- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Bundy Ranch - What You're Not Being Told
Posted on 4/16/14 at 9:46 pm to Sleeping Tiger
Posted on 4/16/14 at 9:46 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
you guys are such fools to think this is about wildlife,
Its not about wildlife.
Its about who has authority over the land.
Which 2 separate courts have ruled against Bundy.
1
Posted on 4/16/14 at 9:53 pm to Rex
quote:Or was it "Pay your fees, develop water capacity, rid it of vermin, spend precious resources to develop it, and when it suits us, we will use it to grow turtles, solar plants, and kick you out."?
Pay your fees and you get to graze your cattle
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:08 pm to theenemy
quote:
Its not about wildlife.
Its about who has authority over the land.
Which 2 separate courts have ruled against Bundy.
Then stop talking about saving turtles.
This is about getting cattle out of the way so billions of dollars can be made.
This issue is overflowing with blatant corruption and conflict of interest.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:08 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Or was it "Pay your fees, develop water capacity, rid it of vermin, spend precious resources to develop it, and when it suits us, we will use it to grow turtles, solar plants, and kick you out."?
Taylor Grazing Act of 1934
quote:
So far as consistent with the purposes and provisions of this subchapter, grazing privileges recognized and acknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded, but the creation of a grazing district or the issuance of a permit pursuant to the provisions of this subchapter shall not create any right, title, interest, or estate in or to the lands.
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976
quote:
the warning that “issuance of a permit” creates no “right, title, interest or estate” make clear that the ranchers’ interest in permit stability cannot be absolute; and that the Secretary is free reasonably to determine just how, and the extent to which, “grazing privileges” shall be safeguarded, in light of the Act’s basic purposes.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:09 pm to Rex
quote:The court said it is okay for corporations to spend their money on political campaigns. What does that tell you?
The court ordered the BLM to confiscate and sell his cows. What does that tell you?
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:17 pm to Poodlebrain
What's your point? My post was simply in answer to what points of the dispute were settled by the court, not any judgment on the wisdom of the law or the courts.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:17 pm to theenemy
quote:All of that in action for 89% of the state of Nevada? Yet how much for Louisiana? How much for Delaware? For New York?
Taylor Grazing Act of 1934
quote:
So far as consistent with the purposes and provisions of this subchapter, grazing privileges recognized and acknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded, but the creation of a grazing district or the issuance of a permit pursuant to the provisions of this subchapter shall not create any right, title, interest, or estate in or to the lands.
Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976
quote:
the warning that “issuance of a permit” creates no “right, title, interest or estate” make clear that the ranchers’ interest in permit stability cannot be absolute; and that the Secretary is free reasonably to determine just how, and the extent to which, “grazing privileges” shall be safeguarded, in light of the Act’s basic purposes.
Is Nevada a state, or is it some sort of federal holding? That is the larger question. That is the larger dilemma. That is the larger issue.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:23 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Is Nevada a state, or is it some sort of federal holding? That is the larger question. That is the larger dilemma. That is the larger issue.
Nevada is a state.
Prior to statehood it belonged to Mexico, when it became a state it placed that land in the ownership of the US government.
The deeding of the land to the US is actually part of their state constitution.
And I believe the state doesn't want the land because managing it is a financial loss to the government.
This post was edited on 4/16/14 at 10:24 pm
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:26 pm to NC_Tigah
These things have been pointed out to you multiple times previously so I'm afraid you're guilty of willful ignorance.
The Feds have owned 86+% of Nevada since 1864 when Nevada became a state. Nevada never owned any of it, and willingly disclaimed any right to it when it became a state.
The Feds have owned 86+% of Nevada since 1864 when Nevada became a state. Nevada never owned any of it, and willingly disclaimed any right to it when it became a state.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:26 pm to theenemy
What is your stance on the evidence of corruption and conflict of interest between BLM, Harry Reid, and the energy company?
You're acting as if this is a clean issue, decided by the fair rules of law. But there is so much more in play.
You're acting as if this is a clean issue, decided by the fair rules of law. But there is so much more in play.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:31 pm to Sleeping Tiger
How many tin foil hats do you have in the closet?
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:33 pm to oilmanNO
That's uncalled for, there isn't anything that is 'here say' in the OP.
There is clear and blatant corruption and conflict of interest surrounding this issue.
There is clear and blatant corruption and conflict of interest surrounding this issue.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:34 pm to Sleeping Tiger
quote:
What is your stance on the evidence of corruption and conflict of interest between BLM, Harry Reid, and the energy company?
Its two separate issues.
1) The Bundy's
The law requires them to pay grazing fees to graze cattle on that public land. They have refused to pay those fees and have continued to violate the law and court orders for the past 20 years.
2) The Solar Energy Plant
Did ENN get preferential treatment in purchasing the land for their plant due to relationships with the Reids.
#2 does not excuse the Bundys from violating the law for the last 20 years.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:36 pm to Rex
quote:Just to be clear, that 1864 Government was the same government that allowed legal ownership of slaves in the North?
The Feds have owned 86+% of Nevada since 1864 when Nevada became a state. Nevada never owned any of it
Gosh, it seems to me that maybe we could, in the 21st Century, be in a position to reconsider the 1864 sense of justifiable ownership.
This post was edited on 4/16/14 at 10:38 pm
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:38 pm to theenemy
quote:
So far as consistent with the purposes and provisions of this subchapter, grazing privileges recognized and acknowledged shall be adequately safeguarded
So this seems to protect grazing privileges as well as manage.
quote:
the warning that “issuance of a permit” creates no “right, title, interest or estate” make clear that the ranchers’ interest in permit stability cannot be absolute; and that the Secretary is free reasonably to determine just how, and the extent to which, “grazing privileges” shall be safeguarded
This seems to say that you are ok grazing there as long as its worthless scrubland but when we find a way to develop and make more money from it you are gone.
I know that there are a lot of ranchers grazing cattle on federal lands out west, I just wonder if they are being harassed as well. I also wonder how many there were in 1976 as opposed to how many are there now.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:41 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
Gosh, it seems to me that maybe we could, in the 21st Century, be justified in reconsidering the 1864 sense of justifiable ownership.
You have every right to petition your congressmen and ask them to consider legislation that would cede Federal lands to Nevada. I doubt you would get a majority of Americans to agree with you, and in the meantime Mr. Bundy should abide by the law.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:43 pm to Rex
quote:As should the POTUS.
n the meantime Mr. Bundy should abide by the law.
As should the AG.
As should the the IRS.
Seems Bundy is simply emulating a higher example.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:44 pm to NC_Tigah
You're getting desperate.... and I'm getting sleepy. Good night.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:47 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
As should the POTUS.
As should the AG.
As should the the IRS.
Agree 100%.
Posted on 4/16/14 at 10:48 pm to NC_Tigah
quote:
As should the POTUS.
As should the AG.
As should the the IRS.
As should DHHS.
Page 4 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News