Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire What's the right resolution re: Bundy?

The Act directs the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to develop and implement an experimental program to provide incentives or rewards to holders of grazing permits and leases whose stewardship results in improved range conditions

(f) The term "range improvement" means any activity or program
on or relating to rangelands which is designed to improve production
of forage; change vegetative composition; control patterns of use;
provide water: stabilize soil and water conditions; and provide habitat
for livestock and wildlife. The term includes, but is not limited to. structures, treatment projects, and use of mechanical means to accomplish
the desired results.

Oh no Isaac seem to know all about the law. If you don't agree with him you are an Idiot. Just ask him. Has Bundy done everything correctly probably not. But I am pretty sure the Feds aren't going to make a move this big unless they have something to hold over someones head. Illegal guns "Ruby Ridge" Child endangerment "Waco".
That is why they make so many rules and make them so hard to figure out. That way they always have something to hold against you. They aren't going to pick on a guys that has a clean record and never done anything wrong.

Still doesn't mean the feds are right.

Excuse me. I have no idea what you're talking about.

Do you think you've made some point I haven't refuted?

I'm not aware of even one. I'll be happy to address any point you've made whereby you actually think you've proved me wrong about something but, you'll actually have to prove it rather than believe it because you posted it.

Cmon, the welfare bitch owes over $1 million and got called on it. This ain't rocket surgery.

but all he had to do is move his cows. problem is, he can't get pasture this cheap, so he'd have to pay fair market value, and that seems to be a huge problem to him. seems a half million acres of cheap grazing is a hard teat to get weaned from.

Oh no Isaac seem to know all about the law. If you don't agree with him you are an Idiot. Just ask him. Has Bundy done everything correctly probably not. But I am pretty sure the Feds aren't going to make a move this big unless they have something to hold over someones head. Illegal guns "Ruby Ridge" Child endangerment "Waco".
That is why they make so many rules and make them so hard to figure out. That way they always have something to hold against you. They aren't going to pick on a guys that has a clean record and never done anything wrong.

Still doesn't mean the feds are right.

OK, I hear you.

You didn't clarify anything as to water rights on the allotment,though.

Until you prove me wrong as to things I've stated, it actually does make me right.

It is the invariable habit of bureaucracies, at all times and everywhere, to assume...that every citizen is a criminal. Their one apparent purpose, pursued with a relentless and furious diligence, is to convert the assumption into a fact. They hunt endlessly for proofs, and, when proofs are lacking, for mere suspicions. The moment they become aware of a definite citizen, John Doe, seeking what is his right under the law, they begin searching feverishly for an excuse for withholding it from him.
~ H. L. Mencken

Take everything away from them they worked for all their life...

Out of curiosity, what are the acreage requirements per head in MT. vs NV?

Not a cattle man, but I'm having a little trouble understanding the wisdom of "working for all their life" on land you don't own, never will own and for which you stopped paying lease fees 20 years ago.

SITREP: BUNDY RANCH

PLEASE SHARE WIDELY. THIS IS FOR THE FECKLESS DUMBASSES WHO ARE DEFENDING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT.

"There have been a lot of people criticizing Clive Bundy because he did not pay his grazing fees for 20 years. The public is also probably wondering why so many other cowboys are supporting Mr. Bundy even though they paid their fees and Clive did not.

What you people probably do not realize is that on every rancher's grazing permit it says the following: "You are authorized to make grazing use of the lands, under the jurisdiction of the Bureau of Land Management and covered by this grazing permit, upon your acceptance of the terms and conditions of this grazing permit and payment of grazing fees when due." The "mandatory" terms and conditions go on to list the allotment, the number and kind of livestock to be grazed, when the permit begins and ends, the number of active or suspended AUMs (animal units per month), etc. The terms and conditions also list specific requirements such as where salt or mineral supplements can be located, maximum allowable use of forage levels (40% of annual growth), etc., and include a lot more stringent policies that must be adhered to. Every rancher must sign this "contract" agreeing to abide by the TERMS AND CONDITIONS before he or she can make payment.

In the early 90s, the BLM went on a frenzy and drastically cut almost every rancher's permit because of this desert tortoise issue, even though all of us ranchers knew that cow and desert tortoise had co-existed for a hundred+ years. As an example, a family friend had his permit cut by 90%. For those of you who are non ranchers, that would be equated to getting your paycheck cut 90%.

In 1976 there were approximately 52 ranching permittees in this area of Nevada. Presently, there are 3. Most of these people lost their livelihoods because of the actions of the BLM. Clive Bundy was one of these people who received extremely unfair and unreasonable TERMS AND CONDITIONS. Keep in mind that Mr. Bundy was required to sign this contract before he was allowed to pay. Had Clive signed on the dotted line, he would have, in essence, signed his very livelihood away.

And so Mr. Bundy took a stand, not only for himself, but for all of us. He refused to be destroyed by a tyrannical federal entity and to have his American liberties and freedoms taken away. Also keep in mind that all ranchers financially paid dearly for the forage rights those permits allow - - not rights to the land, but rights to use the forage that grows on that land. Many of these AUMS are water based, meaning that the rancher also has a vested right (state owned, not federal) to the waters that adjoin the lands and allow the livestock to drink. These water rights were also purchased at a great price. If a rancher cannot show beneficial use of the water (he must have the appropriate number of livestock that drinks and uses that water), then he loses that water right. Usually water rights and forage rights go hand in hand.

Contrary to what the BLM is telling you, they NEVER compensate a rancher for the AUMs they take away. Most times, they tell ranchers that their AUMS are "suspended," but not removed. Unfortunately, my family has thousands of "suspended" AUMs that will probably never be returned.

And so, even though these ranchers throughout the course of a hundred years invested thousands(and perhaps millions) of dollars and sacrificed along the way to obtain these rights through purchase from others, at a whim the government can take everything away with the stroke of a pen. This is the very thing that Clive Bundy singlehandedly took a stand against. Thank you, Clive, from a rancher who considers you a hero." ~ Kandy Sealy