No, he shouldn’t, obviously. However, that’s the first I’ve heard of it. I didn’t know if it was intended to be a hatchet job, or if it was legit. If legit, there is grounds for at least *some* LEO involvement (though nothing like this). If the law says you can’t graze cattle there unless a fee is paid, then that’s the law until it gets struck down.
Much as I’d like to side with this guy, and as much as I hate the Fedzillla bullies, he’s frankly a bit of a nutter. He says he would pay the country to graze but not the Feds because they don’t own the land. It’s one thing to say you don’t think the Feds should own most of the state. It’s another thing to say they don’t, refuse to pay grazing royalties, ignore court orders, and bet the family farm (literally) than nobody will enforce them.