| Author | Message | ||
     Sifo |
I don't know why the BLM seems to want to shut down ranching, but this seems to be an ongoing trend. I'm not surprised that ranchers are gathering by the hundreds to stand up against the BLM lately. This crap is going to have a very bad outcome one of these days. Not surprisingly there's a very long back story on all of this. It's worth a read. http://theconservativetreehouse.com/2016/01/03/ful l-story-on-whats-going-on-in-oregon-militia-take-o ver-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge-in-protest-to -hammond-family-persecution/ | ||
| Hootowl |
You of all people should understand that when they want to make private land public land, they don't ever quit. | ||
| Sifo |
Yes I do understand that. All to well. | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
That's all a smokescreen. What it's really about is that astronaut ice cream in the little silver packages. That federal building's giftshop has boxes of the stuff. | ||
| Rick_a |
What a mess. Shocking it got that far. Arsonist terrorists for a controlled burn? Seems like a bit of a stretch. The President and media are reluctant to call these Muslim spree shooters terrorists, but a rancher taking care of his land is? What the hell am I missing here? | ||
| Rick_a |
I UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING NOW.  | ||
| D_adams |
I'd bet it's got to do more with precious metals and minerals that the BLM wants more than anything. | ||
| Hootowl |
Tom, thanks for the book. My daughter has a habit of hiding my mail for weeks at a time, so I just got it yesterday. Appreciated. You want it back when I'm done? | ||
| Hughlysses |
Interesting article, but it's hard to figure how an entire agency has it in for this family. Obviously everybody at the BLM doesn't, as evidenced by the heavy equipment operator who was falsely quoted in the news. It seems like it would have to be a limited number of upper management types at BLM (or possibly at whatever agency the BLM falls under) and it wouldn't be THAT hard to identify who is (are) the culprit(s). | ||
| Strokizator |
BLM's agenda seems to be keeping everyone and everything off public lands. By "public" they mean "not you". We used to ride all over the Calif desert. Fewer and fewer places along with ever increasing regulations each year. Not that many years ago you could ride up to Charlie Manson's cabin in Death Valley. Then somebody burned it down. They claim it was arson but smart money is on the park service itself. | ||
| Glitch |
they who control the food supply control the masses | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
Or maybe the Bundy crew are just A-holes and trying to start stuff. The two ranchers this was over (who set a fire that spread to federal/public property) didnt even want the militia support. Yet Bundy clan is still at it. | ||
| Sifo |
Tom, thanks for the book. My daughter has a habit of hiding my mail for weeks at a time, so I just got it yesterday. Appreciated. You want it back when I'm done? My pleasure, and thank you! Feel free to keep it, or pay it forward. I hope you enjoy it. | ||
| Sifo |
Interesting article, but it's hard to figure how an entire agency has it in for this family. Obviously everybody at the BLM doesn't, as evidenced by the heavy equipment operator who was falsely quoted in the news. It seems like it would have to be a limited number of upper management types at BLM (or possibly at whatever agency the BLM falls under) and it wouldn't be THAT hard to identify who is (are) the culprit(s). I don't think it's personal with that one family. They just happen to be the last rancher ranching that area. Very much like the Bundy ranch in Nevada. Those last hold outs can be a real bitch for the government. | ||
| Sifo |
Or maybe the Bundy crew are just A-holes and trying to start stuff. The two ranchers this was over (who set a fire that spread to federal/public property) didnt even want the militia support. Yet Bundy clan is still at it. Maybe they are A-holes. Should that make them targets of the federal government? Or let's flip that around. If you have lived for decades with your family lively hood under attack from the federal government, you might just find yourself being a bit of an A-hole. It is true the two ranchers in the center of this didn't want it to play out this way. It's also true that they set a fire that spread to federal land. There's a lot more that is true according to the posted article though. 1) The area ranchers have had improvements done to once "state" land seized by the feds. 2) Those improvements were used as a weapon to flood their lands, making them worthless and unranchable forcing them to sell for pennies on the dollar. 3) The fire that they set was a back fire that put out a fire that was threatening their ranch and not being contained by the fire dept. This is normal fire fighting, not arson. 4) The Judge who sentenced them did a written statement that a full 5 year minimum sentence would be cruel and unusual punishment that didn't fit the "crime". 5) This isn't just the Bundy's that are involved. In fact many of those involved in this standoff are not on board with the Bundy's tactics. Honestly, I'm pretty sure you are spouting off having not read the posted article. You seem to have heard the headline on the cable news and nothing more. As for were they invited to support the two convicted of the fire, are you only allowed to step in to stop a wrong doing when so invited? Are you only allowed to stop a rape when invited to do so by the victim? Sadly, there are times when you have to make a stand against a tyrannical government. Unfortunately, that even applies here in the US. | ||
| Strokizator |
If you like your ranch, you can keep your ranch. | ||
| Panhead_dan |
"If you like your ranch, you can keep your ranch." You must all turn in your guns and ranches now. | ||
| Hybridmomentspass |
"Honestly, I'm pretty sure you are spouting off having not read the posted article. You seem to have heard the headline on the cable news and nothing more." Youre right about the part where I didnt read your link. That said, I've looked at about a dozen other sources daily on this event. Maybe you should try that, reading more than 'conservative treehouse' I am well aware of controlled burns used to stop fires. But does this make it ok to take over federal property? Best of luck to them, I dont think that this will turn out as well as the last standoff did for them. Also, I got a chuckle at these guys asking for handouts | ||
| Glitch |
But does this make it ok to take over federal property? What is "federal property" who owns it, how did they (the government) get it, who did they buy it from? | ||
| Hootowl |
If the feds owned as much land east of the Mississippi as they do west of it, there would be no privately owned land east of the Mississippi. Think about that. The western states are mostly federal property. That's not right. Show me where the constitution says the federal government can own land (other than military bases). Pretty sure that's reserved by the states and by the people. http://bigthink.com/strange-maps/291-federal-lands-in-the-us?utm_campaign=Echobox&utm_medium  | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
I wonder how much of that fed-land is homestead-able? How much is federally protected national parks? My mom used to live in Alaska during late '60s and she said people were still homesteading like in the old west. Is that still a thing in the lower 48? | ||
| Sifo |
Show me where the constitution says the federal government can own land (other than military bases). Well there is a special bit carved out for Washington D.C. That's kind of a funky gray area. Beyond that?  Youre right about the part where I didnt read your link. That said, I've looked at about a dozen other sources daily on this event. Maybe you should try that, reading more than 'conservative treehouse' I am well aware of controlled burns used to stop fires. But does this make it ok to take over federal property? Best of luck to them, I dont think that this will turn out as well as the last standoff did for them. Also, I got a chuckle at these guys asking for handouts Yeah, best not to pay any attention to a source that actually did some digging to find out what is going on. Stay with the sources that will tell you he started a fire and needs to go to jail for 5 years. Quantity over quality. I've certainly seen plenty of those "news reports" too. Something stunk to high heaven about that narrative though. When you find out some history, it starts to make much more sense. The tactics of Bundy aren't exactly something I'm very supportive of, and it's off topic of this thread. As long as you want to focus on that aspect though, what in your mind separates them from the Occupy Wall Street groups that were taking over parks and government buildings? In my mind, it's that the ranchers have experience real material damages at the hands of the government. One more question for you. Do you really think that it serves justice to jail two people for 5 years for extinguishing a fire on federal land? | ||
| Sifo |
I wonder how much of that fed-land is homestead-able? How much is federally protected national parks? My mom used to live in Alaska during late '60s and she said people were still homesteading like in the old west. Is that still a thing in the lower 48? The problem isn't people claiming open land as their own. I assume that's what you mean by homesteading. The problem is that the federal government is forcing people off of their private properties, trying to "purchase" it well below market value. Our family has been dealing with this since roughly 1970. We have huge restrictions put on the use of our own land. The restrictions make it virtually impossible to sell the land, and the government claims the right of first refusal for any offers. One of the problems is that the government won't purchase the entire chunk we own, only the chunk they want to own, which happens to be the diamond of the area. They claim it is of little value because it has not access from public roads, so it is land locked. That's only true if we divide it up and sell it according to their borders. Meanwhile, at their park office, they have a real nice 3D map under glass which show our land as park property. They distribute paper maps there that show the same thing. They are basically sending innocent hikers off to unknowingly trespass on private land. And no, they won't change the maps to reflect private property. We have tried to make that happen many times. They simply don't care. Our problems are minor compared to what has been done to many ranchers in recent decades. | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
I wasn't referring to the Bundy thing as a homesteading thing. I was referring to the map posted above as "federally owned land" Federally owned land used to be converted to private property via homesteading. I have no idea what sort of laws are involved or if they are even still in place. I live up in New England where stuff has been locked in place for a couple of centuries. | ||
| Natexlh1000 |
Here we go: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homestead_Acts#End_o f_homesteading It's over. Now I'll never be a cowboy when I grow up  | ||
| Sifo |
I knew you didn't mean the ranchers were trying to claim land to be their own. When you asked if the land was homestead-able, it just sounded like you may have thought the federal government would be interest in that. Reality is quite the opposite. The federal government has been on a land grab spree for a very long time. This is a very real constitutional issue. Dose the land belong to the state, or the federal government? As Hootowl pointed out, I don't think it's something allowed by our Constitution. Certainly the way they have simply claimed authority over huge tracts of land is not allowed for. Keep in mind that we are a union of states. The territory within a state is under state jurisdiction except for what jurisdiction is allowed for in the Constitution. It's not territory that was given to a state by the federal government. So how have we gotten to where the federal government claims ownership of so much of the land in the western states? It's simple tyranny. | ||
| Paint_shaker |
I have seen first hand (twice) what happens when the Feds come in, establish a national refuge or other area. In the beginning, it's just "an area". In the end, the area becomes highly restricted in it's use, if even accessible at all... | ||
| Sifo |
At least there are some legislators who seem to recognize how wrong all of this is. It's not just ranchers who are suffering this tyranny. The Larger, but Quieter Than Bundy, Push to Take Over Federal Land | ||
| Iamike |
Just another example of US govt overreach and conflicting rules: http://www.newsmax.com/US/epa-state-rights-citizen s/2014/03/14/id/559715/ | ||
| Sifo |
About as far from the Hammond ranch as you can get in the US, but explains the sh*t storm that is likely to get stirred up if there is the slightest slip up that results in a firefight. It's no doubt that BO would like to take away these weapons to ensure that we are defenseless from the government tyrannies. Florida Militia Leader Says Group Would Be Ready for a "Call to Arms" |
