Posted on 04/11/2014 8:34:41 AM PDT by Kackikat
"The Bureau of Land Management has just cashed in with $1.27 million in oil and gas leases in Nevada. This was just reported two weeks ago in ShaleReporter.com, which states:
U.S. Bureau of Land Management geologist Lorenzo Trimble tells the Las Vegas Review-Journal the Elko County oil and gas leases sold
Tuesday for $1.27 million to six different companies. The auction took place in Reno. The leases are near where Houston-based Noble Energy Inc. wants to drill for oil and natural gas on 40,000 acres of public and private land near the town of Wells. The Review-Journal reports the project would be the first in Nevada to use hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to extract oil and gas from shale deposits.
The way this works, of course, is that BLM runs land theft operations by claiming they are “managing” the land and thereby kicking everyone else off it. "
(Excerpt) Read more at thesurvivalplaceblog.com ...
There is plenty of legal argument left surrounding the issue of ‘ownership’. The federal government can control territories but not own them. For example, Puerto Rico is a US Territory but it is not owned by the federal government.
The district court erred if it ruled ‘ownership’ of Nevada to the federal government. It was never ownership, it was legal territorial jurisdiction; control and administration.
Inhabitants of a region coming under federal jurisdiction never lose ‘ownership’ of the land they live on. Such inhabitants inherit rights under the US Constitution of which property is one.
When a territory becomes a state, the federal rights of inhabitants come under state jurisdiction with federal approval. The Bundy family has rights granted by the state of Nevada and the federal government must respect those rights.
No, they were pointing tasers. The son got shot with a taser and he kicked a BLM dog. Hard to tell what order that happened in.
My brother lives in Nevada and we talked about this story yesterday. He said more and more people are showing up and things are really starting to get out of hand. Protestors are ANGRY.... very very very ANGRY types who are sick of the feds and their BS land grabs. The situation is likely going to escalate into a full blown killing spree.
If the Gov had any balls he would order State Police to begin “training exercises” in that area, cut off BLM’s access, not let anyone in, and see how long they last in the hot desert sun with no resupply of food or water.
THANK GOD! Another who actually understands!
The military holdings in the us? They are constitutional. The docks, postal roads et al? They are constitutional. But BLM, USFS and PARKS? THEY are unconstitutional.
All BLM and USFS lands should be given BACK to the local counties where they lay. All Parks should be given back to the States where they lay.
Want to see a success story pertaining a county that controls its lands? Take a look at Marinette County in Wisconsin. They have managed their lands for all, and in the meantime, make a goodly sum of money off from them to fund local schools and parks, etc.
Added to ‘Front Page’. Moderators may pull, but this sounds interesting, and I think it should there (maybe on ‘Extended’ instead).
He stopped paying even before the tortoise issue came up. He is a freeloader who is using a public resource without compensation for his personal economic gain. He’s a moocher and taker.
You left out that he has child porn on his computer.
I have never, ever read that. I sincerely believe it's the stuff of legend, but I'd love to be proven wrong.
Unfortunately, that’s not how it works. If the BLM was not performing it’s duties according to contractual specifications, you take them to court. You don’t stop performing your part of the contract while still benefiting from it, i.e. stop paying while still grazing.
That just guarantees losing in court. The BLM has documentation of non-payment. Does Bundy have documentation of BLM’s specific non performance of contractual obligations. Or is that just his story now?
Or is that just his story now? Bundy is right on the general issue of federal ownership and management of public lands, unfortunately he’s wrong on the law. He should never have stopped paying the fees.
He absolutely will loose his water rights. It is use it or lose and it reverts back to the State.
“I have a hard time believing that the BLM has been conspiring since the early 90’s to set aside this land for oil and gas drilling technology that is just now taking off.
It sounds like this rancher’s original beef (pun intended) was that he felt his grazing fees weren’t being used to his benefit. His mistake was diverging from that legal argument and going down a path of challenging BLM’s statutory authority to administer those lands. That is a losing argument.
The family has done a good job of framing the argument as the poor rancher trying to fight the evil government, but that will only last so long.”
Thank you for that 100% accurate burst of clarity. It is disappointing to see him supported just because he has a dispute with the federal gov’t. He doesn’t have a legal leg to stand on and if anything, the gov’t has been generous to him by letting him continue to use public resources without compensation for decades.
Land is only “owned” by State or Federal government to hold it from being subdivided and developed.
Keeping the land as unused land under authority of a government keeps the value of the land extremely low.
Then, one day in the future when elite finance wants to make use of the land, they can easily work up a cozy deal with the government to buy/rent/lease/etc., or negotiate sweet deals for any rights they want to extract natural resources and sell them.
If the land was owned by private entities, a price would have to be negotiated with numerous sellers who would want a return on their land investment, and may have contructed buildings on it or be conducting other operations, or have future plans themselves.
If the land is “government” land, government force can be used to sweep away folks like this ranching family.
Sad to say, but conservation has nothing at all to do with why land is Federalized. It’s a land grab by the elites which use their vassal government to execute their plans.
Yep!
The phrase "extension acquired by the boundaries of the United States" means extension of its jurisdiction, not its ownership. The government does not 'own', it 'controls'. Its control is subject to the rights of citizens and inhabitants, otherwise there is no freedom.
Here's the actual Article XII from the treaty:
ARTICLE XII
In consideration of the extension acquired by the boundaries of the United States, as defined in the fifth article of the present treaty, the Government of the United States engages to pay to that of the Mexican Republic the sum of fifteen millions of dollars.
Immediately after the treaty shall have been duly ratified by the Government of the Mexican Republic, the sum of three millions of dollars shall be paid to the said Government by that of the United States, at the city of Mexico, in the gold or silver coin of Mexico The remaining twelve millions of dollars shall be paid at the same place, and in the same coin, in annual installments of three millions of dollars each, together with interest on the same at the rate of six per centum per annum. This interest shall begin to run upon the whole sum of twelve millions from the day of the ratification of the present treaty by--the Mexican Government, and the first of the installments shall be paid at the expiration of one year from the same day. Together with each annual installment, as it falls due, the whole interest accruing on such installment from the beginning shall also be paid.
Articles VIII and IX provide for protecting the 'property' and 'rights' of the inhabitants, ergo the Bundy family had grazing rights protected under the treaty. when Nevada was incorporated as a state, those grazing rights came under the state. The federal government cannot take them away unless by application of the 5th Amendment to the US Constitution.
And if he loses his water rights and his own ranch is not able to sustain his herd....the government can buy it cheap. Hence, the man is being managed to sell!
Thanks!!! On TV I saw the blood coming from his taser wound in his upper chest
Thanks...I made the post as a lot of things are hidden from taxpayers with this lie of protecting the ‘desert tortoise.’ There have been links posted about Solar damage at Dry Lake, So Nevada. The water rights that are at stake for the Bundy Ranch. And the oil leases, that may only be a piece of this huge deception.
That Commissioner sounds like a buzzhead case.
Look at post #115. The treaty extended ‘jurisdiction’ of US boundaries, not ownership. The treaty agreed to protect property and rights of inhabitants.
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.