Posted on 12/07/2001 4:34:01 PM PST by brityank
Permission to reprint/republish granted, as long as you include the name of our site, the author, and our URL. www.SierraTimes.comCliff Gardner: Latest Rancher to
Fall Victim to the Western Federal Juggernaut
Sierra Times 12.07.01
RENO - Cliff Gardner, a 30 Ruby Valley Rancher in Elko County, Nevada was found guilty of willfully violating the unilaterally imposed grazing restrictions of the Forest Service. The arbitrary and capricious rule and enforcement of the Forest Service had left the Gardners with the alternatives of giving up their 129 year-old family ranch or opposing the Forest Service.
Since, 1996, Gardner said he had no choice but to run the cattle on land that was once his, but taken away by a Forestry Service mandate. "Over 700 Forestry studies shows that cattle grazing reduces the chances for catastrophic wildfires", he told Sierra Times. Western wildfires have increased in proportion to the decrease in ranching in the west; fires that have destroyed wildlife habitat, and has even killed wildlife several of the last few years.
Still, no one is listening.
Gardner told Sierra Times that every rancher that has spoken out against the federal government's actions in Nevada has been targeted. Most have been put out of business. "About 26 ranchers have vanished in the last 20 years", he said.
Federal District Judge Howard McKibben handed down the ruling Thursday, with a sentencing hearing scheduled for March 11, 2001. Gardner faces up to 6 months in jail, and a $5,000 fine.
He stated upon conclusion of the trial, "The judge could not have made it more clear to us that the Constitution and its protections are completely suspended. There could never have been a more cold-blooded demonstration of disregard for constitutional principles and individual rights than was exhibited by Judge McKibben this morning in his courtroom. Thomas Jefferson's warning that the germ of America's destruction lies in its judiciary, was realized today in Judge McKibben's courtroom."
Their own story - in their own words follow.
Mrs. Bertha Gardner presented the following
testimony to the Federal District Judge Howard McKibben.
"Your Honor: I am Bertha Gardner, Cliff Gardner's wife. The outcome of this trial will effect me as much as it will Cliff. All is at stake right here and now, including our health, safety and the future of our ranching operation. In 1996, I came close to losing part of my family while they were helping to defend a neighbor's house and property during a range fire. Our neighbor was burnt over his face and hands trying to defend his home. This is what happens when the range is not grazed. When you live in such an area as we do you have no choice, you must defend your property the best you can. You have everything to lose, including your home, the ranch itself, your livestock, everything, and you must defend your property even if it means risking your lives.
Even in dry years there is a lot of cheat grass and that is just like an open can of gasoline. If you graze these areas it cuts down on the fuel and the danger. It is necessary that we graze our range for health and safety and protection of property and family. When it comes to protecting my family I will do whatever it takes to prevent a disastrous situation.
Cliff and I have been married for over 33 years and have raised 4 upstanding law abiding adults. Nevada is a Community Property State, so the cows, equipment, ranch and debt are all in my name as well as his, so when you fine him you are punishing me as well. Cliff is the fourth generation in the valley. The Gardners have been ranching in Ruby Valley for over 100 years, 129 years to be exact. The Gardners have been ranching on the ranch that we now own for 99 years.
My husband is an excellent range manager. Our neighbors and even most Forest personnel have acknowledged that fact. He watches the plants as to what animals eat what and how we can better manage the range to benefit both livestock and wildlife. When there is a range fire it kills most of the bitter brush that deer depend on and a lot of the annual grasses, let alone the danger it puts all the people in.
We had a good working relationship with the Forest Service until about 1988, when we supported people in central and southern Nevada that were being targeted for removal by the government. From then on we couldn't do anything right. Our neighbors who kept quiet and acted as political allies were benefited while persons like my husband were persecuted.
In the spring of 1991 we received two letters, one dated April 10th signed by both John Inman, Supervisor of the Humboldt National Forest and R.M. "Jim" Nelson, Supervisor of the Toiyabe National Forest, and the other dated May 9th, signed by Mont E. Lewis, Ranger for the Wells Resource Ranger Station, informing us of their decision to administratively amend our permit to comply with the Forest Land and Resource Management Plan standards and guidelines.
You see, up until that time, it was the policy of the Forest Service and BLM, before they made any changes in an allotment management plan or the terms and conditions of a grazing permit they had, to sit down with the permittee and try to negotiate the change they wanted, and only in the event that the agency had absolute proof that resource damage was occurring, and the rancher could not be talked into a change would they issue a decision amending the terms and conditions of a grazing permit or allotment management plan without permittee approval.
There were many reasons for our decision to turn our cattle onto the Forest Reserve without a permit in 1994. But more than anything, we did it for health, safety and to protect our property and family from wildfire. Never in our lives have we been faced with the danger of wildfire as we have been these last few years. In 1993, when we had the Dawley Creek fire, we had grazed our cattle on the foothills for a short time. The Forest Service called and said it was a dry year, we needed to take our cattle off. We complied. It was only a short time later when lightening struck and the fire started. I yelled at Cliff that there was a fire at the mouth of the canyon. He ran to the barn, just a short distance to get Walt our oldest boy, and told him to go south to Medicine Rock and put in a firebreak there. By the time Walt drove the tractor up there, the fire had already traveled that quarter of a mile.
It is a great worry wondering if all your family is safe and alive. You cannot be every place at the same time and yet your family is spread out trying to protect your property. It was only by the grace of God that the entire Ranch did not burn that day. I called all the neighbors and the Division of Forestry to report the fire. Where we had NOT had cattle, the fire burned with great intensity but fortunately there had been sufficient grazing along the fence lines to help suppress the fire. On adjacent allotments where average grazing had occurred, the Agencies could not even get their backfires to burn.
This is not to mention the fact that to lose our use of our allotment is to destroy us financially. We have debt, and in order to service our debt we must make use of all of our ranching operation and not just a portion of it. Another great concern to us is that, if we do not use the mountain for our cattle to show beneficial use on our VESTED WATER RIGHTS we lose it. Also it has been proven by studies, that if cattle or large unguents do not graze an area, the big woody vegetation increases and the flow of water DECREASES.
Your Honor, we had no choice but to turn our cattle out on Forest land, not only for protection from wildfires but for our health and safety as well as our Vested Water Rights. If you don't have water on your ground, it is of little value.
When we were before you a year ago, Your Honor, you stated that we needed to fence our private land away from the Forest Service land. You see, our property goes up to a point in the canyon or up on the mountain and corners and comes back down. It's really rough terrain, steep and rocky. Every time you have a corner, it creates an abuse area. Such a fence would cross the deer migration trail many times and would be disruptive of the natural migration pattern of our deer herd. In addition, your Honor, there is no proof that the line as is recognized by the Forest Service is correct.When the survey crew were putting in the markers, my husband, our two boys and a neighbor went up on the mountain to talk to the head individual that was working for the cadastral survey. They were told by him that he was using a small willow stick he found laying on the ground that was to have been a section corner put in the ground in 1869. It was in 1993 that he was doing his survey. Now you cannot tell me that in 124 years that the willow that was just laying on the ground would be the same corner marker in the same spot. What has happened to honesty? What has happened to telling the truth and nothing but the truth?
The Forest Personnel have not acted honestly, Your Honor. They have lied to us. They have broken agreement after agreement that they have had with us.
They knew that they were placing us in a position where we could either abandon our permit or defy them."
Cliff Gardner also presented the following to the judge:
"For more than twenty years, the Forest Service people have been intentionally implementing regulations that they knew would force ranching families out of business. Stalin once said that if you tell lies often enough and long enough people will believe them. This is precisely what the federal agencies have been doing for the last 30 years. The agency people have been lying to the public. Now they claim that agriculture and ranching in particular are destructive to natural resources when in fact after this nation was settled and livestock were put on the land, wildlife of every description increased in number including all bird life, even songbirds.Even the agency's own scientific studies and information support this truth. Yet the agency people have successfully suppressed that information and intentionally replaced it with bogus science and reports, altered data and outright lies.
I had the reputation, even among government officials, of being one of the best range managers in the state of Nevada. I had a good working relationship with the Forest Service people until the mid-1980's when my wife and I stepped forward to stand up against the intentional efforts on the part of the government to take out all small ranching operators in southern and central Nevada. From that point forward the government agents targeted me. Nothing my family and I could do would satisfy or appease them.
The government's persecution resulted in us taking over a 75% reduction in use of our range while our neighbors who acted as political allies of the federal government received 25% increases in their grazing use.
Not only has this resulted in extreme economic hardship for my family, but it has placed us in a situation where we are extremely vulnerable to wildfire and the destruction of all our property. Since so much livestock has been removed from the lands in Nevada making it vulnerable to wild fire, vast amounts of winter habitat for mule deer and other species have been destroyed by fire. Where the government manages the land in Ruby Valley--wild fires have destroyed the bitterbrush range. Throughout the western rangelands the greatest production of mule deer was where there were large areas of bitterbrush rangeland. Today in Ruby Valley and other communities throughout northern Nevada the best bitterbrush range remaining is on private land, where intense wildfire can not occur because of proper levels of livestock grazing.
The Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management people have been intentionally ignoring the direct correlation that exists between the decline of livestock grazing with the corresponding decreasing mule deer and sage grouse production.
Federal management of resources works no better in the United States than it did in the Soviet Union. Not only are they driving productive and law-abiding ranching families from the land in the name of protecting resources, but in their insatiable thirst to do so is destroying the productiveness and health of our lands and wild life."
"The Forest Service and the Courts have already caused considerable financial harm to the Gardner family. Now with Judge McKibben's ruling, it will cause the complete destruction of the Gardner ranching operation. We have been living on between $12,000 and $14,000 a year in order to protect what it has taken five generations on the family ranch to put together. This is because of the incredible cost of defending ourselves and our livelihood from the government.
If I lose one of my sons trying to defend our ranch from wildfire who will be held responsible? Will it be the Forest Service officials? Will it be Judge McKibben? Will it be U.S. Attorney Brian Sullivan? Of course not, government officials never hold themselves responsible for anything. Only prudent management of the resources and sufficient grazing can protect us and keep our ranch economically viable. Judge McKibben is determined to penalize us for trying to protect our lives and livelihood.
Our family has been living in Ruby Valley for 129 years. Judge McKibben has destroyed it all with callous disregard for everything this country has stood for.
The primary purpose of the court was to protect the rights of the individual from the majority interest from using government to suppress and enslave individuals and minority interests.
The Judicial Branch was the last refuge of the individual under attack by "Mobocracy" (the tyranny of the majority), now even that is lost... desperately sad!
I know what you mean. As a farmer... I am becoming more and more upset by these things. When I first started to hear about them, I got mad. I wrote letters. I went to rallys. I posted here on FR so that others would learn. I still do those things... but with a heavier heart and with more tears. Every time I do a self search and see an article like this, my heart sinks into my stomache.
However... Thanks for the heads up brityank. As much as it hurts, I want to know about these things. Looking away and pretending I don't know, will only make for one less voice in our fight. For the wrong thing to do is nothing.
The crazy part about the trial was when the Judge declared Cliff GUILTY. He said there was no imminent danger for fire and Cliff should not have put his cattle out to graze. A cow only can eat about 30 pounds of grass a day. I would imagine if you fenced a cow into a pen 30 by 40, it could clean out the wild grass in one day. (my estimate of 30 pounds of wild grass) but cattle walk and eat. They do not graze in one place until there is no more feed then move on. So if a lightening strike is going to cause another fire, as it did in 1996, where is the warning? Bad weather doesn't give three month warnings, especially lightening strikes.
If the Forestry Dept doesn't want to go in and cut the grass, what protection does Cliff and Bertha have from losing their home, stables and barn to another fire, especially a lightening strike fire?
Cliff Gardner: Latest Rancher to Fall Victim to the Western Federal Juggernaut
I talked long into the night with some of those Elko boys when I was at Jarbidge ... the government is severally underestimating the resolve of these folks ... just like they are at Klamath.
I tell you boys ... I'm very concerned. They seem to be hell bent on pushing these people off the land with this "Rural Cleansing" and they are going to run it into a brick wall one day soon. It's as if they have decided to go for it and push these people to the breaking point ... and with some of the new laws, I'll bet they label them terrorists if they stand up and fight.
Well, they better be prepared for a lot of that particular brand in my estimation if the good Lord doesnt touch their hearts or if they don;t turn to reason and to fulfilling their oath to the Constitution soon.
I talked long into the night with some of those Elko boys when I was at Jarbidge ... the government is severally underestimating the resolve of these folks ... just like they are at Klamath.
I tell you boys ... I'm very concerned. They seem to be hell bent on pushing these people off the land with this "Rural Cleansing" and they are going to run it into a brick wall one day soon. It's as if they have decided to go for it and push these people to the breaking point ... and with some of the new laws, I'll bet they label them terrorists if they stand up and fight.
Well, they better be prepared for a lot of that particular brand in my estimation if the good Lord doesnt touch their hearts or if they don;t turn to reason and to fulfilling their oath to the Constitution soon.
It's a good thing I'm not paranoid, otherwise I'd think that BLM and the bambi brigade want a fight.
We were there when Helen Chenoweth said that if it could happen to her and her husband it could happen to anyone.
I have my bags packed and I'm ready. All I need is the word.
Is there nothing that can be done about this revolting situation?
"WHAT IS A PATRIOT?"
PATRIOTS are not "Revolutionaries" trying to overthrow the government of the United States.
PATRIOTS are "Counter-Revolutionaries" trying to prevent the government of the United States from overthrowing the Constitution of the United States. - Unknown Author
What brings the PATRIOTS out of the woodwork?
When the constitutional process, the system of checks and balances set up by the Founders, has not just been thrown out of kilter, it has been thrown out the window. These socialist maneuvers are what attracts PATRIOTS to the streets of America.
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.