Posted on 04/10/2014 8:09:43 PM PDT by rightwingerpatriot
It's rather hard to believe in this day and age, but there's a range war in Nevada that's heating up. The last rancher in Clark County, Nevada, is defying the federal government's orders to remove his cattle from grazing on federal land. The land in question was restricted by the feds in 1998 from being used for grazing in favor of the desert tortoise, which is an endangered species. The rancher, Cliven Bundy, has been in a standoff with federal authorities since then. He stopped paying grazing fees stating that his family has used the land for 140 years, and that the rights of the state of Nevada supersedes that of the federal government. The feds, through the Bureau of Land Management, see it differently and have closed off the area and have begun rounding up the cattle.
The BLM have sent in several hundred officers and have put a cordon around the Bundy ranch. The situation is deteriorating as some militia members from other states are heading to Nevada to stand with Cliven Bundy, and federal officials and protestors have clashed. The feds say Bundy owes $1 million in grazing fees while he maintains he only owes $300,000. While you can argue the merits or the lack of them of Bundy's case, it is disturbing how the federal government is handling the situation.
First, the BLM has set up areas where you can exercise your First Amendment rights. If you're outside of those areas, you're subject to arrest. Cliven Bundy's son, Dave Bundy, was tasered and arrested for protesting outside the First Amendment zone. As an American, the fact that government officials are outlawing free speech is abhorrent (colleges are doing this as well). The entire United States is a First Amendment area, pure and simple. The designation of free speech zones is anti-American and sickening to the extreme.
Second, the large amount of armed response that the Bureau of Land Management is bringing to bear on this situation is obscene. It's estimated that several hundred federal law enforcement are being used, along with canines, helicopters, vehicles, and (reportedly) snipers. It seems like a huge amount of overkill for a land dispute, and it smacks of the federal government flexing its muscle to intimidate. Since so many resources can be allocated to removing a grand total of 900 cattle, I guess that the entire border with Mexico is finally secure and that the proliferation of gang and drug cartel activity within the border states must have been stopped.
From all the accounts I've read, I think that the farmer seems to be in the wrong. With that said though, it doesn't mean that the government doesn't have to pull a blitzkrieg in the area and stifle free speech. You could have the local authorities take a larger role in the situation to calm things down, but I guess that would get in the way of the federal government getting to show off their power. It's almost as if the federal government wants the situation to blow up so they use full force. Who knows how this situation will end? I only hope it doesn't end like Ruby Ridge or Waco, where lives were lost.
You don't kill people over cows, even if the guy is in the wrong.
Typically, the government slowly grinds them down over generations.
The BLM mall-cop tasing a protester makes for ugly optics, as well.
/johnny
My problem with all the reports about this situation is that they all say that the farmer is in the wrong.
Well, he and his family were grazing on those lands before the BLM even came into existence. Then, when the BLM was created, they agreed to pay grazing fees, and the GOVERNMENT (the BLM) would pay for the road maintenance and other improvements.
The BLM is NOT, has NOT and will NOT use these grazing fees to do their agreed upon maintenance and up-keep. Unfortunately, all of the courts refuse to look at THAT evidence, and instead simply say, “You gotta keep paying.”
What the Gundy’s want to know is, “WHAT THE HELL AM I PAYING FOR, IF I GET NOTHING IN RETURN?” This whole thing is BS!
And as has already been noted, the first premise was the desert tortoises, but they are now OVER populated and the government has shut down the reserve and is killing the excess turtles! So, their entire case is a LIE, and STILL the courts refuse to look at the OBVIOUS evidence!
Grind the guy down in court if he's wrong. Don't escalate the situation into a shooting war.
That's basic management.
How much has been spent on this?
/johnny
“On February 26, 1993, Bundy sent an Administrative Notice of Intent to the BLM, which stated his intent to graze cattle “pursuant to my vested grazing rights.” See Exhibit 10 to #11. Bundy sent several more Administrative Notice[s] of Intent in the months that followed. On June 16, 1993, the BLM sent Bundy a letter informing him that his application had not been received to graze livestock for the June 15, 1993 to August 31, 1993 period. The BLM included another application for Bundy to fill out and return. See Exhibit 12 to #11. Bundy responded to the BLM letter with another Administrative Notice and Intent, stating, among other things, that the BLM has produced no documents showing it had jurisdiction over the public lands. See Exhibit 13 to #11. The BLM began trespass detection efforts at the end of June 1993.
On July 13, 1993, the BLM sent Bundy a Trespass Notice and Order to Remove and gave him ten days to respond. As requested by Bundy, the BLM informed Bundy in a July 27, 1993 letter that it would extend the response time to 30 days. On August 19, 1993, Bundy sent another Administrative Notice and Intent, stating the BLM lacked proof that it had jurisdiction. See Exhibit 16 to #11.
On January 24, 1994, the BLM delivered a Proposed Decision Order to Remove and Demand for Payment to Bundy by placing it on the dashboard of Bundy’s vehicle while he was in the vehicle. BLM officials allege that Bundy became agitated, walked out of his truck and accused the BLM of harassing him. He then returned to his truck, threw the decision out of the window and drove away. One of Bundy’s sons then picked up the decision, tore it into pieces and threw it on the ground.
On February 17, 1994, the BLM issued a final decision canceling Bundy’s ephemeral range grazing permit. “
Yep. Just an out of control BLM refusing to work with an honest guy...< / sarcasm >
Maybe killing people over cows?
How much money has the government spent on how much fees?
/johnny
“Grind the guy down in court if he’s wrong.”
He has already LOST in court. The conclusion was:
“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Bundy shall remove his livestock from the New Trespass Lands within 45 days of the date hereof, and that the United States is entitled to seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days of the date hereof....DATED this 9th day of July, 2013”
Actually, what he refused to do was pay on the basis the the US government did not own the land.
“So, you approve of a heavily armed federal government response to the situation?”
What do you do when someone is violating the law...say, heck, that’s OK? From the video I saw, the protesters were acting more violent and more likely to shoot than the feds.
Piss poor management. BLM obviously can't de-escalate the situation to ensure the safety of humans.
Just because they are entitled (according to one court), doesn't mean it has to happen right now, at gun-point.
/johnny
/johnny
It really does depend on what law is being violated. Armed robbery? Shoot 'em.
Non-payment of disputed fees? Maybe armed confrontation is a bad management choice.
/johnny
All Federal agents should heed the words of Bob Wright commander of the 1st Brigade, New Mexico Militia. When asked if he and his friends would actually go to the scene of a future Waco in another state to assist the potential victims, Bob replied, “Why would I want to do that? There’s plenty of you federal SOBs around here.”
Is there a name and office?
/johnny
Most of the BLM land was set up to provide for managed grazing.
Most of the BLM lands appear to have legally mandated encumbrances where the land has to be leased for grazing should someone maintain a right previously granted to do so. These rights are transferable.
Plenty of info/opinions available on the web.
The militias should organize a “tortoise hunt”: prizes for each carcass of the protected species, until it is made truly extinct, and then hold a giant camp out, with large vats of turtle soup.
I hope so
Sounds to me like some of the perps are the BLM Director and the local Federal Attorneys/Prosecutors and Judges. (Most of whom are likely Dingy appointees)
Note that the current BLM Director (Neil Kornze)(worked in Dingy's offices approximately three years ago).
/johnny
Actually, he was paying.
The BLM did some minor improvements, and then stopped doing improvements and actually started telling the local ranchers that they (the ranchers needed to make improvements).
Then, the BLM (along with the help of the EPA), started squeezing the approved grazing areas down to smaller and smaller acreage sizes and demanding that the ranchers shrink their heads of beef to smaller and smaller counts.
After squeezing the life out of most of the area ranchers, the BLM bought the leases back from the ranchers at pennies on the dollar. When the Gundy’s refused to sell (for a dirt price), the BLM ratcheted up their demands even more.
That was when the Gundy’s started asking for proof from the BLM that they have legal authority over the property. The BLM, instead of attempting to work with the Gundy’s, they took him to court. Since then, they have been having two decades worth of suits and counter suits.
In the mean time, while all of this is happening, the reason the BLM started squeezing the farmers out (the desert tortoise) has become OVER populated, which means there is no longer a reason to remove the cattle - IF the BLM would hold up their end of the original grazing fees agreement by maintaining the roads and doing other upgrades and upkeep.
I am not saying that the Gundy’s are innocent. His changing of reasoning for his resistance doesn’t look good, but hell, that is EXACTLY the same thing the BLM has done! But, common sense should kick in here and the two sides should be able to come to an agreement - except, the BLM does NOT want him on the land anymore! PERIOD! You cannot negotiate with someone who wants to put you out of business!
The BLM wants to put every rancher in the area out of business! They want to do that so that they can lease these lands to solar farms, where they, the BLM, can demand higher fees due to the tax credits, etc... that the solar companies will be scamming off of the government! Dingy Hairy can get his kick-backs, etc....
This is NOT just about a man not wanting to pay grazing fees - it is MUCH bigger than that! The government is trying to shutdown a business, so that they can subsidize a replacement business on the same lands - period!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.