Who owns 'public' land?

World Net Daily ^ | November 29, 2003 | Henry Lamb

[marsh2]

Hage has actually won his points in court. I believe he now goes to the stage of reimbursement for the taking of his property under the Fifth Amendment.

According to the Supreme Court in Union Pac. R. Co. v. Harris, 215 U.S. 386 (1910): "What is meant by 'public lands' is well settled. As stated in Newhall v. Sanger, 92 U.S. 761, 763, 23 S. L. ed. 769, 770: 'The words 'public lands' are habitually used in our legislation to describe such as are subject to sale or other disposal under general laws.'

Starting around the turn of the last century, the federal government began "reserving" or withdrawing lands from the public lands (national forests, parks, refuges.) These are more appropriately called "federal lands." The remaining public lands were administered by the BLM until 1976.

The first clause of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 (BLM) reads: "...in order to promote the highest use of public lands pending its final disposal, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized..." It was not until FLPMA (Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976) that federal government discontinued the public lands: "The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States that the public lands be retained in federal ownership."

Now, defining "property" is a State, not a federal function. Western property law was anchored in the Roman Civil Law (Equity.) The basis of this law is the rule of appropriation - that discovery, occupation and continuous beneficial use established a better right of ownership among men according to the maxim of "First in Time, First in Right."

Ranchers used the public lands long before they were ever reserved, withdrawn or retained. They used them before there was a Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. They established State water use rights and ditch rights over public land, which were also recognized under the 1866 Mining Act. (The Court has also recognized a right to use forage associated with the water use right in the Hage case. Angus has even discovered an old federal law that recognized rights of way for cattle traversing the "public lands.")

These are all valuable split estate private property rights in the "federal lands." Wayne Hage has established this in Court.

The grazing allotment was originally recognized as a pre-existing interest established by customary use and anchored by split estate property rights.

Forest Service "Use Book" of 1905 or "The Use of the National Forests", (subtitled "Regulations and instructions for the use of the National Forest Reserves",) July 1905, p.22:

"The Secretary of Agriculture has the authority to permit grazing to the best permanent good of the livestock industry through proper care and improvement of the grazing lands. Grazing permits will be given preference in the following order; small nearby owners and then persons living in or close to the reserve whose stock have regularly grazed upon the reserve range and are dependent upon its use. The protection of settlers and home builders against unfair competition in the use of the range is a prime requisite. Priority in the occupancy and use of the range and the ownership of improved farming land in or near the reserve will be considered, and preference will be given to those who have continuously used the range for the longest period."

Three types of grazing permits were initiated to control use of the resource and prevent over-grazing: three classes of grazing permits; A.) For those who owned adjacent ranch property ("small near-by owners"); B.) For those who owned nonadjacent property and traditionally used the public forest ranges ("all other regular occupants of the reserve range") and C.) For transient herders who could make no claim to local property ownership ("owners of transient stock".)

Section III of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 reads: "That nothing in this sub-chapter shall be construed or administered in any way to diminish or impair any right to the possession and use of water for mining, agriculture, manufacturing, or other purposes which has heretofore vested or accrued under existing law or acquired and maintained in accordance with such law."

"Preference shall be given in the issuance of grazing permits to those within or near a district who are landowners engaged in the livestock business, bona fide occupants or settlers, or owners of water or water rights, as may be necessary to permit the proper use of the lands, water or water rights, owned, occupied or leased by them."

According to Legislative History, Secretary of the Interior, Harold Ickes, during the Taylor Grazing Act Senate Hearings had stated; "We have no intention to...drive stockmen off their ranges or deprive them of rights to which they are entitled either under State laws or by customary usage."

No, it is not just a lease....

[Tailgunner Joe]

bttt

[E.G.C.]

BTTT!!!!!!

[marsh2]

Here is another piece.

[Lester Moore]

Still sounds to me like some prairie lawyers are trying to get land for nuthin'. If the land is for sale they ought to pay the going rate per acre and quit trying to end up 'owning', thru prairie lawyer wrangling, acreage they never bought and paid for.

[george76]

Animal Units per Month

These AUMs and the defined territory became the “allotments” attached to the water rights of the ranchers. Both the right to the water and to the forage, and access (rights of way) to the forage, were already owned by the ranchers. The allotments were simply the adjudicated division of pre-existing rights of the ranchers. The ranchers were required to pay a fee to the government, for the cost of this adjudication.

This simple process of adjudicating the existing rights of ranchers evolved to enlarge the fee to cover not only the adjudication costs, but to also provide a portion to local government, and to create a “range improvement fund,” which could be used by the ranchers to help defray the cost of capital improvements to the range.

Environmentalists, and in recent years, the federal government have ignored these historical facts, and have held that the land and water in the West belong to the federal government, and may be used by the ranchers only with the permission of the government, expressed through the allotment of AUMs for which the ranchers pay.

This new interpretation of the ownership of “public” land ...

[af_vet_rr]

Its amazing how most people I talk to know all about their favorite football, baseball, hockey etc team and know nothing about the Declaration of Independence and/or the Constitution and don't want to know. Yet these same people will bi*ch and complain all the time.

They can also tell you what cokehead celebrity Bill O'Reilly ranted and raved about the night before or what attractive girl recently went missing (while 100s or 1000s of not so attractive girls have went missing in the same time period). They can tell you what crappy retread movie is top of the charts, etc.

It's pretty pathetic how easily distracted many Americans are.

[RightWhale]

The public owns public land. You are not the public.

[SunkenCiv]

Environmentalist... must have missed that booth on career day... appears to pay well, and has no noteworthy qualifications.

[StarCMC]

Google UN Biosphere Reserve. It’ll make you want to throw up.

[editor-surveyor]

This is an old article. Wayne and Helen are dead. Helen was apparently murdered; she died in an auto crash, and her vehicle had been tampered with. That is what happens to those that challenge the pagans. We could call it an ‘Arkincide,’ except that it didn’t happen in AK.

[editor-surveyor]

"So explain to me how having a temporary lease to run cattle ends up being ownership of the land?"

The ranchers had owned all the surface rights for over 100 years before the Fed Gov tricked them into getting leases. They didn't need a lease, because they were only using the rights that they owned. The ownership of the land has never been the issue, the ownership of the surface use is the issue, and the Fed Gov never had any legitimate claim on the surface.

[george76]

Remember Wayne Hage and his wife, former Congresswoman Helen Chenoweth-Hage...?

[shorty_harris]

Well, I tried living on ‘public land’ in my RV a few years ago, but it wasn’t the ranchers who chased me off...it was the gubmint (forest service)!

[jokar]

who owns your land bump

[AuntB]

As for who owns the public lands? These days it’s the Mexican Drug cartels growing dope on thousands and thousands of acres.

http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/search?q=Invasion+the+border+has+moved+800+miles

And Helen Chenoweth was one of the best.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/1795503/posts
[snip]
Those of us who have been involved in property rights battles appreciated Helen Chenoweth-Hage. What a great loss to all of us due to her untimely fatal accident last year. Talk about your dream ticket for the presidential race.

A poster from Idaho, Helen’s home state, on a polictical forum states:

“We are very particular about our conservatives.We like principles and backbone. We elected Helen Chenoweth/Hage and Bill Sali. Helen loved Duncan Hunter and spoke of him often, that is why I loved him before he ever decided to run.”

Helen and Duncan had a great appreciation for each other and accomplished much while they were both in congress, especially protecting private property rights.

It was announced this week that the Mt. Soledad Cross, which the ACLU sued to have removed, will in fact remain per the Supreme Court, largely due to the actions of Duncan Hunter.

In a field hearing held by COMMITTEE ON RESOURCES on the Endangered Species act in 1999 in Hemmet, California, Chenoweth and Hunter were in the forefront to protect the average American citizen property owner. They questioned, with little mercy, the bureaucrats who through archaic regulations and unnecessary paperwork were thwarting use of private land by it’s legitimate owners. Hunter’s comments speak for themselves.

[AuntB]

“Well, I tried living on ‘public land’ in my RV a few years ago, but it wasn’t the ranchers who chased me off...it was the gubmint (forest service)! “

http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/search?q=Invasion+the+border+has+moved+800+miles

[Calpernia]

Of course I remember Chenoweth-Hage.

And she was right. The lands and eavesments have been going into Trusts.

R.I.P. Congresswoman Chenoweth, we should have listened to you!

TheTownCrier

I got the first news of the fatal accident yesterday that took the life of patriot, former congresswoman Helen Chenowith-Hage from a mutual friend who met Helen the about the same time I did.

Helen gave a keynote speech a few years ago, at an event held in Klamath Falls, Oregon, where a lot of good Americans were doing their best to keep the federal government and rabid environmental lawyers from destroying the lives of 1400 farm families and the entire community. Helen and her husband Wayne Hage were there supporting their fellow Americans.

The couple met just months earlier and found love and companionship and common cause and worked tirelessly until Wayne’s death of cancer just a few months ago.

We know Helen for her outstanding, outspoken work on property rights, but that wasn’t all she was about. America has lost a great leader and friend.

http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/

[Calpernia]

Blast from the past

[Calpernia]

Related

>>>>Animal Units per Month

The AUM are pertinent to the TMDL. Explanation follows.