EWG Policy Memorandum
1 E N T A L
G R O U P ’

Contact:
Daniel J. Barry
(202) 6 6 7 -6 9 8 2

April 16, 1997

LaRouche and “ Wise Use”
The Fringe of the Anti-Environmental Lobby

Among the little-known “dirty secrets” of the anti-environmental lobby, also known as the
“wise use” movement, is its willingness to adopt the ideas and strategies of radical fringe
political movements for use in achieving their own policy objectives. In one well
documented case, described below, prominent anti-environmental leaders utilized
information produced by a staff member of Lyndon LaRouche’s pro-industry 21st Century
Science a nd Technology magazine in 1994 to defeat a popular international treaty. When
details of the LaRouchian involvement in the campaign against the treaty were exposed,
leaders of the anti-environmental lobby were quick to deny any foreknowledge that
LaRouche was behind the plot.
The anti-environmental lobby was developed as a broad, segmented movement drawing
support and ideas from as wide a spectrum of sources as possible. The idea behind this
organizing model was that a diversified movement would not become ingrown or
become dominated by any particular faction.1 Another benefit of designing the antienvironmental lobby as a fragmented network was to provide cover for the movement in
the event that any particular individual, organization or faction of the movement engaged
in activity that was illegal or could be embarrassing to the movement as a whole.
Anti-environmental leaders have tried to duck questions about the increased role that the
LaRouche organization has played in their movement in recent years. LaRouche’s
involvement with the anti-environmental lobby was not his first foray into environmental
issues — still, a review of how key LaRouchian activists rose in importance within the
“wise use” movement demonstrates how deft leaders like Ron Arnold can be in dodging
the implications of associating with certain unsavory elements when it suits their
purposes.
Because the vast and shadowy political organization built by Lyndon LaRouche operates
on the fringes of American politics, LaRouche and his ideas have never gained
mainstream popularity. Members of LaRouche’s organization became very active in the
anti-environmental lobby during the late 1980s. Through participation at “wise use”
events, and through the publication of numerous articles written by anti-environmental
authors or sympathetic to the movement in LaRouche periodicals, as well as
advertisements for anti-environmental groups, LaRouchians actively courted anti­
environmentalists while attempting to inject their own peculiar ideas into the movement.
— more —
Environmental Working Group • 1718 Connecticut Avenue, N.W. Suite 6 0 0 • Washington, D.C. 2 0 0 0 9
tel (202) 6 6 7 -6 9 8 2 • fax (202) 232 -2 5 9 2
info@ewg.org • www.ewg.org

 #r

Page 2

Environmental W orking Group

In The War Against the Greens (1994), David Helvarg sums up LaRouche’s history and
environmental philosophy as follows:
“Greenpeace, Shock Troops for a new Dark Age,” was the headline for the
cover story in one of Lyndon LaRouche’s publications, EIR— Executive
Intelligence Review. The article accused the environmental group’s members of
being saboteurs for “a green fascist New World Order,” “shock troops of the
Green Comintern,” murderers of seals and kangaroos, and an “irregular warfare
force.”
“On December 19, 1988, an Alexandria, Virginia, juiy convicted LaRouche and
six of his supporters of conspiracy, mail fraud, and tax evasion. At his
sentencing the aging political cult leader claimed that he was a victim of a
British intelligence plot, a claim the judge dismissed as ‘nonsense.’ With
LaRouche in jail, his followers have sought out new areas in which to exert their
influence. One of their most successful campaigns has been, through their
magazines, books, and seminars and participation in various anti-enviro events,
the promotion of anti-environmental counter-science.
“Although LaRouche is currently serving fifteen years in prison for mail fraud
and tax evasion involving $30 million in unpaid campaign loans, his
multimillion-dollar business and intelligence network continues to function,
turning out EIR, The New Federalist, 21st Century Science a nd Technology, and
reams of other publications, all asserting that the world is dominated by a secret
cabal led by the British oligarchy and its Jewish backers, including ‘Soviet Agent’
Henry Kissinger. They claim that Queen Elizabeth controls the world’s drug
cartels, that Prince Philip and Prince Bernhard of the Netherlands pull the strings
on the environmental movement, and that drugs and environmentalism are key
tools in a plan to bring on a New Dark Age, a descent into madness that only
Lyndon LaRouche has the political genius to prevent.”
The LaRouche/'anti-environmental lobby courtship was exposed in the Fall of 1994, when
a document ghost written by Rogelio Maduro, an associate editor for LaRouche’s 21st
Century Science and Technology, was widely used as the basis of a campaign to defeat
the Convention on Biological Diversity. After the details of the campaign were revealed
in the press, anti-environmental leaders scrambled to distance themselves from
LaRouche’s agents, claiming to have had no knowledge of Maduro’s background and
pledging not to cooperate with him or any other LaRouchians in the future.
The LaRouchian’s fall from grace with the anti-environmental lobby prompted a bizarre
counterstrike when, a short time later, 21st Century Science and Technology featured a
series of articles “warning” that the “wise use" movement is a part of the same British
Royal Family conspiracy to implement the New World Order. Despite these anti-“wise
use” rants, Rogelio Maduro continues to participate in major anti-environmental lobby
events to this date.

 Page 3

Environmental Working Group

P artial Chronology o f LaRouche Anti-Environmentalism

In April, 1977, LaRouchians tried to halt a peaceful demonstration against the Seabrook,
NH, nuclear power plant by contacting the police and the prosecutor’s office claiming
that acts of violence were being planned. A subsequent FBI memorandum stated that the
information had been “fabricated” by LaRouche supporters.2
In June, 1989, the LaRouche magazine 21st Century Science & Technology organized and
paid for a press showing of the anti-Greenpeace film “Survival in The High North” by the
Icelandic filmmaker Magnus Gudmundsson at the National Press Club in Washington,
DC.3 Gudmundsson has long term ties with the “wise use” movement, having
participated in a number of major anti-environmental events.
In June, 1992, Dr. Dixy Lee Ray, former Governor of Washington and an antienvironmental movement icon, released Rogelio Maduro’s book, The Holes in The Ozone
Scare, at a press conference at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro.4 A year later, Science
magazine published an article describing the role Maduro played in developing and
spreading disinformation challenging the scientific theory that chlorofluorocarbons were
causing potentially catastrophic ozone depletion. According to Science, Maduro’s book
formed the basis of the ozone backlash perpetuated by Rush Limbaugh and the late Dr.
Ray.3
In May, 1994, Rogelio Maduro remarked in the Oslo daily Verdens Gang, “I last met
Magnus [Gudmundsson) at a conference of The Alliance for America organization in
September [1993). We share the same views on the environment movement.”6 With this,
Maduro’s direct links to the anti-environmental lobby had been established.
How the Biodiversity Treaty W ent Down...

Maduro’s participation in anti-environmental lobby events like the Alliance for America’s
“Fly In For Freedom” enabled him to make the contacts with anti-environmental leaders
that eventually allowed him to become directly involved in developing policy and
strategy. During the final four months of the 103rd Congress, as the Senate worked its
way towards what was considered to be the certain passage of the Convention on
Biological Diversity, Maduro was given the opportunity to play his hand.7
On July 14, 1994, the Alliance for America distributed a fax demanding a “mass outcry
immediately” over the treaty, claiming the national sovereignty of America was a stake.
On July 15, the National Federal Lands Conference sent a letter to Senator John Chafee
expressing strong concerns of the effect of the treaty on national sovereignty, bragging of
a grassroots power of 6 million members.”
On July 17, 1994, Maduro was ceded time by Dr. Michael Coffman to make a presentation
at Ron Arnold’s Wise Use Leadership Conference, the annual planning meeting of the top
organizers and ideologues of the anti-environmental lobby. Maduro suggested that the
movement make opposition to the Biodiversity Treaty their top concern and announced

 Page 4

Environmental Working Group

that he was working with the American Sheep Industry Association (ASI) on a report that
would be used to generate opposition to the treaty.9
On July 28, 1994, a report titled “Biodiversity: The Root Policy of Ecosystem
Management” was published by ASI and a company called Ecological Strategies, Inc.
CLEAR research later revealed that Ecological Strategies, Inc., had been incorporated by
Rogelio Maduro and his wife, Michelle, on July 11 of that year.
On August 5, a letter from the National Cattlemen’s Association to Senator Dole requested
a delay in the vote on the Biodiversity Treaty. A letter from the American Farm Bureau
Federation to Dole that same day also requested a delay in the vote. Additionally, a letter
to Majority Leader Mitchell signed by Robert Dole and 34 other Senators requested that
action on the treaty be delayed to allow more consideration, claiming that the treaty was
too vague.111 Also that day, at a meeting convened by State Department and Agriculture
Department officials and attended by staff members of the American Farm Bureau
Federation and National Cattlemen’s Association, a staffer for one of the agriculture
groups read aloud from the Maduro/ASI report, citing it as a source of farmer and rancher
opposition, and provided a copy of the report to government officials.
M aduro Takes Credit

The cover story of the September 2, 1994, issue of LaRouche’s Executive Intelligence
Review (EIR), “Biodiversity: the New Malthusian Religion,” written by Maduro, presented
nearly verbatim the anti-Biodiversity Treaty arguments contained in the Maduro/ASI
report. Maduro described the “groundswell of opposition to the Biodiversity Treaty,”
saying “In a mobilization that had U.S. Senate staffers flabbergasted, State department
officials screaming, and greenies weeping, Senate offices were flooded with hundreds of
thousands of phone calls and faxes over Aug. 3-5 in a full-scale mobilization to defeat the
Biodiversity Treaty. It was this steamroller that succeeded in waking up the Senate,
moving 35 Republican senators to sign a letter requesting postponement of the vote on
the treaty until September.”
In the same EIR article, Maduro described a “massive grassroots campaign” by such antienvironmental lobby groups as the Alliance for America, the Environmental Conservation
Organization, Putting People First!, People for the West, the BlueRibbon coalition, the
National Federal Lands Conference, the American Land Rights Association, the National
Wilderness Institute, the Maine Conservation Rights Institute, and the National
Fishermen’s Coalition. Leaders from some of these groups have written extensively for a
sister publication to EIR, called 21st Century Science and Technology, another LaRouche
backed publication. According to Maduro:
Trade associations were also involved. The American Farm Bureau and the
National Cattlemen’s Association lobbied in Washington to ensure that the
American livestock and farm industries would not be destroyed by ratification of
the treaty. They also mobilized their membership to put pressure on the Senate.
An important factor was the distribution of a series of reports by the American

 Page 5

Environmental Working Group

Sheep Industry Association (ASI), detailing the true nature of the Biodiversity
Treaty. For the first time, a highly respected trade association had the courage
to put forward the actual dangers represented by a piece of radical
environmental legislation.
Between September 17-21, 1994, Maduro participated in the Alliance for America’s “Fly In
For Freedom” lobbying effort in Washington, DC. Maduro and fellow LaRouche staffer
Anton Chaikin staffed a full literature table stacked with LaRouche publications. On
September 19, Dr. Michael Coffman, addressing the “Fly In”, discussed opposition to the
treaty and claimed that 35,000 calls to the Senate generated by the Alliance for America
fax alert had led to the Dole letter to Mitchell that called for a delayed treaty vote.
On September 29, a U.S. Senate Republican Policy Committee report echoed earlier
concerns over the treaty and reiterated the need for a delay in the vote. The treaty was
never been brought to a vote in the U.S. Senate during the 103rd Congress, and to this
day has not been ratified by the United States.
LaRouche Ties Exposed As M aduro Extends “ Wise Use” Links

On September 30, the Chicago Tribune published the front page article “Odd Trio Could
Kill Nature Pact,” describing the deep ties that the LaRouche organization had fostered
within the anti-environmental lobby. In the article, the American Sheep Industry
Association (ASI) acknowledged that its critique of the Biodiversity Convention was
written by Rogelio Maduro, a long-time associate of political extremist Lyndon LaRouche.
According to official Virginia state documents, Maduro was one of two directors of report
co-authors Ecological Strategies, Inc., based in Leesburg, VA. An ASI spokesman told the
Chicago Tribune that they did not realize that Maduro was an associate of Lyndon
LaRouche.
The Fall 1994 issue of 21st Century Science and Technology bragged that the Tribune
piece had demonstrated magazine’s — and Maduro’s — growing influence. The
magazine also featured an article by Maduro that repeated many of the criticisms of the
treaty included in the paper he wrote for ASI, as well as an article by Maduro associate
Dr. Michael Coffman titled “The Pagan Roots of Environmentalism.”
In the Winter 1994-95 issue of 21st Century Science and Technology, an item under the
heading ‘“How The Biodiversity Treaty Went Down’? 21st Century Did It!,” again took
credit for defeating the treaty, adding “we are increasing the frequency of the magazine
to six issues a year so that we can win more such victories....”11 Another article, titled
“British Crown Rules The Greens,” outlined the LaRouche theory that environmental
activism is a pagan conspiracy directed by the Royal Family for the purpose of re­
establishing the British Empire.
In November 1994, Maduro launched a new publication dedicated to the “defense of
human civilization.” Ecoterrorism Watch, published by Maduro’s Ecological Strategies,
Inc., purported to chronicle cases of “ecoterrorism” in this country and abroad.

 Page 6

Environmental Working Group

Ecoterrorism Watch was the collaborative effort of co-editors Maduro and Barry Clausen,
a self-professed private investigator who was paid by the Washington Contract Loggers
Association to infiltrate and “expose” Earth First!. Clausen’s book, Walking on the Edge,
was published in 1994 by Merril Press, the publishing arm of Ron Arnold’s Center for
Defense of Free Enterprise. The cover of the book was designed by Arnold himself.12
In January, 1995, Maduro attended the Western States Coalition Summit III, held in Salt
Lake City, UT. Maduro reportedly announced an upcoming report that would
demonstrate that the environmental movement was created from the top down by the
British Royal Family. Maduro clearly identified himself as being associated with 21st
C entw y Science and Technology.
M aduro Takes Another Hit

On April 23, 1995, an overview of the Biodiversity Treaty debacle appeared in the
Opinion section of the Washington Post. 13 Ron Arnold was quoted as saying that he was
unaware that Maduro was going to speak at his July 1994 “Leadership Conference,” and
that LaRouchians were not welcome at future anti-environmental lobby events. The
article’s author told CLEAR that other anti-environmental leaders claimed to have been
shocked by the revelation that they were essentially working with LaRouche, and that
they assured him that LaRouche influences would be purged from their movement.
A month later, at the Alliance for America’s “Fly In for Freedom”, relations between
Maduro and the anti-environmental lobby appeared to have cooled considerably.
Maduro attended, but instead of an information table he was reduced to distributing
LaRouche materials out of his briefcase. At one point, Chuck Cushman became
concerned when an environmentalist who had just snapped his photograph began
speaking with Maduro shortly afterwards. Cushman reportedly rushed up and demanded
assurances that his image would not appear in any LaRouche publications, indicating that
he had no respect for the LaRouchians. Maduro witnessed the entire exchange. 14
LaRouche Turns on “ Wise Use”

The snubs Maduro had received appear to have taken their toll. The Summer 1995 issue
of 21st Century Science and Technology carried a “Special Report: A Warning on the ‘wise
use’ Movement,” arguing that “wise use” and environmentalists were both being
manipulated by the British royal conspiracy. By establishing and supporting “both sides
of a conflict,” the magazine argued, “the same small group of European royalty and its
wealthy friends and agents, including top-level British Intelligence figures....is also
manipulating zmh-environmentalists. Its aim is to finish off what is know as the American
system, so that an industrial American giant can never again threaten the British colonial
system” (emphasis in original).
An accompanying article by Anton Chaikin alleged: “Operatives of British intelligence and
international banking are meddling dangerously in the United States through the so-called
“wise use” movement....[by]....promoting a confrontation pitting ranchers and others...in a

 Page 7

Environmental Working Group

legal battle and potential manipulated violence against the U. S. government.” Chaikin
scolded Ron Arnold for leading the “wise use” movement away from the “fight for a
national policy of technological progress and into the trap of fighting against the existence
and authority of the U.S. government.”
The next issue of 21st Century continued the anti-“wise use” theme with an editorial
claiming that the “300 anti-environmentalists who came to the Alliance for America
meeting” were being led astray by an attempt to divert the anti-environmental lobby away
from its original purpose. The editorial cited participation by environmentalists on some
panels at the Fly In as an “attempted takeover” of the conference.
In the Spring 1996 issue of the magazine, an editorial on ozone depletion claimed that “On
the one hand are greens of various shades, including the terrorists promoting paganism and
Malthusianism. And on the other hand are the anti-environmentalists of various degrees,
including the free-enterprise, “private property is primary” extremists. On the one side, the
extremists say there are too many people, so let some die, while on the other side, the
extremists say ‘I made it, so if others can’t, that’s just tough — let them die.’”
Improving Relations?

Despite what appeared to be an irreparable rift between the LaRouchian camp and the antienvironmental lobby, Maduro was down but not out of anti-environmental circles by the
beginning of 1996.
A January 1996 mailing by the Phoenix chapter of People for the West! included a flyer
stating that an environmentalist “anti-CFC ozone hoax” has led to the ban of CFC
production in the U.S. The flyer suggested that readers buy a copy of Maduro’s book, The
Holes in the Ozone Scare. The mailing was illustrated with a cartoon that originally
appeared in a Summer 1993 issue of 21st Century and Technology, the LaRouche magazine
where Maduro serves as Associate Editor.1”
Maduro’s relationship with the anti-environmental leadership appeared to have improved
by June, 1996, during the Fly In held that year. Although maintaining a low key presence
throughout the event, Maduro was greeted warmly by several participants, including Don
Fife, a board member of Chuck Cushman’s American Land Rights Association. Fife
introduced Maduro to a fellow panelist who said, “It’s nice to meet you, I’ve heard a lot
about you.”lls
The most recent appearance of Maduro at an anti-environmental lobby function was March
14-16, 1997, at the first annual conference of the new group Sovereignty International (SI),
a group created in opposition to United Nations-backed treaties. SI is run by a number of
prominent anti-environmental leaders, including long-time Maduro associate Dr. Michael
Coffman (Executive Director), Henry Lamb (Chairman), the founder of the Environmental
Conservation Organization, Robert Voight (Secretary/Treasurer), the founding president of
the Maine Conservation Rights Institute (where Coffman serves as a Board member), and
Tom McDonnell (Director), the assistant director of natural resources for the American

 Page 8

Environmental Working Group

Sheep Industry Association. McDonnell was the ASI staffer who worked with Maduro to
stop the ratification of the Biodiversity Treaty in Fall 1994.
Summary

The LaRouchian “political cult” has always perplexed those who have observed it. The
relationship between the LaRouchians and the anti-environmental lobby tells us more
about the anti-environmental lobby than it does about LaRouche, whose organization has
functioned in a parasitic manner since its origins. What the debacle over the Biodiversity
Treaty (and the continued involvement of Rogelio Maduro in anti-environmental lobby
events) tells us is that the anti-environmental movement is either not willing or not able
to investigate the sources of the information they rely upon in formulating their
campaigns. That the anti-environmental lobby was willing to use the twisted information
provided by a political charlatan connected with Lyndon LaRouche in order to scare up
opposition to the Biodiversity Treaty betrays either an alarming lack of intellectual
honesty or intelligence. In either case, under Ron Arnold’s “SPIN” model, the antienvironmental lobby was designed to get away with just this type of situation.
Notes

1 In an April 20, 1992, speech before the Maine Conservation Rights Institute, Ron Arnold explained his SPIN
model. The “S” in SPIN represents “segmentary.” Segmented movements, Arnold explains, are necessary for
a movement to have “a vanguard, a mainstream, land] a rear guard...” The “P’ represents “polycephalous,” or
many-headed, meaning that “there are many leaders in a movement, and no one can speak for it all.” The “I”
stands for “ideological," meaning that there are a core set of beliefs uniting the movement, but that “every
segment of every movement has its own preferred style, its own preferred tactics, and its own special direc­
tion.” Finally, the “N" stands for “networks.” The networking element of the SPIN model appears to be very
important to Arnold, who explains its function as follows: “There are no command lines in a movement
network. None. One group cannot tell another group what to do. One individual cannot tell another
individual what to do...networks do not have command lines, they only have communication lines.”
2 King, Dennis. “Lyndon LaRouche and the New American Fascism," Doubleday, 1989. p 241.
1 National Press Club invoice for room rentals, June 8, 1989.
1 PR Newswire, June 4, 1992.
’ “The Ozone Backlash,” Science, Volume 260, June 11, 1993.
*' Verdens Gang; May 11, 1994.
In October, 1994, the Environmental Working Group published a report, “How the Biodiversity Treaty Went
Down,” that described the role Rogelio Maduro played in defeating the Biodiversity Treaty.
H Both fax alerts are on file with the Environmental Working Group.
Ace Investigations “Report of Investigation,” August 10, 1994.
1,1 All documents are on file with The Environmental Working Group.
" According to the masthead of the Winter 1997 issue, 2 1 st C e n tu r y is still only published 4 times per year.
The subscription price, however, lias increased.
12 A CLEAR View, Volume 2, Number 1, April 1995
H Ross, Ryan, “Washington Post”, April 23, 1995.
14 A CLEAR View, Volume 3, Number 11, July 24, 1996.
14 A CLEAR View, Volume 3, Number 4, March 12, 1996.
A CLEAR View, Volume 3, Number 11, July 24, 1996.