Sierra Club is Attempting to Sue Cane Farmers to Turn a Profit.
Sierra club absolutely does not care about protecting the people of the Glades.
In 2017, Sierra Club began a campaign to stop farmers in South Florida from burning sugar cane fields during harvest season. Sierra Clubs claims to want Florida farmers to ‘green harvest’ their sugar cane as an effort to improve air quality in the Glades. However, scientific data shows air quality in the glades in in fact BETTER that the air quality in nearby larger cities. So their air quality claim is a complete lie.
The truth is, Sierra Club is now attempting to sue the sugar farming industry (with baseless claims) to turn a profit, even if it means having the industry completely shut down like they did in Hawaii.
Sierra Club’s ‘Stop the Burn. Go Green Harvest’ campaign in the Glades is being led by people who do not live, work, or spend any time in the Glades. They do not care about the thousands of families who rely on the South Florida sugar farming industry, they care only about making a profit. What once was an organization dedicated to conserving wilderness for future human enjoyment, has become an anti-growth, anti-technology, anti-energy group that puts its utopian environmentalist vision before the well-being of humans.
QUICK FACTS ABOUT SIERRA CLUB’s ‘Sue for profit’ Model
Sierra Club is an “environmental’ group based in California who prides themselves at being the leader in environmental litigation
On average, the Sierra Clubs leads 250+ environmental lawsuits a year
In addition to suing private corporations, Sierra Club constantly sues the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to thwart settlement money from the Federal Government (taxpayers dollars)
The Sierra Club regularly colludes with federal agencies in “sue and settle” lawsuits ie. Sierra Club sues the EPA, arguing that the agency is taking too long to issue a particular regulation or that the agency isn’t meeting a specific legal requirement. The EPA can then either defend itself in court or settle with the environmentalists. In many cases, the EPA issued a consent agreement to settle cases the very same day activists filed their lawsuits.
In many cases, if the environmentalists are successful in suing the EPA, the groups’ attorneys’ fees are paid by the federal government. According to a 2011 report from the Government Accountability Office, between 1995 and 2010, taxpayers reimbursed the Sierra Club to the tune of $966,687.*
Sierra Club’s Shady FINANCIALS and special-interest donors
In 2012, Time magazine broke the news that the Sierra Club, had, for three years, accepted $26 million from Chesapeake Energy, one of the largest gas-drillers in the world. The Sierra Club used the Chesapeake Energy money for its Beyond Coal campaign to block new coal-fired power plants and close old ones.
In 2013, Washington Free Beacon uncovered that Klein Ltd., a company incorporated in Bermuda that exists solely on paper, donated millions of dollars to the Sea Change Foundation. Sea Change Foundation then passed a total of $5.45 million to Sierra Club (in 2012 alone). SeaChange also donates money to the Tides Foundation. In 2011 alone, Tides gave over $600,000 to the Sierra Club.
In 2014, the Energy and Environment Legal Institute filed a referral with the Internal Revenue Service pointing out that Sierra Club and Sierra Club Foundation were not paying income taxes from sales of solar panels for their partners across the US.
In 2015, the Environmental Policy Alliance, published claims that the Sierra Club received funding from groups with ties to Russia's state-owned oil company.
Sierra Club’s abuse of the Endangered Species Act & Clean Air act
Sierra Club is a major advocate of solar energy, but sued in 2012 to stop the development of a large-scale solar plant in California because the project could potentially harm the desert tortoise, golden eagle, and other protected species.
In 2007, Sierra Club v. Bosworth the court stopped the U.S. Forest Service program of cutting brush and thinning dead and dying trees to protect communities from catastrophic wildfires. Devastating fires have raged throughout California in recent years killing people, burning millions of acres, and forcing the evacuations of hundreds of thousands of residents.
The Truth about Air Quality in the glades and Pre-harvest sugarcane burning
Controlled sugar cane burning is a long-standing and critical farming practice necessary to burn off leaves and prepare sugarcane for harvest. The practice is done via permitting issued by the Florida Forestry Service.
Air Quality Around Sugar Farms is the actually better than nearby cities.
The air quality categories are based on the amount of particulate matter in the air. When air quality is in the moderate range, unusually sensitive people should consider not physically exerting themselves.
smoke to rise 4,000 feet and dissipate
The breathing zone is zero to 20 feet. You are not breathing smoke if you are not exposed to it,
With a prescribed field burn smoke will typically rise well above ground level.
““You have to have exposure, close exposure and duration. You have to have a high concentration. None of that exists with prescribed burns” ”
‘Green’ Harvesting
The 'green' harvesting data Sierra Club refers to is based on ONE study done in Brazil, and far from scientifically proven to be ideal. “Green Harvesting” actually creates uncontrolled fire hazards, is extremely expensive, requires more equipment and fossil fuels to be used, causes drainage issues, increases greenhouse gas emissions, and promotes the growth of fungus, disease and mold.
‘Green Harvesting’ of cane is not ideal, and could be potentially dangerous, for South Florida farms.
The Sierra Club attempts to misinform the public by claiming carefully managed prescribed cause air pollution despite the fact that the Glades communities enjoy some of the best air quality in the state.
As an effort to combat the un-truths being spread about cane harvesting, we partnered up with industry professionals to launch the SAFE: Sustainable Agricultural Fire Education campaign.