The same government that claimed they couldn’t trust ranchers to serve as stewards for the land have reportedly wreaked havoc on it.
Though the federal government seems thoroughly unwilling to allow Nevadans to control the lands that reside within their state’s borders, the federals government seems entirely incapable of acting as a responsible caretaker of the land that they claim is in need of preservation.
The BLM has demanded that Clive Bundy and his family stay off the land that the federal government claims dominion over. Citing the supposed need to preserve the habit of the desert tortoise, the whole ordeal seems to be more about a power struggle than the desert tortoise.
In fact, after BLM agents pulled out of the valley after a tense standoff with armed protesters, they left in their wake a devastating mess.
It’s another public relations nightmare for the BLM.
Fox News reports that the BLM’s presence has left a trail of wreckage in just over a week. They report holes in watering tanks, busted water lines, torn-down fences as a result of the BLM’s occupation of the land that, apparently, could not be entrusted to the native Nevadans out of fear that they might not preserve the land adequately.
In fact, in their efforts to supposedly save the desert tortoise’s environment, the contracted cowboys used by the BLM shot two 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?”
BLM officials have claimed that “illegal” structures such as watering tanks used by cattle had to be destroyed to restore the land to its natural state and keep Bundy from restarting his ranching endeavors.
However, the court order used to justify the invasion allowed for the BLM to seize cattle, not to go on a search and destroy mission and destroy Bundy’s property.
Houston even pointed out that the BLM reportedly crushed a tortoise burrow with a vehicle. These are the same people justifying their occupation of the land by claiming that they need to help preserve the desert tortoise.
This is exactly the kind of “thinking” that emerges from big government. The attitude that they know what’s best comes in the form of bans on soft drinks, mandatory health insurance and this insistence that the people who have relied upon this land for generations can no longer be trusted to be good stewards of this land.
Instead, the bureaucrats have decided that they know what’s best and in just over a week, wreaked havoc upon the land that they crusaded to “protect” from the rancher.
Has this government gone completely insane?
Hate to break it to you but the land is federal and does not belong to Cliven Bundy. Anything he erected on the property is not his.
your so wrong on the first part and may be right on the second.
Legally US Constitution wise the federal government can not own that land, that’s a fact.
Its not a fort, its not a magazine, its not an arsenal, its not a dock yard or other needful buildings, its in a state thus the federal government legally can not own it even if the state of Nevada, Clark County and Cliven Bundy wanted the federal government to own or even to manage the land.
The Bundy’s may not legally own the land but the county might.
The family said they were willing to pay grazing fees to the state of Nevada or Clark County.
lol Umm, Terry1956 you are wrong on that. You might recall a little detail of a Desert Tortoise being endangered and that that whole area is it’s a Federally protected preserve for.. ding.. the tortoise. THAT falls under the manage of the BLM. What does that mean? It means the federal government owns that land. Next?
Clark county is not responsible for the administration of grazing fees on public land. That is the BLM’s job and that is what has cost Bundy all his court cases.
And on the second, again, know your law. Just because a person erects something on a property, especially if they owe money to the property owner, it is not theirs. It’s called abandonment if it is left they 48 hours or more.
You move out of a rented house. Anything and everything you leave behind then becomes the legal property of the owner.
You seem to be missing the big picture Brian. I would rather have Bundy take care of the land instead of the BLM. Seeing as how the BLM is responsibresponsible for dozens of ranches closing in the area since the 90s. Also Bundy stopped paying his grazing fees because the money paid for grazing fees eas supposed to go back into helping the ranchers. The BLM stopped doing that so Bundy stopped paying his fees. Also no the federal government does not own the land they overwatch it and state law superscedes federal law and the state sided with Bundy. Thus the feds had no right to be there. The feds think that they are so powerful when in fact the states hold the power but do not realize it anymore.
Another reason he stopped paying the fees…The BLM was using the fees paid by ranchers to shut down the very ranchers that were paying the fees.
It does not matter. The land is Federally Protected. Until that status changes there is nothing to even talk about. Bundy is in the wrong. He owes the BLM, therefore he owes we the people for all the time he failed to pay Fees.
David, the land is Federally protected which means they have full jurisdiction over it. State law does not supercede Federal. If you believe that, see how far a Sheriff can get onto a Military base. And no, the state did not side with Bundy. Go back and read the article and do your own research. They helped negotiate a settlement to end the standoff but the Sheriff did not side with Bundy.
If they are so worried about federally protected land, why don’t the feds control the border lands where illegals trash it every day?I have been to the border in AZ and have seen this.
He never signed any papers handing over his rights…DING…they had to buy the other properties and he doesn’t pay the feds because he doesn’t acknowledge their right to it since he has never signed or sold…which means they are stealing it from him…and he would that Nevada have it then the feds
Seems you need to actually educate yourself AmericanFaith. There are no papers to be signed. He never owned any part of the land he was allowing his cattle to graze on. That was all public land from the start. When a person does not pay to graze and allows their cattle to graze it’s called trespassing.
When he had the grazing rights the blm breached its contract by not performing its end of the contract
That doesn’t mean he can stop paying his fees. If a contract is breached you go to court. They did… Twice. He lost… Twice!
No you educate yourself…I know what i talk about.
Obviously not. His cattle trespassed on federal protected lands. He’s in the wrong, period. Educate yourself.
You need to do more research on Harry Reid, this is not about the tortoise, its about a billion dollar deal with solar energy and China: The Bundy family have been grazing that land since 1870, never before has there been a tortoise problem and by the way the Government or BLM killed a lot of tortoise in their efforts to collect the cattle OH and yes they shot 2 prize bulls, because they were scared and dug a hole and buried more cattle they killed!! This is not about land fees or tortoise, its about selling land to China, that’s not their land to sell, its’ Nevada’s land!!
Already DID my research Sherri, no this was not about that at all. Point of fact the deal fell thru OVER 10 months ago as the Chinese pulled out of it. There is no Chinese Solar Power deal. Google it.
Guess you haven’t heard, Reid had all stories regarding him and his son Rory taken down off Google and You tube and all searches regarding Solar deal with China!!!
http://www.lasvegassun.com/news/2013/jul/02/after-chinese-back-out-laughlin-project-commission/
Hi might have tried.
The deal did not fall through, its only on hold until Hairy can steal the land
lol There was no land to “steal”. The site where the Solar Plant for the Chinese is not anywhere near the Bundy land and no, the deal is dead. It is not on hold.
Not talking about the Laughlin site, the one next door to Bundy is still up in the air and he stands in Hairy’s way
That one is not up in the air. That is 10 miles away and on Indian Reservation land and does not in any way connect with the acreage Bundy is trespassing on.
Ground has already been broken for construction on that.
Do you really believe the story about the desert tortoise? The fed killed more than the cattle ever did.
It’s what they used to declare the area Federally protected. But in answer, no, if it was all that important as a species then a lot more care would have been taken.
The Federal government CANNOT OWN LAND.
lol sorry to laugh at you sonjamay but the Federal Government CAN own land. It owns every base, port, fort and air station in the US.
National monuments, owned by the Government. Federal Preserves, owned by the Government.
Land such as what Bundy is trespassing on is Federally protected and managed by the BLM.
Might want to look that up in the future before posting.
troll
lol Sorry AmericanFaith, the troll would be you.
Here is an Idea Adverse Possession. The Bundy family has been using the land as there own for close to 150 years. Has the Federal Government paid ANY property taxes on said property to the State of Nevada or Clark County? Just saying.
Federal land does not fall under that category. No Federal land or federally protected land, anywhere can be taxed. Not on the city, county or state level.
Brian you are Wrong So STUFF-IT.
No Barbara, I am not wrong. The land is Federally protected. Look it up, it’s all there for anyone to read. Bundy failed to pay his fees and owes 1 Million bucks in Fees that have gone unpaid. He doesn’t own the land and was trespassing each and every time he allowed his cattle onto it or went onto it.
You can dislike that all you want but it’s fact and it’s law. And no silly little temper tantrum of yours is going to change that.
Brian you need to learn to read…..The land is federally owned…. Ranchers were paying dues to use the land.,..But the feds renigged on there end of the deal…So Mr. Bundy has been trying to pay his dues locally,, but has not been successful.. Doe;s the fed not have to take you to court for money owed??? Do you honestly believe they can just come and take your property without court documents??? (in this case Bundy,s Cattle)
And what about easement rights??? Do you know anything about those???? Don’t you think the court should handle this??? This is a power hungry fed??? Why else would they spend almost a million tax dollars mind you to round up cattle they know they would have to give back….What about the Harry Reid Scenario??? Not even a possibility in your tiny little mind…
Why now?? the Bundy’s have been using the same piece of land for years and years….He stopped paying dues to the fed in 1993.. so why now??? He has used the land ever since.. you only need to use a piece of land for 5 years to claim easement in a court of law…So why all the sudden this big power play costing tax payers almost a million dollars…
Because maybe just maybe,,, Mr Bundy does have an actual claim.. And the fed is afraid of how the court will rule…Maybe?? And then poor Harry would not get his Chinese Solar power field built there…MAYBE???
lol Umm Marty, YOU need to learn to read and do research. They DID take him to court, TWICE and won both times. That is what allowed them to come in to remove the cattle that were trespassing.
They don’t have to give the cattle back as Bundy owes over a Million dollars in Fees that he has not paid. The cattle were to be rounded up and auctioned off to pay what it could on that debt.
Bundy gave up any easement rights he may have had once he stopped paying the fees. This means he nor the cattle can use the land.
The Harry Reid scenario? I’m guessing you are talking about the Chinese Solar power plant? Again, do some research. That fell thru over 10 months ago. The Chinese pulled out and the deal died. The only other Solar plant in construction is not anywhere near Bundy. It is on Indian Reservation land. Where it is being constructed is not even ON the land that Bundy was using to cattle graze.
Oh and you cannot claim easement rights on Federal land. Bundy has no claim. He lost in court, not once but twice.
but then most of the judges are paid off nowadays. hard to find one who upholds the constitution and the bill of rights.
You get proven wrong so you head off on bought judges. You miss the point that Bundy signed his grazing rights lease and then didn’t pay for the grazing owing the american public, not just the people in Nevada over a million dollars. The BLM should add court costs to that sum! Bundy is just a thief same as you would be if you stole took something without paying for it!
The actual fees are in the 200k range, but just like the IRS penalties and interest and fees and it never ends
They did not file a lien on any property therefore they are thieves, but we all know our government is just that thieves
That is up in the air till we see the actual court documents which neither side has provided.
Is that not what I said above?? Does the fed not need a court order to take Mr Bundys cattle.. And you laughed,, now you say wait and see…You are a joke Brian…And a big waste of time
They had the court order. They had it twice over. They went to court twice and each time Bundy lost. They had the court order to remove his cattle. Now whether in that court order they had the authority and legal power to TAKE his cattle and SELL it is a different matter altogether. And that is what the actual documents are needed for.
Bundy was in violation of trespassing and failure to pay grazing fees. That has never been in question.
And no marty, what you said above was about taking him to court, which they did. The court documents allow them to come in and take the cattle off the land. Period.
They never had a court order to take his cattle….They had a court order for him to stop grazing on the federal land…Because he did not pay his grazing fee’s,, Which he has been trying to pay locally…Not to the fed…Big difference there…Not paying grazing fee’s and a lien against the cattle for those fee’s… They need a court order to take his property….They cannot just steal it…
What exactly do you think an order removing cattle from the property is? That is a legal order from a court that says the agents have authority to come onto the property THEY manage and remove the offending cattle. That is what the court order was.
It’s not up to him where or who he pays the fees to. This is federally protected land, it is the governance of the BLM. He does not get to not pay just because he does not believe in the authority of the person trying to collect the fees. That is called breaking the law.
They HAD a court order and it is not stealing. Bundy was ordered by a court to remove his cattle. That is the same as an eviction. When a person leaves their property behind when the authority comes to evict the person… they LOSE that property. THAT IS LAW.
Do your research.
http://www.tpnn.com/2014/04/16/unbelievable-blm-wreaks-havoc-on-land-they-fought-to-preserve/#comment-1343177504
No more read it….I can’t help the ignorant understand…
In this case YOU are the ignorant, and you need to understand.
Bundy has no legal grounds. Period. If he did, he would have claimed it in court already. Has he done that? Nope. It stands at Bundy zero, courts 2.
They went to court and got the ruling against him. 2 in fact. Bundy broke the law. Period.
Read it and understand why? Bundy states that his rights derive from the fact his Mormon ancestors were using the land far before the federal government claimed authority over it. One Elko County rancher, Cliff Gardner, has decided to take his case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that states’ rights mean the federal government has no authority over the land where his cattle graze.
It does not matter one bit about his ancestors. It will be thrown out for the simple reason that if an Indian were to come forth whose Ancestors lived on the land they could claim rights. Bundy has no deed to the land in question.
As long as the land is federally protected the BLM has complete authority and when brought to court, the case is a loss for the plaintiff.
A federal judge issues a permanent injunction against Bundy, ordering him to remove his cattle from the federal lands. He lost an appeal to the San Francisco 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. He represented himself.
Nowhere I can find does it say the fed is to remove the cattle…It says Bundy is to remove the cattle,,,,, Until it goes back to court to grant authority to the fed to remove the cattle they can’t just steal it…
Seriously? Ok let me break it down simply for you.
Bundy is ordered to remove his cattle from Federal lands. Failure to comply means that the Government can use any and all means to remove the cattle to comply with the order.
If Bundy refuses to remove the cattle, ordered by a Court, then it falls to the BLM to enforce the court order and they are perfectly legal to do so. THAT is what the Court order means.
By leaving the cattle there, Bundy effectively abandoned the cattle.
When a person is evicted, a judge order the person to vacate the premises. If they fail to vacate then the person who brought the suit for eviction can use all legal means necessary, up to and including force. Anything left behind is forfeit under law and the owner or agent can do what they like with it.
They cannot just go in and take property in this case Bundy’s cattle… They need a court order to remove by force,, they cannot just show up one day with force…
Seizing property in this case Bundy’s Cattle,, requires a writ of execution which is normally not in the original order…
In needs to go back to court,, or before a judge to get a writ of execution…Then the fed can seize his cattle but not until…And that has been my whole point..They cannot just show up with force and take property…..
http://www.kcsg.com/view/full_story/24908037/article-Heated-Cattle-Debates-Spikes-The-Question–Who-Really-Owns-The-Land-?instance=eeo_report1
They HAD that court order. They don’t need a separate order to use force. Bundy was court ordered to cease and desist and remove his cattle. He failed to do so and that Court order gives Law Enforcement all the authority they need to act.
Wrong. A writ is only in the case where they are going onto Bundy’s property to take possession. In this case, Bundy abandoned the cattle on the Federal Lands. They do not need a writ.
They need a writ of execution to seize property…Look at the link I provided…Not a court order… A writ of execution which is different than a court order…The order tells Bundy to remove his cattle…A writ of execution allows the use of force..To uphold said judgement…They need the original judgement Plus a writ of execution,,, or they cannot touch Bundy’s property legally….
You yourself said this is not over why not???? They didn’t have a writ of execution and are probably getting that document now..Then they wikk be back…
ONLY if the cattle are on the persons private property. The cattle in this case are on Federal lands and they are already have a court order forcing Bundy, compelling Bundy to remove them. He failed to do so, so in effect he abandoned them on Federal lands.
It ceased to be Bundy’s property when he abandoned it on Federal lands and failed to comply with the Court order that had been in effect for years.
I said it’s not over because now they will go after Bundy financially and any other way legal that they can. They can size his bank account, his IRS refund if any, they can wait for him to sell the cattle and take the proceeds, they can attach liens to the actual ranch. The list can go on and on.
Again you will not read you are wrong…..
No Marty, I am not. It is called the law and you need to learn it and stop being stupid. Bundy was wrong. At the moment he stopped paying his rent ie Grazing fees he was wrong. He was an errant tenant and the Federal Government got an order that told him to stop and to remove the cattle. He failed to do so and so the BLM moved in, lawfully to remove the cattle. Bundy left them on Federal land so he abandoned them. That is how the law sees it. That is how it works.
There is no writ required, nothing else needs to be done. If the cattle had been on Bundy’s property and BLM wanted to take them for the debt then they would have had to go to court to get a lien on the cattle and then a writ to be able to go onto Bundy’s land to take the property. That was not the case here.
By him failing to do so they need to go back to the judge and get a writ of execution to enforce judgement…They cannot just take his property..That part is always in a writ of execution….Which forces compliance with a judgement…..
Has nothing to do with who’s property it is on…A writ of execution is needed to enforce judgement..
If you stop making payments on you home and the bank forecloses,, Normally the court will tell you to be out by a certain time…If you do not comply the bank has to get a writ of execution,,, to have you removed from the property.. This case is no different…..The bank cannot just send in the sheriff… they need a writ of execution for that…The bank already has the order for you to leave… However you haven’t left that is there last option…Same here in the Bundy case..
There has to be a writ of execution to seize property in this case Bundy’s cattle..
lol No.
By Bundy failing to remove his cattle and stop grazing the Federal lands he effectively abandoned them. The Court order already directs bundy to stop and to remove the cattle. Failure to do so is abandonment of property. There is no writ required because it is not Bundy’s property (The land) and he abandoned the cattle by his failing to remove them. That is the way the law works.
A writ is ONLY necessary when going onto anothers property.
Your example and the Bundy case are two separate things. One is a person getting evicted. The second is a removal of cattle which were abandoned. No Writ is necessary.
This expresses it perfectly.
Bundy’s cattle was tresspassing. They went to court and got 2 judgements against him. No writ is necessary and that is by law.
http://congressionalresearch.com/RL31081/document.php
You are right,,, this does explain it perfectly doesn’t it.. like I said earlier you are a lazy researcher…You did not read what you sent me…. Here is a paragraph that proves my point…I may have worded it wrong earlier.. but the BLM cannot take the Bundy cattle without notifying them first… here is that paragraph from your link….
Do you really want to deny your own research????
Livestock can be impounded if either the owner is unknown or the permittee fails
to remove the livestock when ordered to do so.19 A separate notice of intent to
impound must be sent by certified mail or personally delivered to the owner or his
agent, or both, or be posted if the owner is unknown.
Maybe not a writ of execution but are you 100% positive this notice was sent????
They cannot just take personal property without notice….
Nope I am not a lazy researcher Marty, I am an honest researcher, I read the whole thing and sent it. I know the law and how it works. A writ is not required unless a person is sizing property from a personal residence.
And yes the notice was sent.
Either way,,, They could not take his cattle with just a court order… That has been my argument… And we are to the bottom of that… Where it goes from here is up to the fed… I see trouble Either way….Bundy has won a small battle for now,,, But I really don’t believe the fed will give up that easy… They will be back,,,Just like at Waco… I for one agree with Bundy,,, his family has been using that land since 1870.. All the sudden they have to leave for a supposed endangered turtle really..Really.. Think about that…
Fed won’t give up. As it stands, IF they are smart, they are even at this moment assessing his ranch’s worth and preparing to attach a lien onto it. As well as seize his bank accounts and any refunds he might be due. This will all go towards the 1.1 million dollars he currently owes. Fees and penalties would apply as well as accrued interest and of course for each day he kept his cattle on the Federal land.. more fees.
Took me a moment. This is the court document. All in in, there in no need to obtain a writ.
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/nv/field_offices/las_vegas_field_office/cattle_trespass.Par.0116.File.dat/Dkt%2035%20Order%20Granting%20MSJ%207-9-13.pdf
LOL, if the source is the tea party news network it has to be factual! I’ve never seen such a room full of morons.
Blow me Randy MSDNC is a lot better
Here you go Brian again I do your research….But he has no right’s LOLOL…why did they wait 15 years after taking it court in 1998??? Why all the sudden now??? They Should have to take him back to court…They waited Until AUG 2013 and tell him he has 45 days get real,,, People have squated in vacant homes in less than 15 years…If you evict someone from your home but allow them to stay another 15 years you have to take them back to court…You can’t just say I have a 15 year old court order get out in 45 day’s…They have to take him back to court…..This is a federal power grab of Bundy’s Cattle…READ…
http://benswann.com/exclusive-does-cliven-bundy-have-something-called-prescriptive-rights-why-the-blm-may-be-afraid-of-going-to-court/
lol Well let’s start punching holes in your case shall we?
First off, you seem to be under some mis-conception that a court order like the first one issued has a time limit or constraint that it MUST be used by. It was taken to court and the court went against him. There is nothing that says they have to execute it right then, next month or next year or even the next decade.
And no in your eviction example, no your don’t. As long as the eviction notice is filed, legal and ruled upon, the person owning the property can act upon it at any time and no further legal action is required. They have taken the steps that they need to to secure the removal of the person legally.
an there is no help for your liberial thoughts
It’s not liberal. It’s Constitutional and if you can’t see that there is no help for you. If you don’t like the law, work to change the law, whining and moaning about it does nothing.
Well,thats something we can blame race on.
Our government is on a collision course with a revolution… I for one am ready… I will never comply with obama and any other president who is out to strip me and my fwllow Americans of my and there rights
Revolution is exactly what the current administration is working towards. It will allow them to completely annalilate all opposition with the power of local and national law enforcement and the US military if necessary.
The real enemy here is not the Taliban, terrorists, Putin’s takeover of whatever he wants or even those that would enter our country illegally. It is, in fact, the US Citizen that wants to uphold the Constitution, the rule of law and the freedom and liberty that our forefathers handed down to us.
i have read it 4 times an i am the enemy–nope unless your the likes of obamas hords an want tp control us all–yep then i’m your enemy
The facts are clear; the evidence is un refutable; what we have is a Dictator tyrant EVIL in Pinocchio Obama and the Dimcrat party lawless and un constitutional; it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it; we some altering to do if that don’t work Abolish it; we must for the future of our country for the youth of our country get back to a constitutional authority Federal government returning authority and control back to the states even their claims of land preservation that constitutional law says belongs to the States is a lie;
I stand with you Ronnie! I ditto this very post! Good one!
To me…..The federal does not own the land it is owned by the people of Nevada. Who to many dam loop holes in the new constitution. Let’s just be cut and dry about things. And if a man is making a living off land that is not being used so what. Is he out stealing cars or robbing banks? He’s not hurting you so who cares wtf is going on.
There is no NEW Constitution. Same one we had when the nation was established in 1776. The bill of rights came along a little later and through it we can further define the liberties we enjoy. Our elected officials at all levels have made a mess of things while trying to enrich themselves and others by enacting regulations that strip us of the rights we should enjoy. That has been going on every since the Republic was established. The years since the second world war have been much worse than any time before. It’s time to set things right… The problem is now so bad that we argue about where to start so nothing gets done…
Actually it is #2 the first was called the articles of confederation which was the law of the land from 1777-1781.
One is the Constitution and the other is not although both were the law of the land. Point to you for the date of acceptance 1789 and thank you for the clarification. It has been a while since high school and I never was much on dates. I expect that you would agree that our country is not being governed as the founders envisioned, although I believe one of them did think that a Revolution should occur with some frequency. I think it was Jefferson and he may not have been serious but didn’t he say we should have a revolution ever twenty five years or so ? I really should look these things up. If I’m right we are greatly over due. Not that I’m recommending that (message to who ever in the NSA is reading this) but our elected officials for the most part have forgotten that they work for the people although they give grudging lip service to the idea.
Tim we still have avenues left to us before I would even consider revolution. One of which is Article 5 which is currently getting close to reaching the threshold for a convention of states.
I certainly hope we don’t have a revolution. But I think the threat of one is certainly in the air. If the government is brought back under Republican control and if they actually can make the necessary changes in the out of control agencies we might avoid it. If the feds keep pushing as they have for more and more control we will have spilled blood. If that were to happen all bets are off. I thought the men at the Bundy standoff acted admirably and I would hope that if something similar were to occur that those involved would act as well but we can’t reasonably expect that to be the case.. We have huge growing problems in this country from the drug cartels and the Islamic clerics spouting the need for sharia law and our energies should be spent there instead of dealing with out of control agencies..
correct, and we also had more than one president before washington
first of all, the federal government is paid for by we the people, secondly they work for us in point, thirdly they should all be fired and I want some real answers on this blm and the feds owning 80 per cent of Nevada and why? that land belongs to us, the people who paid for it and if it was stolen or the owners were threatened or intimidated it needs to go back to them and those responsible tried and punished. that includes harry reid and his son!
no answers —TILL we the people stand an be counted—till then nothing going to change but for the worst
I agree with you, the government doesn’t own anything, it belongs to ” we the people”
it’s not about the land or the turtles…..its about the money and power!!
the turtles existed with wild cattle and bison as was intended by nature.
No such thing as wild cattle, only escaped domesticated cattle and they do not do anything to the land but destroy it.
The cattle are domestic, but they didn’t destroy anything. If they had, the whole area would have been worthless a long time ago.
Kate, where do you get this information. The desert tortoise exists after over hundred years along with cattle grazing on the land. In fact reports out there indicate the numbers are up for the tortoise. So please share your knowledge of the damage cattle do to the land. I am interested in what you know. This article I cite includes facts about the positive co-existances of these two beings.
https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/rangelands/article/viewFile/10776/10049
The Bundy family and other ranchers were actually encouraged by the Federal Government to settle in this area 75 years before there was even a BLM established in 1946. The Bundy’s built irrigation and roads in the area and the desert tortoises haved lived side by side with the cattle. Bundy’s son demonstrated that cattle avoid even stepping on rocks every time that might resemble a Desert turtle.
cattle just as any other domesticated animals were at one time wild.
Very few people have chosen to live in such a hostile environment where temperatures can soar above 120 degrees. No thanks.
really? phoenix is the 5th largest city in america and that doesn’t even include the dozens of cities that are directly surrounding it. tucson is also very large, many other cities in the state also. don’t forget california, nevada, utah, colorado, new mexico and texas. more people then you think.
The demographics of this area are less hospitable then many other desert cities across the southwest. I’ve been all over the Southwest several times including the Bundy Ranch area, some areas are simply not that inviting by just a few demographic problems. The Bundy’s were part of that group of Mormons who were determined to make those areas more habitable. Las Vegas was started by Mormons, and they where thought to be crazy to even try a 100 years ago, however it was are own government that encouraged ranchers and farmer to make these lands work long before the BLM was established back in 1946.
it’s not demographics that make it less hospitable, it’s the amount of modern amenities available. i play and camp out in the open desert all the time with only what i bring, it’s plenty hospitable when you know how to live in it. the native americans and early settlers had no problem living there either.
Hrm, remind me again how does a herd of cattle destroy dirt and rock?
They come in, trample up some ground as they range about, grazing. The move from where they graze to a watering hole to wherever they sleep. They drop cow patties that in turn, for the most part, fertilize the grasses that they eat and encourage them to grow.
Grass grows back. Rains fall and replenish the water. Rains come along and settle tracks. Are cattle in possession of some explosive? Do they at night suddenly develop the ability to operate heavy machinery and dig large swathes of ground up?
The most destructive thing they do is to eat. And the plants grow back.
Evidently Kate you don’t know anything about cattle. You must be one of those people from the city. The only thing that I agree with Boehner is that the private citizens take better care of the lands then the government.
The question is has the government gone completely insane and the answer is, YES !
It actually happened several years ago when the elected officials decided to form the agencies that are now in the news. These agencies were not given clear mandates and restrictions nor were proper methods of redress for their inevitable mistakes established. These agencies are allowed to enact regulations that have the effect of law. Law without representation !! Appeal is nearly impossible and seldom reversed regardless of the harm done to business and livelihood.. And nearly everyone knows it, and has allowed it to continue. Not only is the government insane but we the people seem to be tottering on the edge of insanity ourselves.
40 years ago BLM had no guns. Let’s go back. Their bravery is based on their guns. As someone said, “To a man who only has a hammer, everything looks like a nail.”
Have you noticed since the stench of b o has infiltrated the White House, how many armed agency’s exist, that were non-existent, prior?
Ironically, they are targeting private citizens firearms, under the guise of public safety.
Keep your powder dry! GOD bless America!
Yes, our government has gone insane. Drunk with perceived power and in need of being eliminated through the power of the purse.
The correct past tense of “wreak” is “wrought”, not “wreaked”. And the BLM has every right to protect this land from criminal trespass, which is exactly what Mr. Bundy has been doing for many years. If it’s okay for him to graze his cattle on this FEDERALLY PROTECTED land, then I guess it’s ok for me to release my horses to graze at will in the Grand Canyon, right?
Might be a little harder to round them up considering that they would most likely mingle with the wild horses already there. But why not. You might be able to do that for twenty years or so.. The BLM unfortunately can and does write it’s own rules. They seized the land and declared it protected territory, for the tortoise. The state still owns the land, or possibly the county owns it, but they have no control over it’s use, because the BLM does what it damn well pleases. Now that’s my understanding of events from reading about them, but considering the dispute has been going on for twenty years I rather doubt I have all the facts..
This gov’t isn’t “insane.” It is un-American and anti-American. The progressive democrats are built on a Marxist ideology and are led by a subversive Marxist.
“By their fruits you will know them,” is not only sound wisdom and common sense – it is transparently obvious. Yet, a significant number of voters in this country can’t see the destruction that is being visited on our nation by these modern day commies.
So much for the Oath of Enlistment, especially “and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States…”. You might want to change your avatar, you’re a disgrace to our military.
“I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.”
Nowhere in there does it say that a soldier cannot have an opinion or free speech Randy. A solder takes an oath to defend the Constitution. There is a reason that the Constitution comes first. It places emphasis that upholding the Constitution is paramount over what a President or even a politician wants or requires.
“And that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me, according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice.”
If a President or Officers orders fall outside the bounds of the UCMJ then a soldier is duty bound, honor bound, OATH bound to not follow it.
Don’t criticize a soldier for speaking their mind on policies and actions. The President is not the be all, end all.
Then obey this President’s Executive Order (A REPUBLICAN AT THAT!)
Executive Order 12548 — Grazing Fees
February 14, 1986
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and in order to provide for establishment of appropriate fees for the grazing of domestic livestock on public rangelands, it is ordered as follows:
Section 1. Determination of Fees. The Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior are directed to exercise their authority, to the extent permitted by law under the various statutes they administer, to establish fees for domestic livestock grazing on the public rangelands which annually equals the $1.23 base established by the 1966 Western Livestock Grazing Survey multiplied by the result of the Forage Value Index (computed annually from data supplied by the Statistical Reporting Service) added to the Combined Index (Beef Cattle Price Index minus the Prices Paid Index) and divided by 100; provided, that the annual increase or decrease in such fee for any given year shall be limited to not more than plus or minus 25 percent of the previous year’s fee, and provided further, that the fee shall not be less than $1.35 per animal unit month.
Sec. 2. Definitions. As used in this Order, the term:
(a) “Public rangelands” has the same meaning as in the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (Public Law 95 – 514);
(b) “Forage Value Index” means the weighted average estimate of the annual rental charge per head per month for pasturing cattle on private rangelands in the 11 Western States (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California) (computed by the Statistical Reporting Service from the June Enumerative Survey) divided by $3.65 and multiplied by 100;
(c) “Beef Cattle Price Index” means the weighted average annual selling price for beef cattle (excluding calves) in the 11 Western States (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California) for November through October (computed by the Statistical Reporting Service) divided by $22.04 per hundred weight and multiplied by 100; and
(d) “Prices Paid Index” means the following selected components from the Statistical Reporting Service’s Annual National Index of Prices Paid by Farmers for Goods and Services adjusted by the weights indicated in parentheses to reflect livestock production costs in the Western States: 1. Fuels and Energy (14.5); 2. Farm and Motor Supplies (12.0); 3. Autos and Trucks (4.5); 4. Tractors and Self-Propelled Machinery (4.5); 5. Other Machinery (12.0); 6. Building and Fencing Materials (14.5); 7. Interest (6.0); 8. Farm Wage Rates (14.0); 9. Farm Services (18.0).
Sec. 3. Any and all existing rules, practices, policies, and regulations relating to the administration of the formula for grazing fees in section 6(a) of the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 shall continue in full force and effect.
Sec. 4. This Order shall be effective immediately.
Ronald Reagan
The White House,
February 14, 1986.
[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 10:32 a.m., February 18, 1986]
That is what the Rangers of the BLM attempted to do and in light of the HIGH probability of bloodshed they pulled back. That does not mean that this is over by any means. Bundy has lost in court twice and there is no expectation that he will win in future court appearances.
Legally, the Government can simply sit back and take him apart piecemeal by attacking his IRS refund, attaching liens on his bank accounts etc and waiting till he brings the cattle to market and placing a lien on the funds at that time.
Randy, sorry you’re a buffoon. Reagan didn’t take Bundy’s land or send troops after him. Terrible example that doesn’t make the point you think it does.
Hey buffoon, it’s not bundy’s land to begin with. It’s public land!
Missed it by thaat much…it’s Nevada land. The federal government has no place in this, and definitely no justification for sending a private army.
We don’t have to blindly follow a corrupt president, incapeable of telling the truth & passing over 900 executive orders & calling them laws. enforcing only the laws he wants & ignoring the others. That is not leadership that is corruption.
No-one is blindly following. Executive orders are laws. Congress has the option, rarely used, of overturning an Executive order.
Can you please provide the source of these “900 executive orders”? Thanks, I’ll be waiting for your reply.
I swore an oath to the Constitution, not a president. Just like USMC 64-68.
Our current president has shown, on several occasions, that the Constitution means nothing to him, unless it helps him achieve his goals. His orders are null and void.
The best thing about Freedom is your choice to move when you don’t like it.
So when are you leaving?
Randy – you’re a disgrace to America and those that cherish their individual rights. I can tell by your comment that you never wore the uniform and served under arms.
There’s a critical part of “obeying orders” that you’re ignorant of, and I’d guess it’s because your a P.C. conformist kind of progressive – an Obamabot, or an Obamanista.
Patriots – are only obliged to follow “lawful orders.” The Constitution is the standard (which I’m sure you disrespect).
Isn’t Fox News on? Were you crying back in 1986 when it was Reagan that imposed the fees on Bundy? Hypocrite much? Let me guess you’re referring to Reagan as the commie since it was his executive order, it was HIS PEN AND PAPER! Google executive order 12548 moron.
Your hero ozero could have ignored it like he does with other laws.
Typical leftist response. Did your political minder call and give you a suggestion how to use dishonesty in dealing with a legitimate issue, or have you got the deceit down pat by now?
Did I write any defense of Reagan? Did I even address the issues underlying this situation? Yet, you feel you have the right like all progressive trolls to construct a straw man in order to set fire to your own creation and give you the feeling that your arguments are superior. You’re talking to yourself lefty loser.
I focused on the Tyrant’s administration and his Marxist party’s use of political power against the patriotic Americans he considers to be terrorists and enemies. I can understand how he doesn’t like patriots because they know the truth and expose his un-American activities.
Deflect much Randy? The issue is today’s, not the last generation’s. Ha, you’re doing better than your Commie leader with his habit of blaming Bush; you’re going back to Reagan. Now, how did Reagan summon those BLM jackbooted thugs to the ranch? How did Reagan order them to round up the cattle, kill many of them, separate calves from mothers, destroy the water infrastructure, etc.?
Call your political minder back – tell him you need something more than this bit of twisted propaganda from Reagan’s E.O. to defend the tyranny of the Marxist democrats. (p.s. this tactic has been widely disseminated already for all progressives like Randy who can’t think for themselves – it is the talking point of the day for the commies)
Take a breath and let me sum up your jibberish. Using public lands comes with a cost. What happens if you don’t pay your property taxes? If Bundy didn’t like the terms and conditions created post 1986 by REAGAN, he should have moved on! That’s called freedom. How many court cases does it take for Bundy to realize this? Time to pay up!
Troll alert! Troll alert! Don’t bother to engage, he’s smarter than everyone else.
OOHRah jarhead,FMF Corpsman 68-72
oh yes and randy I suppose u would fire upon Americans if ordered to including your brother ,wife kids and any one else they ordered u to
Just love it when those that have not served know everything about our oath and the requirements thereof. I think its about time our military relieved the purported CIC of his command
Just love it when those who think just because they served automatically get a constitutional law degree. Funny thing is it’s people like that who enlisted at 17.
Randy, another brilliant retort from a dimwit. I enlisted at 17, but I have no doubt I have spent many more years in graduate and post-graduate schools and more degrees than you (if you have one, however, by the level of indoctrination you display, you probably have had some exposure to commie professors).
Now, as one who was a student and practitioner of adult education, I make that claim on the evidence that is manifested in your revealed thinking (or lack thereof).
Wow, I’m sure you own the internet also.
You’re on a roll Kahl. You haven’t made on intelligent statement yet!
I don’t own much, I’m just educated, knowledgeable and grounded in truth unlike you and your Marxist comrades.
Unlawful orders are just that unlawful. What is called our president is and unlawful tyrant
That is legal orders of the president of the US. Our constitution is the law of the land, not Obama & his cronies & handlers.
Hey Tea Bagging Morons! Before blaming the current administration, pull out a history book and look who used his pen and paper to sign Executive Order 12548 regarding grazing fees in 1986! Hypocrites much?
Randy, no one is blaming Obama for grazing fees. Everyone realizes that it was Reagan that signed the order. But the current actions are being undertaken under Obama’s watch. It might not be by his directive but whatever bad happens during a presidents term always lands on that president.
This was a mess that was at least 3 presidential terms in the making.
So it’s Obama’s fault for upholding Reagan’s Executive Order? Again, republicans just love to pick and choose when to use the government in their favor! Hypocrites!
I never said that. Obama gets the blame, right or wrong for the actions that occur during his administration. Perfect example is Reagan getting the blame for Iran Contra scandal. People got prosecuted and whatnot but it happened under Reagan’s watch so it’s something now linked to his presidency for all time.
And obama and holder pick and choose what laws they will enforce.
A law is a law.
True. But obama doesn’t enforce ones he doesn’t like, and as holder said to the states attorneys generals, don’t enforce laws you don’t believe in.
Sorry that Obama doesn’t enforce the laws in your order.
holder and obama don’t enforce any laws they don’t like, so what does in my order mean. Learn to read and comprehend. So its okay to you if they pick and choose as long as it suits you?
Not to the current administration. If an election was not coming up in November blood would have been shed, everything is politics with Prez zero
Yeah because the Waco standoff really hurt Clinton. Wake up on your history.
Heh, I take it you were initially brainwashed by Osam OKlintoon
Boy you have a nasty mouth on you, but then again you are a moron liberal.
Did Reagan send in armed gestapo
Didn’t have to because Bundy paid up.
The Bundy family has been in this area 75 years before the BLM was created (1946) by congress, and 15 years after Nevada became a state. Ranchers like the Bundys’ were actually encouraged by the Federal Government to settle and ranch in this area. Only in recent years has the BLM become a tool of powerful interests from environmentalists to big business. The Bundys’ are the last ranchers in Southern Nevada.
Constitutional Convention and Ratification, 1787–1789. Your sentiments are right on but your dates are wrong.
Phase 1 – Get the masses of uninformed and illegal population on your side with promises that you never intend to keep
Phase 2 – Start intimidating and running over the top of those who oppose you with overwhelming force
Phase 3 – Attack the few who are not intimidated and refuse to yield in Phase-2, hoping they will attempt to defend themselves
Phase 4 – Which will justify the declaration of a state of emergency, implement Marshall Law and confiscate all means of self defense nationwide (Let No Emergency go to waste)
Phase 5 – Welcome comrades to our Soviet Union West….
This is the lieberal way, and the Tyrant in Chief intends to enforce it. After 2014 we must impeach and jail him if we are to continue to have a country
They are such idiots–and Harry Reid and his corrupt pack of family is leading the idiots charge.l
maybe we should take a look at how they have preserved the other eighty percent they took? and exactly why they needed to take it and what has happened to it since then. sure would be an interesting idea!
Truth!
Yes, the government is insane and will stay that way till true republicans, not rinos, take over control.
BLM has a budget of $960,000,000 (2010 actual operating budget) and over 10,000 employees….a huge number of which are trained, armed and ready. They have an astonishing array of battle equipment and armament. They are a law unto themselves and they are NOT military, so they are not subject to the UCMJ, but rather they answer to the department head, who answers directly to the president. It is the president’s own little WELL-ARMED Army that bypasses completely the American Military. No one is watching the store, folks!
20 plus year of nuclear testing in the Nevada dessert and the BLM only worried about a small desert tortoise being killed by cattle grazing on the federal land?? . Plus hundreds of illegal aliens cross into America daily, mega tons of illegal drugs also come in daily all unchecked, no federal agency cares and the Bundy family are the felons?? just saying, something is definitely wrong with those bureaucratic feeble minds, with their thought process……..
The only way this could be federal land is if the US government never ceded it to Nevada on Oct.31st 1864 when it became a state which they are required to do so the state can be created with all property rights.
Executive Order 12548 — Grazing Fees
February 14, 1986
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and laws of the United States of America, and in order to provide for establishment of appropriate fees for the grazing of domestic livestock on public rangelands, it is ordered as follows:
Section 1. Determination of Fees. The Secretaries of Agriculture and the Interior are directed to exercise their authority, to the extent permitted by law under the various statutes they administer, to establish fees for domestic livestock grazing on the public rangelands which annually equals the $1.23 base established by the 1966 Western Livestock Grazing Survey multiplied by the result of the Forage Value Index (computed annually from data supplied by the Statistical Reporting Service) added to the Combined Index (Beef Cattle Price Index minus the Prices Paid Index) and divided by 100; provided, that the annual increase or decrease in such fee for any given year shall be limited to not more than plus or minus 25 percent of the previous year’s fee, and provided further, that the fee shall not be less than $1.35 per animal unit month.
Sec. 2. Definitions. As used in this Order, the term:
(a) “Public rangelands” has the same meaning as in the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 (Public Law 95 – 514);
(b) “Forage Value Index” means the weighted average estimate of the annual rental charge per head per month for pasturing cattle on private rangelands in the 11 Western States (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California) (computed by the Statistical Reporting Service from the June Enumerative Survey) divided by $3.65 and multiplied by 100;
(c) “Beef Cattle Price Index” means the weighted average annual selling price for beef cattle (excluding calves) in the 11 Western States (Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Colorado, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Oregon, and California) for November through October (computed by the Statistical Reporting Service) divided by $22.04 per hundred weight and multiplied by 100; and
(d) “Prices Paid Index” means the following selected components from the Statistical Reporting Service’s Annual National Index of Prices Paid by Farmers for Goods and Services adjusted by the weights indicated in parentheses to reflect livestock production costs in the Western States: 1. Fuels and Energy (14.5); 2. Farm and Motor Supplies (12.0); 3. Autos and Trucks (4.5); 4. Tractors and Self-Propelled Machinery (4.5); 5. Other Machinery (12.0); 6. Building and Fencing Materials (14.5); 7. Interest (6.0); 8. Farm Wage Rates (14.0); 9. Farm Services (18.0).
Sec. 3. Any and all existing rules, practices, policies, and regulations relating to the administration of the formula for grazing fees in section 6(a) of the Public Rangelands Improvement Act of 1978 shall continue in full force and effect.
Sec. 4. This Order shall be effective immediately.
Ronald Reagan
The White House,
February 14, 1986.
[Filed with the Office of the Federal Register, 10:32 a.m., February 18, 1986]
Problem,you can’t control land you don’t own.That’s Nevada land!
LOL, you want to wager a bet on that?
Sorry,The SC already ruled on what happens to land when a state is created and the guidelines for the creation.Their decision would have to be overturned to do otherwise and this is part of Bundys argument.If the feds truly owned the land then Nevada is not a state and it would be a federal territory.The feds can’t have it both ways.PS,not even a president can overturn a SC decision nor the congress.
It is “protected land”.
No,
It’s Nevada land but the federal government has never played by the rules of ceding the land over to the state since 1864.That’s why this is so confusing to people.Now the state is passing legislation to control their land and kick the feds out of the state because it’s their legal property via the creation of a state in 1864.The federal government has been very deceptive over this issue and very dishonest.
No, lookup “Enabling Acts” for statehood in the west. Article 4, section 4. Look at 2nd paragraph “Ordinance” section. A 2nd constitution was approved by voters on sept 7 1864 and Nevada agreed to let fed govt own “appropriated land” within the state.
You have bad info.
Can you show me the court ruling about Nevada being a federal territory.
I wonder how the native Americans feel about this?
Our founding fathers didn’t want career politicians able to become too powerful and therefore put into our constitution checks and balances which our career politicians ignore. By constitution, the Federal government isn’t allowed to own more than 10 square miles of a states land, and for specific government building purposes. The career politicians ignore this and have taken nearly 85% of the Nevada state as Federal property.
Consult the Molasses Act of 1733, Sugar Act of 1763 and Stamp Act of 1765. Revolutions are begun over seemingly very minor things. The clock is ticking on this government.
Under Obama this is NOT unbelievable