They should go to prison. Who are these freaks? Possibly endangering people and wildlife and for what? What gives them the right to do this?
“Bundy and his supporters were in Oregon after two men were scheduled to go to prison on Monday for setting fires on federal land,”
They should go to prison. Who are these freaks? Possibly endangering people and wildlife and for what? What gives them the right to do this?
They should go to prison. Who are these freaks? Possibly endangering people and wildlife and for what? What gives them the right to do this?
Supporters of these men say the fires were backfires set on property they owned to eliminate brush that could destroy their property if wildfires developed during the fire season.
These protective fires on their land ended up spreading onto federal lands, hence the federal charges of arson and prison sentences of five years imposed on them.
Firebreaks to protect their own land?
Get lost alphabet agency hack...
Usually the "For what" is to protect land from devastating fires that occur because you don't do a controlled burn every so many years. A controlled burn removes the small brush that builds up over time, makes the land walkable and is wonderful in that it usually prevents trees from being burned in the future because what fires do happen are not bad enough to damage them.
It was just common sense before everyone went coo-coo thinking it was a bad thing. Now fires risk growing so bad that you do endanger whole communities.
“They should go to prison. Who are these freaks? Possibly endangering people and wildlife and for what? What gives them the right to do this?”
Reading is fundamental. In one case, a wildfire was headed to their house and ranch headquarters. They set a small backfire to successfully protect their home.
In the second case, they were doing a controlled burn of invasive juniper on their property. They called BLM first to check conditions and were told BLM was also burning that day so to go ahead. But got away and burned less than 100 acres of grass when it crossed over into the BLM side of the fence. The ranchers successfully put it out.
Stay in the city.
Don’t let the agitprop get you excited. They try to make it sound like the ranchers were setting fires as protest or arson - NOT TRUE! They were burning rangeland as a part of good range management practices.
the feds should have been doing it, they are paid by the ranchers to manage and improve the range. If it wasn’t done, their livelihood would be severely threatened.
Trust me, those guys are more concerned about that land than you, me, or anybody else on God’s green earth.
They were put in jail for doing what was supposed to be done. I wouldn’t be surprised if they would have been heavily fined if they hadn’t burned and the invasive plants got out of control. Then AFTER they served their time, a different muddle-headed judge decided they should serve MORE time! I don’t know how long you’ve been in this country, but that’s NOT the way the law is supposed to work.
If I have the correct story, these are ranchers who burn grazing land every couple of years to encourage forigable flora to grow. It’s been an accepted practice for the history of mankind.
They burned a pasture on their private land, but the fire spread to adjacent federal land and burned a couple of acres.
I another time, more reasonable people would not be bothered by this, but the current regime used terrorism laws to arrest, and convict the ranchers.
Not freaks, but victims of tyranny.
They are controlled burns, not fire setting. This has been done by grass seed farmers and ranchers for decades. Fields have been burned after the harvest to kill off the bugs,diseases and burn off the left over straw and this has just been part of farming in Oregon. It’s not arson, it’s controlled burning.
The feds are the ones going over-board here. This has been common practice. Feds need to get out of Oregon and so do the liberals.
‘They should go to prison. Who are these freaks? Possibly endangering people and wildlife and for what? What gives them the right to do this?’
They don’t have a right to do it - unless they had grazing rights on a lease and with it reasonable expectation that the land leased to them for grazing was to be kept suitable for it - and the custom [up until this admin] was to maintain grassland/prairie by burning.
Fire is not automatically a negative thing- while it can destroy life in one short incident, over the long term it is far more beneficial to life by reinvigorating and renewing the most nutritious plants for wildlife than no fires at all... and when conducted at regular intervals, it prevents huge devastating conflagrations caused by buildup of woody brush. The forest service itself eventually came to its senses and changed its no fire ‘Smoky the Bear’ policy to one of proscribed burns for these reasons.
I suspect the Obama admin, in its pursuit of a no-humans environmental policy, has decided to shut down commercial leases for grazing as it has done for mining and oil in the sneakiest way it can, in the case of ranchers by simply failing to maintain prairie by fire, and allowing rank overgrowth of shrubby vegetation and trees to kill off grasses and wildflower meadowlands that herbivores, domestic and wild, prefer.
That’s not to say that ranchers here are right- the court apparently thinks otherwise - because people tend to overexploit what they rent rather than own, and some oversight is appropriate to prevent overgrazing. Some Oregon sheep ranchers have overgrazed before. If they don’t have proscribed burning allowed in their lease to maintain forage [and they probably don’t because they’ve probably held the leases for generations... since before the phrase was even a defined practice] then they are legally screwed whether or not the burning was beneficial or routine up until now for doing what may in fact have been a widely accepted, even expected, practice for leaseholders ...that even the Native Americans once used from the west to the East coast up to historic times to increase the range and abundance of elk and bison all the way to the Virginia Coast.
“”They should go to prison. Who are these freaks? Possibly endangering people and wildlife and for what? What gives them the right to do this?””
The first time they did it was to cover up a crime scene. A crime they were later convicted of due to testimony from family and individuals who actually witnessed it.
They were burning backfires to protect their property from brushfires as it has been reported. Apparently, their fire managed to not to recognize the federal land border and ended up burning some of it.
That is all that I know now of the incident other than some of this federal land was confiscated from the local ranchers for this “Preserve”.
But, they were absolutely wrong to take over anything and needed to keep their powder dry for just one more year. The Hammonds are reported to being willingly to reporting for prison tomorrow morning while this whole mess is adjudicated, most likely kangaroo, but none the less willing to spend their time more as an act of civil disobedience and using their incarceration as their act in that process to bring attention to the tyranny.
I agree these hotheads just gave Obama what he has been seeking since the 2012 re-election.