. It means your body is trying to excrete the toxic dye.)

- Postmortem visceral (blue) staining caused by methylene blue has been clinically documented in the bodies of the deceased. The "Pistachio" and "Avatar" Green-Blue Discoloration of the Brain from methylene blue use was also clinically documented in the deceased.

- Staining your organs and cells with methylene blue is like putting a trigger button directly into the hands of the patent holders of COVID 19. No wonder no efforts are being made to shut down methylene blue’s normalization. It's benefiting the transhumanism project.

- What does it mean for a COVID-19 “vaccinated” person or anyone with graphene or graphene oxide in their bodies to orally ingest or IV infuse methylene blue? Dr. Robert Young and his microscopy students are seeing graphene chunks and graphene oxide microdevices in blood samples of everyone who’s blood they analyze. Methylene blue synthesizes with graphene oxide quantum dots and gold nanobots to interact with and **probe DNA**. Methelyne blue carbon dots (Quantum Dots) are used as electrochemical DNA sensors.

- There is no way to detox from it and get it out of your body. The research concludes that no antidote for treating methylene blue toxicity has been found to exist.

- Methylene blue embeds itself into your DNA.

- Methylene blue was sold to the public as a treatment against COVID-19 graphene oxide nanocomposites and quantum dots. In actuality, it’s a crucial part of the operating system, activating and enabling transfection and preserving spike protein production.

The above are all bulletpoints I pulled out of the following articles:

Methylene Blue Binds To DNA! Stew Peters Pushes False Narrative

https://drloveariyana.substack.com/.../methylene-blue...

WARNING! Methylene Blue Activates Graphene Oxide! EDTA Preserves Spike Protein Production!

https://drloveariyana.substack.com/.../warning-methylene...

Methylene Blue Is Industrial Poison

https://drloveariyana.substack.com/.../methylene-blue-is...

The Whole Truth About Methylene Blue

https://inagene.com/.../the-whole-truth-about-methylene-blue