The study was commissioned by the U.S. State Department and the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program to find out why their most recent nomination went down in flames.

The Ozark Man and the Biosphere Reserve was first proposed at a meeting sponsored by the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program, for state and federal resource agencies, in Kentucky, in 1988. The effort was spearheaded by David Foster of the National Park Service until his retirement. George Oviatt, also of the National Park Service, then led the effort until its final demise.

The study was conducted by Theresa Goedeke of the Department of Rural Sociology at the University of Missouri. The funders of her study will not like what she reports.

According to the study, "The OMAB Steering Committee wanted to avoid difficulties arising from the inclusion of a variety of stakeholders early in the nomination process." To explain why the public was excluded, the report quotes a member of the steering committee who says: "You get a bunch of citizens on this main steering committee who had votes [and] who knows what issues might come up. They say whatever the hell they want."

The study also reveals and documents a deliberate effort by the steering committee to manipulate a feasibility study to produce evidence of public support of the project when there was none. Only one public meeting was scheduled to promote the nomination. It was advertised in a small rural newspaper that was in business only four months. The meeting had 40 to 70 participants (conflicting estimates), most of whom were employees of government agencies or officials from local environmental organizations. The report blisters the steering committee for trying to keep the nomination "out of public view until after the designation."

The study praises the opposition for its "phenomenal" effectiveness in disseminating information and urging citizens to decide for themselves. The report says clearly that the opposition was doing what the steering committee should have been doing.

Organizations such as Take Back Arkansas, and Missouri's Citizens for Private Property Rights led the opposition to the Ozark Man and the Biosphere designation. While the study was conducted so that the U.S. MAB could learn how to avoid similar defeats in the future, it also provides valuable insights for other organizations that need to learn how to defeat such proposals.

The 47 Biosphere Reserves in the United States are part of a network of more than 300 reserves around the world. UNESCO has presented this network to the Conference of the Parties of the Convention on Biological Diversity as the "beginning point" for the implementation of the Convention. The U.S. Senate chose not to ratify this Convention. Nevertheless, the U.S. Man and the Biosphere Program continues to promote additional nominations of Biosphere Reserves in the United States. The problems associated with U.N. Biosphere Reserves will not go away just because the Ozarks project was a flop.

Through a 1974 agreement between the U.S. State Department and UNESCO, Congress, which has constitutional responsibility for managing federal lands, has been completely sidestepped. The executive branch is implementing U.N. land management policies in Biosphere Reserves. The objective of the Biosphere Reserve management scheme is to continually expand the Biosphere Reserves, connecting the reserves with corridors of wilderness, until virtually all the land area falls within one of the three zones of land-use stipulated by the U.N. All the areas are to be "managed" by government.

The U.S. MAB insists that the U.N. Biosphere Reserve designation carries no regulatory authority, a theme that was echoed by the Ozark steering committee. According to the report, opponents were not convinced. "This is absurd. What possible use is a program with no regulatory authority?" asked one opponent.