B
big28hunter
Guest
+2 It won't be the Bundy's that destroy this country. Every member of our political system robs the tax payers every year IMO. It will be the illegals, recipients, and head turners that do.
BLM, Forest Service and Nevada Ranchers
- Thread starter Grizzley
- Start date
- Status
+2 It won't be the Bundy's that destroy this country. Every member of our political system robs the tax payers every year IMO. It will be the illegals, recipients, and head turners that do.
Well said.
I agree that laws are laws and should be followed. I also agree that this adminsitration, like most, is rather selective in which issues climb to the top of a priority list.
But, when I last read the court documents related to this case, it was the court and a judge appointed by Ronald Reagan, who told the BLM that they better get their crap organized and follow the court order that was issued the prior year. How they went about doing what the court told them is open to debate, but I don't think it is correct to say or imply that it was the Obama administration that told the BLM to follow through on what the court had previously told the BLM to do.
Zach
Well-known member
This is just an in general statement, but it's hard to follow court rulings when then are constantly being overturned by appeals. It makes it appear as though the laws mean nothing, votes mean nothing.
The fiasco in NV seems to center around one thing, money.
The fiasco in NV seems to center around one thing, money.
Musket Man
New member
Bundys dispute with the BLM started when they cut his grazing allotment from 1000 AUM to 150 AUM which they claimed was to protect the desert tortoise. They did the same to all the other ranchers in there too. At that time there were 53 ranches in Clark county NV and now all but Bundy have been pushed out by the BLM. The BLM is telling everyone its about unpaid grazing fees but that is not the real issue here.
There are about 1500 tortoise at the desert tortoise conservation center (tdcc), which is going to be closed in about a year due to lack of funding. There are no cows on the dtcc and yet over 60% cant be released into the wild because they have diseases and are going to be killed by the BLM so I find it hard to believe cows are the cause of the desert tortoise's decline.
There are about 1500 tortoise at the desert tortoise conservation center (tdcc), which is going to be closed in about a year due to lack of funding. There are no cows on the dtcc and yet over 60% cant be released into the wild because they have diseases and are going to be killed by the BLM so I find it hard to believe cows are the cause of the desert tortoise's decline.
Nemont
Well-known member
So the BLM has this grand plan that has been in place through three different presidents from both parties?
Harry Reid planned all this back before he was majority leader and the BLM is doing the bidding of who?
Who is the owner of these lands in question? It is not Bundy because his family never valued that land enough to take ownership of it through the patent and deed process. The U.S. taxpayers own this land and when the owner says they decided to do something different with their land then that is the way things are.
Doesn't matter about the tortoise or a shrew or anything else. Bundy is not owed anything in the way he choose to earn a living. Unless he is just a ward of the government.
Nemont
MinnesotaHunter
Well-known member
I don't disagree with this at all. I do think that each administration has it's things that they focus in on, and I think they primarily do these things because something is motivating them whether it is money, votes, cronyism. I think there are ussually just too many layers, smoke, mirrors that prevent people from really understanding the catalyst. I think Bundy broke the law, and should be held accountable, but when the BLM only goes after the cows, and ignores the money he owes, it sends mixed messages about what this issue is all about. Is it compassionate reasons they are ignoring the 11 million, or is it that the only thing they care about is getting him off the land for some reason? My feeling is that if the BLM is that passionate about holding this lawbreaker accountable they would be going after both, but for some reason they aren't. They can say this is about enforcing a law that has been broken, but we ignore thousands of other broken laws in this country, it makes me think that their is a specific reason why they picked this one to go to war on that they for some reason don't feel like they can come out and say.
Maybe the UFOs are buried out there, and they are worried about erosion due to over-grazing uncovering all the secrets.
Last edited:
RobG
Well-known member
It's been my experience that agencies like the BLM, USFS, etc are under political pressures from local and state elected officials, cattlemen associations, irrigators, etc that prevent any strong enforcement actions. It takes a lawsuit by an outside group to force them to enforce their own rules if the ranchers (etc) choose to ignore them. So those are the issues that climb to the top of the enforcement list.
In fact, I believe it was a lawsuit in this case that forced the rules to be enforced after 20 years of BLM pussyfooting.
When I exposed some flagrant violations in a cattle allotment the IDF&G biologist who simply furnished the conservation agreements at my request was nearly fired because of pressure bought on by the cattlemen. When my wife worked at the BLM in Pocatello she told me about the tiny office reserved for anyone who got too zealous in making ranchers and other users obey the rules. I also remember a case where the EPA wouldn't enforce its own air quality rules in Poky until they were sued.
It takes a lawsuit before these groups will take on politically hot topics because it will affect their career if they pursue it with a strong hand. It doesn't matter who the President is.
MinnesotaHunter
Well-known member
This is interesting.
Musket Man
New member
Bundy does not own the land, he owns the grazing rights on that land. If the feds have the power to stop grazing on public land they have the power to stop all other uses of that land too including hunting. There are alot of ranchers that have lost their grazing leases across the west. Its mostly been pushed by the so called environmental groups like defenders of wildlife, center for biological diversity, ect. The same groups that pushed to introduce wolves, tied up managing wolves in court for years while they destroyed alot of good hunting, and would like nothing more then to end hunting and ranching all together.
jryoung
Well-known member
He use to own the rights, but forfeited them when he didn't want to comply with the change in terms. The land we own should be managed for all, not the wealthy, not the ranchers, not the hunters, not the environmentalists but for all.
BuzzH
Well-known member
I believe 1-pointer will tell you he doesnt own the "rights"...he used to own a PERMIT to graze his cattle.
That was prior to his breaking the law...in 1993.
That was prior to his breaking the law...in 1993.
Zach
Well-known member
Where is Erin Brockovich when you need her?
BuzzH
Well-known member
How long do we have to be nice to the new guys?
Fire away...lots of "ammo" in that post.
WOW!
Musket Man
New member
1000 AUM to 150 AUM is a very unreasonable change in terms IMO. I believe their goal with that change was to shut him down along with other 52 ranchers they shut down in Clark county.
Nemont
Well-known member
Musket man,
Please show me where Bundy "owned" these grazing "rights". That is where the people are being hoodwinked, there is no "right" anywhere. The owner of the property holds the rights and uses a grazing permit system.
Bundy and his family did not and do not own grazing rights, they held a grazing permit which he decided to drop when he chose not to pay the grazing permit fees. The million or so he owes is fines and interests not back dated grazing fees.
The facts matter in this case.
Nemont
Please show me where Bundy "owned" these grazing "rights". That is where the people are being hoodwinked, there is no "right" anywhere. The owner of the property holds the rights and uses a grazing permit system.
Bundy and his family did not and do not own grazing rights, they held a grazing permit which he decided to drop when he chose not to pay the grazing permit fees. The million or so he owes is fines and interests not back dated grazing fees.
The facts matter in this case.
Nemont
Elkmagnet
Well-known member
Viva la revolucion!
JoseCuervo
New member
You are mixing all sorts of stuff up here. If you read thru this thread, people like Big Fin, Nemont, Buzz and a couple of others have laid out the facts. You complained that you can't find unbiased news and information, but there have been several in this thread that have laid out the issues, including reputable links (to the US Constitution) that would help you, if you were able to process the information.
This "Administration" focuses on things that Judges order them to do. As they should. And, if this Administration does not follow the law, I applaud organizations that drag them into court and get them to follow the laws.
That is exactly what happened here. The BLM got sued by a group of organized citizens because they had been being "patient" with Bundy.
No, it does not send a "mixed message" if you were to read what the aforementioned posters took the time to share with you. The BLM "goes after the cows" not to have 900 pets that they can take care of and tease Mr. Bundy and ignore the money. The BLM was taking the cows to sale yards and going to sell the cattle as seized/forefeited assets to put against the court ordered fees. Try not paying the government some time, and see how they collect their money from you.
Before you start worrying about "compassion" and "ignoring the 11 million", why not go gather some facts and report back to us which president has greatly stepped up deportation since January 20, 2009. And, please compare the rates of deportation with those of the predecessor from January 20, 2001 thru January 19, 2009. And, then start a new thread discussing your "compassion" and "ignoring the 11 million".
It should be quite entertaining to see you effectively argue about "we ignore thousands of other broken laws in this country".
I look forward to the entertainment.
This "Administration" focuses on things that Judges order them to do. As they should. And, if this Administration does not follow the law, I applaud organizations that drag them into court and get them to follow the laws.
That is exactly what happened here. The BLM got sued by a group of organized citizens because they had been being "patient" with Bundy.
No, it does not send a "mixed message" if you were to read what the aforementioned posters took the time to share with you. The BLM "goes after the cows" not to have 900 pets that they can take care of and tease Mr. Bundy and ignore the money. The BLM was taking the cows to sale yards and going to sell the cattle as seized/forefeited assets to put against the court ordered fees. Try not paying the government some time, and see how they collect their money from you.
Is it compassionate reasons they are ignoring the 11 million, or is it that the only thing they care about is getting him off the land for some reason? My feeling is that if the BLM is that passionate about holding this lawbreaker accountable they would be going after both, but for some reason they aren't. They can say this is about enforcing a law that has been broken, but we ignore thousands of other broken laws in this country, it makes me think that their is a specific reason why they picked this one to go to war on that they for some reason don't feel like they can come out and say.
Maybe the UFOs are buried out there, and they are worried about erosion due to over-grazing uncovering all the secrets.
Before you start worrying about "compassion" and "ignoring the 11 million", why not go gather some facts and report back to us which president has greatly stepped up deportation since January 20, 2009. And, please compare the rates of deportation with those of the predecessor from January 20, 2001 thru January 19, 2009. And, then start a new thread discussing your "compassion" and "ignoring the 11 million".
It should be quite entertaining to see you effectively argue about "we ignore thousands of other broken laws in this country".
I look forward to the entertainment.
JoseCuervo
New member
- Status
Similar threads
