Posted on 04/23/2014 8:44:53 AM PDT by rktman
The Texas Rangers are waiting for you!
The issue does not seem to be the feds coming into Texas, as such. The disagreement is over where the border of Texas is.
There WILL be trouble once the epa takes over the adjacent river front property. To protect the fishies of course.
Harry’s expressing the frustration that all control freaks do when those they think they have a right to control tell them that they will not obey.
This may well have won the Governor’s seat for Abbott. Him, with Texans, the flag with deep roots in Texan history, defying the Federalist emperial forces at the Red River would be an impressive image.
Now, the Bureau of LoudMouths have suddenly decided that they're going to confiscate the land until Congress gets around to setting boundaries for dispute that no longer exists!
Like everyone is too stupid to realize the feral government has NO intention of giving it back once they get it.
I agree with Abbott. Come and Take It, suckers!
Other news outlets go into more detail and have noted that the BLM is basically looking for a pretext to take land.
Texas Ping.
“I am about ready to go to the Red River and raise a ‘Come and Take It’ flag to tell the feds to stay out of Texas,” Abbott said.
You’re about ready? Then what will make you ready?
It sure looks to me like the feds are trying to get a fight started somewhere. You don’t mess with Texas unless you want trouble. I’m not a Texan, but my parents rest in Texas soil and I love the state. I am blessed to live in Alabama, home of the only statesman in Washington, Jeff Sessions.
I don’t think most people realize just how much land in their own states is under the control of the state and federal government.
Here in Michigan the state alone owns over a half million acres with the feds owning some 250,000 more and a lot more land both public and private are under various regulatory restrictions.
I have to go to the Army corps of engineers for approval to put a permanent dock on my little 180 acre mill pond because they rebuilt the dam some 20 odd years ago. Apparently that was the deal that was made by the township to rebuild the dam.
A couple of other threads if anyone is interested in reading the many comments thereon:
EXCLUSIVE—TEXAS AG ABBOTT TO BLM: ‘COME AND TAKE IT’
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3147402/posts
235 comments
BLM EYES 90,000 ACRES OF TEXAS LAND
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3147020/posts
116 comments
AG Abbott’s letter to the BLM
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/oagnews/release.php?id=4718
Specific Questions that were asked:
Accordingly, I hereby request that you or your staff respond in writing to this
letter by providing the following information as soon as possible:
1. Please delineate with specificity each of the steps for the RMP/EIS process for
property along the Red River.
2. Please describe the procedural due process the BLM will afford to Texans whose
property may be claimed by the federal government.
3. Please confirm whether the BLM agrees that, from 1923 until the ratification
of the Red River Boundary Compact, the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma was
the gradient line of the south bank of the Red River. To the extent the BLM does
not agree, please provide legal analysis supporting the BLM’s position.
4. Please confirm whether the BLM still considers Congress’ ratification of the Red
River Boundary Compact as determinative of its interest in land along the Red River?
To the extent the BLM does not agree, please provide legal analysis supporting the
BLM’s new position.
5. Please delineate with specificity the amount of Texas territory that would be
impacted by the BLM’s decision to claim this private land as the property of the
federal government.
end snip
The issue does not seem to be the feds coming into Texas, as such.
***********
Well that’s one way of looking at it but the bottom line is that the land would be
removed from Texas. The ownership would have to be placed in elsewhere.
From AG Abbott’s letter:
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/oagnews/release.php?id=4718
snip
Nearly a century ago, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the gradient line of
the south bank of the Red River—subject to the doctrines of accretion and avulsion—was
the boundary between Texas and Oklahoma. Oklahoma v. Texas, 260 U.S. 606 (1923).
More recently, in 1994, the BLM stated that the Red River area was “[a] unique situation”
and stated that “[t]he area itself cannot be defined until action by the U.S. Congress
establishes the permanent state boundary between Oklahoma and Texas.” Further, the BLM
determined that one possible scenario was legislation that established the “south geologic
cut bank as the boundary,” which could have resulted “in up to 90,000 acres” of newly
delineated federal land. But no such legislation was ever enacted.
Instead, in 2000, the U.S. Congress enacted legislation ratifying an interstate boundary
compact agreed to by the State of Texas and the State of Oklahoma. With Congress’
ratification of the Red River Boundary Compact, federal law now provides that the boundary
between Texas and Oklahoma is “the vegetation on the south bank of the Red River . . .”—not
the “south geologic cut bank.” Given this significant legal development, it is not at
all clear what legal basis supports the BLM’s claim of federal ownership over private
property that abuts the Red River in the State of Texas.
end snip
Red River Boundary Compact - Texas Statutes
http://www.statutes.legis.state.tx.us/Docs/NR/htm/NR.12.htm
ping And right beside it we'll fly... 
another honored historical banner!
BTW, Air Corps, one of my house babes... 
has a question for ya:
Re: (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
What? No... 
Panacakes?
Take it if you think you can....Pilgrim!
Ping!
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.