Jump to content

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

just_chris

Nevada Rancher vs the BLM and Federal Govet

Recommended Posts

Not sure if anyone is following the story and I'm not seeing it in too many news outlets outside of local news but this has the potential to be really ugly.

 

Basically the feds have decided they are going to spend 3 million tax payer dollars to remove these cattle that are grazing on BLM land despite the fact that the Bundy family has had cattle on the land since the late 1800's. They say he owed them a million dollars so of course let's spend 3 million to remove the cattle and who knows what to surrond his property with armed fedreal agents. I had heard a rumor that some "armed citizens group" is supposedly on their way to help this guy out.

 

http://rt.com/usa/nevada-ranch-armed-feds-520/

 

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nevada-rancher-tense-standoff-federal-government-article-1.1751348

 

 

 

 

I can't sing and I can't dance but I can make romance - Macho Man Randy Savage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I briefly read some stuff about it. Can't believe they are using armed agents to remove the cattle. Never should have let the blm acquire that much land

 

It's a joke, they are saying because the land is under management because the desert tortoise calls it home... the guy isn't building houses or a freaking Walmart he is raising cattle. I wonder how much protecting of the tortoise there would be if this guy was closer to Red Rock and wanted to build million dollar homes..... oh yeah, none. This is all about the Feds flexing their muscle and screwing the little guy because they can.

I can't sing and I can't dance but I can make romance - Macho Man Randy Savage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never should have let the blm acquire that much land

 

And that is the real crime. There is no reason for the Federal Govt to own the majority of the land in NV, AZ, NM, UT, and WY.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad story.  I have seen ranchers leave cattle on critical BLM elk wintering habitat and basically overgraze it to keep from paying for feed and increase their profits.  Often local BLM and Forest service agents won't enforce the grazing lease dates and look the other way due to good old boy networks and political connections from the rancher.

 

However sending in armed agents to do this is rather silly when you just take the guy to court and see if your claim holds up.

 

I would like to see quite a bit of the BLM land turned over to the states where it is located.  Sell it off or keep if for critical wildlife habitat or a state park/reserve based on each case but pull the feds out of it if possible.  would be a huge hit to some local schools and tax districts though if the federal cash stopped flowing from that ownership.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sad story.  I have seen ranchers leave cattle on critical elk wintering habitat and basically overgraze it to keep from paying for feed and increase their profits.  Often local BLM and Forest service agents won't enforce the grazing lease dates and look the other way due to good old boy networks and political connections from the rancher.

 

However sending in armed agents to do this is rather silly when you just take the guy to court and see if your claim holds up.

Haven't they been dicking around in court for the better part of 2 decades?

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Haven't they been dicking around in court for the better part of 2 decades?

 

 

Didn't see that but if true then the courts need to hurry up and resolve who owns what

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe it or not, between BLM, USFS, NP, and DoD, the Feds own more than half the land in Cali.

Ownership doesn't appear to be the issue. It's BLM land. It says in the article that he hasn't paid his grazing lease fees (which are typically far below market) for more than 20 years. Did he think he could go on like that forever?

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's a joke, they are saying because the land is under management because the desert tortoise calls it home... the guy isn't building houses or a freaking Walmart he is raising cattle. I wonder how much protecting of the tortoise there would be if this guy was closer to Red Rock and wanted to build million dollar homes..... oh yeah, none. This is all about the Feds flexing their muscle and screwing the little guy because they can.

it happens. We lost a boy scout camp ground due to it being the possible habitat for the preebles jumping mouse. Which ended up not being an endangered species.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Believe it or not, the Feds own more than half the land in Cali.

It says in the article that he hasn't paid his grazing lease fees (which are typically far below market) for more than 20 years. Did he think he could go on like that forever?

he probably didn't think it would come down to armed agents
Link to comment
Share on other sites

he probably didn't think it would come down to armed agents

it happens. We lost a boy scout camp ground due to it being the possible habitat for the preebles jumping mouse. Which ended up not being an endangered species.

Desert tortoise is definitely endangered.

Thay Haif Said: Quhat Say Thay? Lat Thame Say

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I hadn't paid the rent on a house I lived in for twenty years, would the owner of the property be justified in having armed police officers forcefully remove me from the property?

 

Yes he would, but why do the Feds own 75% of the land in the west? Most of that land was originally to be held in trust for a few years and then returned to the states. It never happened. Why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In 2013 a judge ordered him to remove the cattle.

thelawlorfaithful, on 31 Dec 2012 - 04:01 AM, said:One of the rules I live by: never underestimate a man in a dandy looking sweater

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If I hadn't paid the rent on a house I lived in for twenty years, would the owner of the property be justified in having armed police officers forcefully remove me from the property?

His land and ranch were there long before the BLM suddenly started saying he owed them money.

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes he would, but why do the Feds own 75% of the land in the west? Most of that land was originally to be held in trust for a few years and then returned to the states. It never happened. Why?

I'd like to see the federal land in Utah returned to the state.

Image result for jim mcmahon with lavell edwardsImage result for byu logoImage result for byu boise state end zone hail maryc07489bb8bb7f5bad3672877f8b04f34.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I could be wrong on this but from what I understand the Feds own more % of the land in Nevada than in any other state in the nation.... my guess would have been Alaska

I can't sing and I can't dance but I can make romance - Macho Man Randy Savage

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This story is infuriating to me.  There's no legal reason for the feds to be involved in this.  The 10th ammendement applies.

 

It is federal land.  That family doesn't own the land.  They have no legal claim to the land.   

 

The guys father grandfather and great grandfather all paid to lease that land from the feds which acknowledged the fact they didn't have ownership. 

 

The guy should have been clapped in irons years ago and thrown in jail for stealing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...