[Ben Ficklin]

"Yet, for a very large sum to the government, a cattle raiser can use the land........"

The grazing fees, measured in a monthly fee per cow/calf unit, are very, very cheap. Much cheaper than what it costs to graze on private land.

There are a huge number of these grazing leases thru-out the western states and in total, the cow/calf economy is huge and a substantial benefit to the western states.

And if you add up the congressional delegations from all these states, they have enough power in Congress to prevent Congress from raising the grazing fees.

[Jacquerie]

Over the last two or three decades, the Bureau has squeezed the ranchers in southern Nevada by limiting the acres on which their cattle can graze, reducing the number of cattle that can be on federal land, and charging grazing fees for the ever-diminishing privilege. The effect of these restrictions has been to drive the ranchers out of business. Formerly, there were dozens of ranches in the area where Bundy operates. Now, his ranch is the only one.

An unaccountable, radical left agency controls more land than "France, Germany, and Italy" combined.

Congress didn't raise the fees. Congress must pass positive laws to counter Obama's ministers. That isn't going to happen in Obama's senate.

Events such as these are not supposed to happen in our constitutional republic.

[CharlesWayneCT]

Are you saying that it would be more expensive for Bundy if he actually owned that land? Does the BLM pay money to grow the grass or something?

What are they doing that Bundy would have to pay more for if he was doing it himself than the grazing fees they were charging?