He did pay grazing fees to Clark County not the BLM. The BLM has refused them because they have closed the area to grazing for the turtle.
No, that's not the timeline.
1993: Bundy tells the BLM he's not going to pay them grazing fees. Says he'll pay Clark County...never does.
1993-1998: Bundy continues to graze his cattle on public land without paying the grazing fees.
1998: BLM declares it a habitat. Says no more grazing on that public land.
1998-2014: Bundy continues grazing anyway.
2014: BLM says "Enough." and takes steps
Having now fully researched this, I can't plump for Bundy. He doesn't own that land. He never did. It's been fed land since 1848. If he'd paid the grazing fees, it'd probably never have been turned into a habitat. But look, don't take my word for it -
read the case yourself. Bundy doesn't believe fed law is legit, he doesn't believe this or that state law is legit - that type of thinking don't work.
First of all I am not “plump”ing for Bundy. Second make no mistake this is about water and stopping oil development. It's not about grazing fees or even the turtle which is doing just fine. Many posts on this and other threads do not understand the complex situation in relation to water rights in Nevada and the thirst that Las Vegas has for water which is supported by Harry Reid. Las Vegas is raping the Eastern part of the State for water. Similar to the Owens Valley 90 years ago in Kalifornia. In any case the BLM closed the area in spite of Bundy or because of him(not). This closing represents a taking of Bundy’s LEGAL REGISTERED water rights.
All over Nevada (where I live and work) there are open range cattle - many unbranded and not claimed. This is also about stopping oil development. The Feds Ok moving hundreds of the tortoises to install a solar development yet they claim they cannot stand to have one cow in every 100 acres or they will perish. BS.
Is Bundy right? History will decide that.
Is Bundy going to win? No.
Is the BLM right? No.
Did Bundy play this smart? Absolutely not.