Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Sagebrush Rebellion Volume II

Where is the site with the pol of for the Bundy's or the gov? Last time I looked it was 98% for Bundy.

Not here. Big government advocates would vote the other way. Long live the libs.

According to an Alex Jones (I know) reporter on the scene, the feds are barricaded behind their cars shouting at protesters and cowboys who are determined to release the cattle. They are threatening to shoot them and all feeds have been disabled.

A little bloodletting would probably turn the tide in this country a little much like Kent State did the Vietnam war. We might actually see the states themselves stand up to the BLM after that.

Utah and others have apparently said "GFY don't bring those cow to sell over here" already.

What bothers me about this particular case is the arbitrary nature of the lease reduction. Dropping from 500 to 150 head on over a hundred thousand acres. All for the sake of a desert tortoise, that as others have mentioned, has survived much more intensive grazing over the past 100+ years. The other aspect of this is that the reduction is permanent with no chance of regaling the lost allotment.

Oftentimes permits are reduced for various reasons, drought, wildlife impact or even suspended entirely for 1 or 2 grazing seasons after a fire. These adjustments happen and are part of the norm in public lands grazing. But to have a permit be, for all intents and purposes, made worthless because of a specious argument to save some dang tortoise smells to high heaven for me.

There is an administrative law that states actions taken by the government cannot be arbitrary and capricious. Many of the actions the BLM have taken here, especially when you educate yourself on the Feds actions in the Hage case have the distinct appearance of having broken that law.

As to the reference to impact on other species as a result of grazing and asking who is responsible, all grazing plans have to be approved by the BLM. So over the 10-20 years previous to the Feds' attempt to cut Bundy's allotment, those grazing levels and timing were approved by the BLM. So if all the sudden the BLM decides that the grazing is greatly negatively impacting a specie, the impact of a drastic allotment cut of falls squarely on the shoulders of the rancher, even though he has been doing exactly what he has been told to for years. Typical, the bureaucrats really responsible for the mess have no responsibility.


As to the fact that Bundy appears to be an a@@hole. Probably is. But, oftentimes it takes a real a@@hole to be the one to stand up and bring light to a situation such as this.

As I've stated several times here in the last week.........there are quite a number of factions, interests, and beliefs that play into this entire situation. Thats what makes this situation interesting. Not one of them is 100% correct and right. Not one. That is life in the west. Like it or leave it.

I'm 50 years old and have lived and worked my entire life in the Rocky Mtn West. Not bragging.......but I've seen it all. All of it. And I've made my living in most of the different areas of beliefs that pertain to the west. I posted this the other night.

Extremism does not work in life for anybody. That narrowminded mindset, regardless of what floats your boat, never succeeds in the long run and at many times does more discrediting and damage than good. Stop it. You don't have to absolutely choose one side or the other........when there commonly is a meet in the middle win. Moderation is what succeeds and yields positive results and personal satisfaction and happiness. This whole entire situation is a living, breathing example of this. That's why I posted it here the other night.

Nice text, and a well stated groundrule.

Try doing some more of that, every now and than.

GTC

I wasn't speaking about internet forum discussions. I was speaking about real life. Dudes showed up at this thing in Nevada with AR-15's more than happy to cap folks over their uninformed extremist beliefs. Both sides. Incredible.

When I throw up a wild-ass topic or post here in order to spice things up here when it gets dead and boring........it is only that. Nobody should ever believe that what I post here is what I really think, LOL. And I'm certainly not willing to shoot folks over much of anything.

Just a couple of things on timing that have some bearing in this case. It looks like that Mojave Desert popultion of the tortoise was listed as threatened in 1993/1994. Couple that with a change in BLM grazing administration in 1994 (Range Reform '94) and one starts see how things could have changed for Bundy in the early '90s. These two things changed the analysis as required for BLM to analyze the grazing permit that lead to the reduction in 1993.

I know all about abritrary and capricious. That is easy to throw out there but hard to defend without seeing any data. I know I can't prove it either way, but I have not seen the desert tortoise population data nor the rangeland condition/trend data. My guess, beings that the decision was held up by two levels of court, is that the data was present to support the reduction. Arbitrary and capricious is taken quite seriously by the administrative courts and I doubt the decision would have been upheld twice were that the case.

Similarly, though not common, the data can be present to show that the permit could be restored to previous levels. It can happen. A permanent reduction would be when the amount as listed in the land use plan is a reduced amount.

I agree that the grazing levels/time/timing (ie plans) have to be agreed to by the BLM. Do you think a guy willing to not pay his grazing fees for 20 years followed the plan all that closely on the years he did pay? Really? One thing BLM, in many places, needs to do is get the range folks out of the office and on the ground making sure that the plan is being followed. And yes, at times, the amount of grazing allowed by the BLM may be wrong or too high for a variety of reasons. One being that everyone makes mistakes. But if the BLM grazing plan is causing a problem how else does one correct that wrong with out changing the grazing??

Pointer,

Back in the 90's the radical environmental groups just wrote a "study" on something and got what they wanted. Mostly, as in cases of the spotted owl, or the tortoise, they were pure BS.

It cost millions in taxpayer dollars to defend or disprove these studies in courts. But, in MANY cases, they WERE proven to be lies. (Like that is not an inherent liberal trait.)

Now, agencies at least on the local levels are more cautious about making them "prove the science" of the studies before they give them any credibility at all.

Tort reform is needed as protection against these frivolous lawsuits the radical environmentalists use like an assassin uses a gun.

In Cochise County, there is a bit of a stink currently being raised regarding "environmentalists" insinuating themselves into APPOINTED positions on boards making decisions having DIRECT bearing on water rights. Some of what's come to light denotes an arrogance, and sense of superiority that should give one pause, and mandate sober reflection on just how badly a lack of unrelenting OVERSIGHT can play out.

Watch these people, they've gotten quite a foothold.

GTC

Some of the people on these threads supporting the government won't like it so much as technology continues to advance and it will soon become so that if you pull over on the side of the road to take a piss in the wrong spot, you'll get a ticket in the mail from some bureaucrat in D.C. a few days later.

You ought to see what they pulled in Las Cruces, NM.

http://www.predatormastersforums.co...b=showflat&Number=2662070&page=1

This was all brought on by the Southwest Environmental Center.

They are a radical eco-terrorist group of just a handful of loud, mouthy, entitled liberals.

https://www.wildmesquite.org/

it�s complicated which has been made worse when old laws have to be followed and new laws do not take in account the older laws .
OHH and yes , inheritance tax is based on the total value of a ranch which includes existing grazing , water and mineral rights . Those however are not taxed as yearly property taxes. Well unless you want to count grazing fee�s as a tax, which by the way they are not as these agencies do not have the authority to tax, hence they are fee�s
Also if these were actual taxs . Then why didn�t the BLM just come in , slap a lean on the deeded property and then put it up for tax sale?

Frankly im to the point I think this was nothing more then a big strong arm show by the BLM . And don�t tell me that a given BLM office doesn�t have the authority to do such things . that�s BS , they make all kinds of independent decisions all around here . Both the BLM and the USFS . Which frankly is worse . But that�s for another time .

So what did this even prove , well nothing really . But it did show that the US government will now deal first hand with the consequence of mass media . That having the government controlled media play down or as in this case ignore the subject tell the point it was near over , isn�t going to work any more .

It also I believe showed that regardless of what you may think of the people or what their motivations were, who answered the call for help , it must be clear that people from all over this country began answering . Some actuating going there . Others using the internet to get the word out . Even people like those of us here no mater which side your opinion falls. All played a part .
Possibly it showed the government just how dissatisfied and angry a lot of people in this country actually are . That many of the people have reached the point , they will draw a line in the sand .
Next time , and there will be an next as the government will continue testing the waters just as they always have . More will most likely show up if a call goes out . Thus it will make it even worse if blood gets spilled .
But one way or another , any such event , will now be played out not just among the us population but all round the world . While there will be differing opinions , its not going to change the fact that the prevailing impression will still be one of the people rising up against a government . It will be plaid out on the world stage .
So I think this was much bigger then we may realize . While it may be easy to say that the BLM backed down because , the information concerning herry reed , mid term election or what have you . Lets not forget that any such action created even bigger question on the world stage for a US government that isn�t seen by the rest of the world in the same light as some of us may see it .

Among other things, one does wonder, given the fact that the man hasn't really done anything different for the last 20 years, why now did the BLM decide to enforce the 20 year old court decision.

And if they were going to enforce it, once a rumor about Harry Reid surfaced they decided not to enforce it again. They weren't worried about possible violence the first 3 days, why now?

The whole thing reeks of bureaucrats, antique laws, hardheaded old ranchers, talk radio/Internet [bleep] stirrers and smelly politics.

I agree that EAJA reform is needed to address frivolous lawsuits. Not sure that TORT is a part of that...

Anywho, not sure who did what study, but the fact remains that the USFWS listed the desert tortoise for the Mojave in 1993. If that was part of the rationale for cutting the grazing permit in 1993 and the study was "a lie" that should have come out in Mr. Bundy's appeal. It didn't appear that it did. I'd also like to see the data on the range health of allotment at the time the permit was cut. My guess is that, coupled with the listing by the desert tortoise, was what led to the permit being cut. Both were new laws/rules that had to followed by the BLM in the early '90s.

That said, I know all too well how many "conservation" groups try to use things like the ESA as a way of attacking grazing on public lands.

How can a law suit be determined "frivolous" before it is filed? Law suits are thrown out of court now when they have no legal merit.

After the tortoise issue got him evicted, then the issue transferred to him being in trespass. That was the largest part of the court battle.

Now, the tortoise is being killed by those that sought the protection, due to money running out for their pet project.

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/desert-tortoise-reserve-euthanized/2013/08/26/id/522264/

These same groups have brought us the wolf too.

They file it. Then the courts have a hearing to determine whether the suit can go on. In some states. Not nationwide.