Things getting serious at the Bundy ranch.

[Dori]

This is interesting.  Bundy has his own website.

From 2012

Monday, May 7, 2012

Looks to me like there has been a systematic effort to destroy cattle ranching in the West.

   

“NEW GOLD BUTTE” WILD FIRE

South of Mesquite, Nevada

on April 26,2012




I see you are burning FEED once again, the renewable resource that should be used for mankind and a healthy habitat for lots of species of wildlife. Now you as (BLM) land managers are burning this land one more time, the third time since cattle grazing was abandoned off the range in the 1990's.

BLM's superb land management has managed to burn every living creature out of house and home three times in just over a decade, killing every insect, reptile, mammal, and bird nest. Those critters that escape the terrible heat and smoke, down a burrow hole, what do they have to come up for? Only a black chard earth, no feed, no protection, no chance for new growth until next spring. It would have been better to burn than face the dread of starvation.
http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/2012/05/newgold-butte-wild-fire-southof.html

I've seen what the insanity of the environmentalists have done to California's farmers. And now the alternative energy people are ruining our deserts.    

[CollectivismMustDie]

Shouldn't Bundy have to pay his fee like everyone else? The federal government owns that land. Did Bundy pay his fees when Reagan implemented the fee paying program by executive order?

Yes. Yes he did pay those fees. Until 1993.

Now if you can generate a spark in those synapses of yours, why don't you investigate for yourself why he paid them up until 1993, and why he stopped after 1993.

Bitchslap for being a troll.


CMD

[Wineslob]

Guess what?
































Reid Butt

[willcross]

Another bitch slap for being an Administration schill. You are such a racist.

Even your own buddies in this post acknowledge the Feds own the majority of Nevada? It's just a fact? Nevada itself openly admits it's federal land. The only person saying the Feds don't own that land is the person who has 300k in back grazing fees at stake lol.

Lol you guys pretend to bitchslap people over the internet, that's kinda cool.


*Figure four leg lock for typing like a ten year old. 

[Mr Mannn]

Lol you guys pretend to bitchslap people over the internet, that's kinda cool.

Bitchslap because you like it. -37 now. Proof thou art a liberal troll.

[willcross]

Bitchslap because you like it. -37 now. Proof thou art a liberal troll.

So are the other people in this thread who are asking why the Feds own the vast majority of Nevada trolls too?

I assume you now realize that BLM manages federally owned land and are just doubling down on the troll stuff cause you don't have any answers.

[longview]

Many people realize that the Fed government is limited on what they can own.  And they likewise realize the Federal government has exceeded those limitations.  They further recognize that federal control of land is never for the common good of citizens.  Finally, they object.

[Big Dog]

There are so many elements to this Bundy thing that need explained.

What really upsets me the most is the Feds ownership of state land.
Why does the government own so much land in the West? Where in the constitution does it allow for this? 

Dori,

The US Government has the constitutional authority to acquire, dispose of, and manage land. Article IV, Section 3, Clause 2 of the US Constitution (usually called "the Property Clause") says, "The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States." (emphasis added).

The constitutional authority to dispose of and manage land includes the authority to issue leases and permits for use, and to charge fees for those leases or permits.

Specific to this discussion, the US Congress and the Nevada Territory agreed, as a condition of statehood, that the Territory would surrender “all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States.” (Nevada Enabling Act, 1864)

Here's a 2007 Congressional Research Service paper on the subject of Federal land ownership, which explains it thoroughly.

[JohnnyReb]

I think I read somewhere that the problem started when BLM wanted to change the terms of his lease agreement. He complied with all their mandates, request and requirements until they wanted to reduce his herd to about 10% what he had been running.....in effect, starving him out of business.

....and Harry Reid would be scum if he hadn't already stolen the swamp water.

[Dori]

Here's a 2007 Congressional Research Service paper on the subject of Federal land ownership, which explains it thoroughly.

Thanks 

I was reading where some states fought the Feds to get their land back.  The Western states need to do the same.

I can see the federal government owning some things, but it just seems to fly in the face of the state rights issue for the feds to hold the majority of a states land and resources.

Especially today, with our government becoming tyrannical.



 

[Mr Mannn]

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/04/16/feds-accused-leaving-trail-wreckage-after-nevada-ranch-standoff/
Feds accused of leaving trail of wreckage after Nevada ranch standoff
Jackboot thugs.

The federal agency that backed down over the weekend in a tense standoff with a Nevada rancher is being accused of leaving a trail of wreckage behind.

Fox News toured the damage -- allegedly caused by the Bureau of Land Management -- which included holes in water tanks and destroyed water lines and fences. According to family friends, the bureau's hired "cowboys" also killed two prize bulls.

"They had total control of this land for one week, and look at the destruction they did in one week," said Corey Houston, friend of rancher Cliven Bundy and his family. "So why would you trust somebody like that? And how does that show that they're a better steward?"

The BLM and other law enforcement officials backed down on Saturday in their effort to seize Bundy's cattle, after hundreds of protesters, some armed, arrived to show support for the Bundy family. In the end, BLM officials left the scene amid concerns about safety, and no shots were fired.

The dispute between the feds and the Bundy family has been going on for years; they say he owes more than $1.1 million in unpaid grazing fees -- and long ago revoked his grazing rights over concern for a federally protected tortoise. They sent officials to round up his livestock following a pair of federal court orders last year giving the U.S. government the authority to impound the cattle.

The feds, though, are being accused of taking the court orders way too far.

On a Friday night conference call, BLM officials told reporters that "illegal structures" on Bundy's ranch -- water tanks, water lines and corrals -- had to be removed to "restore" the land to its natural state and prevent the rancher from restarting his illegal cattle operation.

However, the court order used to justify the operation appears only to give the agency the authority to "seize and impound" Bundy's cattle.

"Nowhere in the court order that I saw does it say that they can destroy infrastructure, destroy corrals, tanks ... desert environment, shoot cattle," Houston said.

Bundy's friends say the BLM wranglers told them the bulls were shot because they were dangerous and could gore their horses. One bull was shot five times.

But Houston said the pen holding the bull wasn't even bent. "It's not like the bull was smashing this pen and trying tackle people or anything," he said. "The pen is sitting here. It hasn't moved. No damage whatsoever. Where was the danger with that bull?"

Plus he said BLM vehicles appear to have crushed a tortoise burrow near the damaged water tank. "How's that conservation?" he asked.

The BLM has not yet responded to a request for comment on these allegations.

[Dori]

they say he owes more than $1.1 million in unpaid grazing fees

The bureau last week announced the area would be closed through May 12 while contractors conduct the roundup using helicopters, vehicles and temporary pens. Cannon said the agency paid the contractors $966,000.

http://www.thedalleschronicle.com/news/2014/apr/08/nevada-ranchers-son-freed-blm-collects-cattle/

So I wonder what this fiasco has cost taxpayers. This government makes no sense.

[DLR Pyro]

On a Friday night conference call, BLM officials told reporters that "illegal structures" on Bundy's ranch -- water tanks, water lines and corrals -- had to be removed to "restore" the land to its natural state and prevent the rancher from restarting his illegal cattle operation.

The government is sure going out of their way for a few "illegal" structures and one "illegal" cattle operation. 

Contrast that with how the government goes out of their way to accommodate and protect the millions of illegal aliens who have invaded this once sovereign Nation.

This government is out of control.

[JohnnyReb]

The government is sure going out of their way for a few "illegal" structures and one "illegal" cattle operation. 

Contrast that with how the government goes out of their way to accommodate and protect the millions of illegal aliens who have invaded this once sovereign Nation.

This government is out of control.

The government put water stations in the desert for the illegal aliens.....how 'bout we poke holes in them and rip out the plumbing.

[YupItsMe]

You know, I'm not sure where exactly I stand on Bundy's legal position, but the attitude of these BLM guys is just a hair away from brownshirts and black armbands. 

[Big Dog]

Thanks 

I was reading where some states fought the Feds to get their land back.  The Western states need to do the same.

I can see the federal government owning some things, but it just seems to fly in the face of the state rights issue for the feds to hold the majority of a states land and resources.

Especially today, with our government becoming tyrannical.

I think we're already there.

[Skul]

http://www.thedalleschronicle.com/news/2014/apr/08/nevada-ranchers-son-freed-blm-collects-cattle/

So I wonder what this fiasco has cost taxpayers. This government makes no sense.

That was just the contractors. How much more was spent?
Leave it to government to spend a hundred, to recover ten.
Unbelievable incompetency.

[Ptarmigan]

Harry Reid Calls Cliven Bundy Supporters “Domestic Terrorists”
http://www.infowars.com/harry-reid-calls-cliven-bundy-supporters-domestic-terrorists/

Senator Harry Reid has escalated the war of words over the Cliven Bundy dispute, sensationally labeling the Nevada cattle rancher’s supporters “domestic terrorists” during an event in Las Vegas today.

During a ‘Hashtags & Headlines’ event at the Paris Hotel & Casino in Las Vegas, Reid referred to Bundy supporters as “Nothing more than domestic terrorists,” adding, “I repeat: what happened there was domestic terrorism.”

Reid was referring to the stand off on Saturday in Bunkerville where Bundy supporters, some of whom were armed, forced Bureau of Land Management agents to back down and release around 380 head of cattle belonging to Bundy that had been seized over the course of the previous week.

So says the pederast.  

[Dori]

Harry Reid Calls Cliven Bundy Supporters “Domestic Terrorists”
http://www.infowars.com/harry-reid-calls-cliven-bundy-supporters-domestic-terrorists/

So says the pederast.  

Greta called him the "Senate majority bully" and wondered how he kept his job. 

[DLR Pyro]

Well then,   I guess I'm a domestic terrorist.  Come and get me Harry Reid. I dare you.

[Dori]

Well then,   I guess I'm a domestic terrorist.  Come and get me Harry Reid. I dare you.

Reid accused Bundy of not just paying his grazing fees, but also of not paying his taxes.  Bundy said that was a lie.

Reid thinks he owns Nevada.  I would like to see a poll on what Nevadans think of Reid.  

Can you recall a U.S. Senator?

[Mr Mannn]

[longview]

Not a constitutional scholar here, by any means, but I thought there were only two ways the Feds could own land.

Either for armories, government offices, and military bases, or if the property owner was compensated under the "Takings Act."  Neither applies to the land the Bundy cows grazed on, from what I know.  (Articles I and V, respectively)

Many now question whether the Fed agencies, such as the blm and forest service, can exist constitutionally. 

I think people just put up with it until the Feds pushed too many, too far.

So, this is a good thing that needed to happen. 

[willcross]

Not a constitutional scholar here, by any means, but I thought there were only two ways the Feds could own land.

Either for armories, government offices, and military bases, or if the property owner was compensated under the "Takings Act."  Neither applies to the land the Bundy cows grazed on, from what I know.  (Articles I and V, respectively)

Many now question whether the Fed agencies, such as the blm and forest service, can exist constitutionally.  

I think people just put up with it until the Feds pushed too many, too far.

So, this is a good thing that needed to happen.  

Actually article IV of the constitution refers to this.

The Congress shall have power to dispose of and make all needful rules and regulations respecting the territory or other property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to prejudice any claims of the United States, or of any particular state.

So basically it's up to congress to make the rules on what the Feds can own.

Then Article III creates the federal court system to handle disputes of this nature,
"to controversies to which the United States shall be a party". Bundy used the courts and they decided the federal govt does in fact own the land.

[willcross]

BTW, Mr. Bundy won his first case in federal court years ago.  

I'll apologize if I'm wrong, but this is not true. Bundy has lost every federal court case on this matter.