NACs

In the news

New York Times Attempts to Rebrand NACs

by | Feb 29, 2024 | Liberty Matters, NACs | 0 comments

New York Times Attempts to Rebrand NACs

Names ASL for their Initial Defeat

The New York Times (NYT) has picked up the torch of the defeated Natural Asset Companies.  In an article entitled “Nature Has Value. Could We Literally Invest in It?,” published February 18th, the news outlet asserts that “‘Natural asset companies’ would put a market price on improving ecosystems, rather than on destroying them.”

The Intrinsic Exchange Group, the company behind the failed attempt to monetize natural processes through the creation of “Natural Asset Companies,” or NACs, had signaled it would rebrand the idea and make another attempt to create the investment vehicle. The NYT article is the first major piece to set the new stage.

The article points to American Stewards of Liberty as the “right-wing group” that spearheaded the proposal’s defeat:

“The American Stewards of Liberty, a Texas-based group that campaigns against conservation measures and seeks to roll back federal protections for endangered species, picked up on the plan. Through both grass-roots organizing and high-level lobbying, it argued that natural asset companies were a Trojan horse for foreign governments and “global elites” to lock up large swaths of rural America, particularly public lands. The rule-making docket started to fill up with comments from critics charging that the concept was nothing but a Wall Street land grab.

A collection of 25 Republican attorneys general called it illegal and part of a “radical climate agenda.” On Jan. 11, in what may have been the final straw, the Republican chairman of the House Natural Resources Committee sent a letter demanding a slew of documents relating to the proposal. Less than a week later, the proposal was scratched.”

Proponents of NACs are committed to profiting off the 30×30 campaign that is eliminating the productive uses of our federal lands and blanketing America’s private lands with conservation programs. These actions generate the “ecosystem services” to be enrolled in the investment product where they intend to reap huge profits — all to save nature, of course.

They have many allies willing to carry their water, whether knowingly or not.  In Kansas, a new alliance has formed to press the State legislature into creating a “consistent, sustainable funding source for voluntary conservation initiatives,” to the tune of $50 million annually.  This new alliance of 35 organizations includes: 

“Kansas Farm Bureau, Evergy, Kansas Wildlife Federation, The Nature Conservancy, Kansas Rural Center, General Mills, Audubon of Kansas, Friends of the Kaw, Kansas Association of Wheat Growers, Bowersock Hydropower, Kansas Forestry Association, Kansas Land Trust, Kansas Soil Health Alliance.”

We expect to see the NAC concept formally reemerge in the future, partnered with those seeking short-term monetary gains without regard for the long term damage they will do to our land, liberty and national sovereignty.

For more information on NACs, go to the ASL website.