re: 300+ Nevada ranchers and militia stage an armed insurrection against the USBLM

Oh, how did I miss this.

LINK

quote:

---

Before their arrival Thursday, dozens of Bundy’s friends and relatives gathered at a protest camp in solidarity for the recent woes that have colored his rustic ranch.

The militiamen posted a sign: MILITA SIGHN IN (sic).

---

quote:

---

Macphisto

---

Joe Biden? Is that you?

quote:

---

get wanting small government, but people who want no federal government are a bit loony.

---

What about being concerned that the feds own 84% of Nevada?

Does being concerned about that make me a bit loony?

And what if it turns out to be true that they're trying to clear the land now to sell it to a Chinese company? That doesn't sound like stewardship of the land for public purposes at all...

quote:

---

Can someone explain to me why people are siding with Bundy when he has not payed his grazing fees for over 20 years, has lost twice in court already, and apparently thinks the federal government has no authority?

---

have you kept up with everything?

a. he (along with 100 other ranchers in the area) have used this land for over 100 years for grazing
b. in the 90s the good ol' gov'ment decided in the name of conservation (or is it just anti-capitalism? anti-cattle? anti-non-green farming?) or whatever to start jacking up fees on the land these ranchers had used for a century.

-- pause --

FYI THIS LAND IS THOUSANDS OF SQUARE MILES OF NOTHING THAT THE GOVERNMENT CANT POSSIBLY POLICE BUT THAT NEVER STOPPED BUREAUCRATS FROM LOOKING FOR NEW WAYS TO ELIMINATE INDUSTRIES THEY DON'T LIKE

-- play --

c. so yes lnchbox, you are correct. the government is well within their rights to withdraw their markers and frick over the cattle ranchers.

d. every other rancher (100s of them) have closed up shop due to ever increasing fees..essentially driven out of business

e. bundy is the lone standout. he decided to ignore the ever escalating and economically unsustainable EXTORTATION/FEES/INNOCENT GRAZING COSTS the government was charging and let his cattle wander around the desert like he's done forver.

f. cue the BLM (under orders from a left-leaning administrator) to drive the last cattle farmer off the land so now it can be "cordoned off" and sit useless...BUT NOW ITS PROTECTED FROM THE OH-SO-VICIOUS TRAMPLING OF BILLIONS OF TURTLES BY STAMPEDING COWS!!!

***g. oh but then a little known fact emerged that Harry Reid's scumbag son is actually selling land to the chinese in a political game to build solar farms. turns out they need an EQUAL amount of land to be under 'conservation' to offset this. that land intersects with bundy's easement.


make sense?

now his land isn't directly in the path of the solar farm, but it is the other side of the see-saw.

is it any wonder the anger that's been boiling over is from the 100 other former ranchers/neighbors who capitulated?

now you see why more than just bundy's cowboys showed up to face off against the BLM

Since clearly no one is reading it, let me pull out the key statements in the OFFICIAL BLM COMPLAINT AGAINST CLIVE BUNDY

quote:

---

Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cows

---

I don't think I need to comment on that.

Who are the ones doing the complaining?

quote:

---

Within the last month, letters requesting action have also been recieved from several individuals, Friends of Nevada Wilderness, Friends of Gold Butte and Friends of Joshua Tree Forest.

---

Friends of Nevada Wilderness MISSION

quote:

---

We rely on wilderness for healthy air and clean water, and yet lands with wilderness character face new threats every day. Our members are not only the eyes, ears, and helping hands in wilderness, but the voices of these incredible areas as well, speaking up to ensure deserving areas are protected for future generations. Friends of Nevada Wilderness works closely with our partners in land management agencies, volunteers out on the ground, elected officials, and many other stakeholders to identify lands with wilderness characteristics and then speak up for them in one united voice to provide the highest level of protection possible. We are proud to be a bi-partisan organization.

---

"EYES AND EARS FOR THE BLM"

Friends of Gold Butte MISSION

Achieve the permanent protection of the biological, geological and cultural resources through education, community outreach and advocacy.

quote:

---

Goals

Achieve NCA designation and assist with the development of the management plan.
Develop and implement service projects to prevent resource damage through collaboration with governing agencies.
Develop and implement a public education program through outings, and presentations.
Accrue public support and endorsement from community organizations and political leaders.

---

Friends of Joshua Tree Forest

quote:

---

We work with BLM to maintain roads and trails to discourage and decrease people impact of the fragile eco system in the forest.
File a monthly report with BLM documenting the hours for volunteers; this is important and very helpful in our efforts to secure funding. It will also be useful in building our clout with decision makers and opinion leaders from the most local level up to the administration.

---

WOW..read that sentence in bold again.

quote:

---

The Center for Biological Diversity has DEMANDED

---

DEMANDED! Who are they? Lets look at their website

Center for Biological Diversity MISSION

quote:

---

Center for Biological Diversity was founded beneath the ancient ponderosa pines of New Mexico’s Gila wilderness, where Kierán Suckling, Peter Galvin, and Todd Schulke met while surveying owls for the U.S. Forest Service. All three were in their early twenties, with a passion for wild places; Kierán was a doctoral student in philosophy, Peter was training in conservation biology, and Todd had a background running outdoor-education programs for high-risk kids. When their surveys turned up a rare Mexican spotted owl nest in an old-growth tree, and they found out that same tree was part of a vast area slated to be razed in a massive timber sale, they took their findings to the local Forest Service manager. The Forest Service had been entrusted with shielding sensitive species from harm, but it soon became clear the agency was more invested in its relationship with big timber than in its commitment to the public to protect forest wildlife. The timber sale would go forward, in violation of the Service’s own rules.

The three young men promptly took the story to a local paper.

In the end, that big old tree never fell to the chainsaws

---

"big old tree".

another non-partisan lobbying group.

Thats sounds like a bunch of pretty unbiased organizations with no agenda in demonizing Bundy trying to kick him off the land.

Good thing the government is only interested in fairness to all.

quote:

---

Since clearly no one is reading it, let me pull out the key statements in the OFFICIAL BLM COMPLAINT AGAINST CLIVE BUNDY

---

I'm reading it, I just don't care.

What fed gov decides to do with their land has nothing to do with Bundy not paying fees for 20 years.

quote:

---

Non-Governmental Organizations have expressed concern that the regional mitigation strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone utilizes Gold Butte as the location for offsite mitigation for impacts from solar development, and that those restoration activities are not durable with the presence of trespass cows

---

quote:

---

I don't think I need to comment on that.

---

I'd rather if you did though, because I'm not sure you understand what that sentence means.

When there is an energy development on federal lands, there is a requirement that damage be offset by improvements elsewhere. This location isn't a potential site for an energy development; its a potential site for offsetting damages from a development elsewhere. The BLM is saying the developers are interested in restoring the area and can't do it with cows eating everything. And the BLM has expressed a preference for having someone pay to turn the area into some kind of wildlife sanctuary over having someone's cows trespass and eat stuff there for free.

I'm just not sure why I should care or why this should make me super angry.

If the next administration shows a desire to open up more federal lands for oil and gas development, and a drilling company expresses interest in an offsite mitigation project that involves making someone stop trespassing, is everyone going to freak out then too?

quote:

---

exactly. basically they want their pet chinese solar farm political project (harry reid's son) and are using the land bundy's cattle was grazing on as the offset.

end result = more 'untouchable' land in nevada in fed control.

pretty soon there wont be land left anywhere in the country that isn't controlled by the government.

---

I don't understand what you want though; I just think you aren't thinking your position all the way through.

Are you against all development of federal land, or just projects you don't like?

To be more specific:
If BLM decided to open up a few thousand acres to oil and gas drilling, and in order to offset the environmental damage from the drilling the oil companies wanted to pay to improve the environment on some other federal lands, and the mitigation project (and the drilling) couldn't move forward until some trespassing cows were removed from the property, would you support armed resistance to removing the cows from the property?

quote:

---

the losers are the american ranchers who sold their farms and have to find a new way to support their family because they were 'shortsighted' and thought the land they had use of for the prior 100 years was needed for them to remain solvent.

---

You're still not answering why you support a man that decided he doesn't need to pay a fee for his cattle to graze on land he doesn't own?

quote:

---

You're still not answering why you support a man that decided he doesn't need to pay a fee for his cattle to graze on land he doesn't own?

---

because he would have had to close up shop like every other rancher and gone on to working as a greeter at walmart.