philip964 wrote:One report talked with a real estate agent who has been trying to get him to sell his land to rich and powerful people for 20 years and he won't budge.
The real estate agent said the land is very valuable because of the water under it and the highway frontage.
Most of Nevada is not privately owned so what is privately owned is very valuable. If you don't believe me ask Howard Hughes.
As far as any stockman/rancher stealing from the public goes, please consider the fact that the Bureau of Land Management(pardon me while I rinse out my mouth) and U.S. Forest Service have between them created a bureaucracy that spent $132.5 million in 2012 to administer a grazing program that generates $17.5 million in fees. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RS21232.pdf If you are going steal from the public, steal BIG.
About half the fees generated go back into the land in reclamation projects.
Most of which goes to repair damage caused by wild burros/horses. Unlike feral hogs here in Texas, the wild burros/horses are noble, cute, inspiring, symbols. Heck, your tax dollars have been and will be spent in the future to feed them.
Imagine if some D.C. twit decides that hogs are noble.....
P.S. There isn't a lease or permit holder worth a darn that doesn't put 4 or 5 times his fees back into the "public lands" he utilizes in improvements every year.
Disclaimer: My family has run cows on "Federal" land for 6 generations.
Interesting reading. Most of the fight against grazing is led by un-named environmental groups. The most appalling fact I read was the fed's long standing and still on going battle with the Western Shoshone Tribe for un-paid grazing fees in Nevada. The tribe says it's their land, but the feds say that is wrong it belongs to the Federal Government. Let's see - who was there first I wonder? The environmental groups don't want any body using the land .......except them, for free. The environmental groups were willing to compensate some of the permit holders if they'd give the permits to them.
From what I could discern from permit holder complaints regarding grazing fees the water rights seem to belong to the state.
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
Video at the very end of this article has some pretty strong stuff from old Cowboy, including "WHO is the man behind the trigger?" http://mobile.wnd.com/2014/04/reid-smel ... nch-fight/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
That's what makes America so great.
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
That's what makes America so great.
Does "that" refer to the rancher continuing in his defiance, or Cedar Park Dad not having sympathy?
I am not a lawyer, nor have I played one on TV, nor did I stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night, nor should anything I say be taken as legal advice. If it is important that any information be accurate, do not use me as the only source.
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
That's what makes America so great.
Does "that" refer to the rancher continuing in his defiance, or Cedar Park Dad not having sympathy?
The latter.
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
His family owned that land in 1877. The Federal government stole it from them and then insisted they pay fees to graze their cattle there.
How would you feel if one day the Feds came in waving the deed, which they had gotten in court against your will, to your property and said you could live there but you have to pay them rent?
Think about it.
The Constitution preserves the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation where the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. James Madison
NRA Life Member Texas Firearms Coalition member
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
His family owned that land in 1877. The Federal government stole it from them and then insisted they pay fees to graze their cattle there.
How would you feel if one day the Feds came in waving the deed, which they had gotten in court against your will, to your property and said you could live there but you have to pay them rent?
Think about it.
If he had a deed for the land, he would not in this predicament.
Beiruty,
United we stand, dispersed we falter
2014: NRA Endowment lifetime member
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
I think the land issue is very gray. It reeks of theft from this man. Laws that are written to legalize theft remain immoral. It is entirely possible that the deed that he has/had was from Nevada and the feds won't recognize it. It is entirely possible that his family had an agreement with Navada for joint ownership. Any number of things are possible.
But lets say the rancher is 100% wrong. I don't care. How the BLM reacted with snipers and helicopters and swat teams is entirely beyond reasonable. You do not threaten a family with lethal force for a disagreement over range fees. That is way way outside of reasonable.
If he owes range fees.....and that is not established to any amount of reasonableness with me. Put a lien on his cattle, put a lien on his land, put a lien on his taxes. Financial disputes with the gov't should NEVER end with the citizen looking down the wrong end of a rifle.
SAHM to four precious children. Wife to a loving husband.
"The women of this country learned long ago those without swords can still die upon them!" Eowyn in LOTR Two Towers
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
His family owned that land in 1877. The Federal government stole it from them and then insisted they pay fees to graze their cattle there.
How would you feel if one day the Feds came in waving the deed, which they had gotten in court against your will, to your property and said you could live there but you have to pay them rent?
Think about it.
If he had a deed for the land, he would not in this predicament.
ummm, his family owned the land back before deeds were needed....you know, sort of like the Indians? and look what happened to them? and now it's happening again. that's the problem.
as for the fees. he was suppose to be paying for a specific service and they weren't providing that service, so, he stopped paying. You want to know why the government is scared of him? they're afraid we'll all get ideas and stop paying taxes or maybe elect him to office.
~Tracy
Gun control is what you talk about when you don't want to talk about the truth ~ Colion Noir
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
His family owned that land in 1877. The Federal government stole it from them and then insisted they pay fees to graze their cattle there.
How would you feel if one day the Feds came in waving the deed, which they had gotten in court against your will, to your property and said you could live there but you have to pay them rent?
Think about it.
If he had a deed for the land, he would not in this predicament.
The Shoshone Tribe also has a "deed" to the land. It's the Treaty of Ruby Valley. Of course the same Federal Courts that ruled against Bundy have ruled that the Tribe no longer owns the land, too. So in essence we the people stole it in the first place and are now charging Bundy and the Shoshones fees to use it. Of course all the other "we the citizens" who use the - land, hikers, motocyclists, RV'ers, ATV'ers and environmental groups pay zero to use it.
Botton line: Harry Reid wants this land to pay off his cronys, campaign contributors and the Chinese (one and the same) and Harry will have it, mark my words. I pity the landowners who get the tortoises moved to their land.
KAHR PM40/Hoffner IWB and S&W Mod 60/ Galco IWB
NRA Endowment Member, TSRA Life Member,100 Club Life Member,TFC Member
My Faith, My Gun and My Constitution: I cling to all three!
I have heard this guy on the radio, unfortunately he does not do a lot for his cause. I wish he was better at public speaking.
It is really hard to understand what all the facts are. What changed in 1993 to cause the problem that they now have? Was it just to protect the turtles. Seems turtles and cattle can co exist on the same range land. I don't see a problem.
I understand a federal judge ruled that the federal government was correct. He of course disputes that since the judge he feels is biased.
Certainly he could go to the supreme court or even to a court of appeals. Not sure if he has missed his opportunity.
I feel lots of land owners in the country are being put upon, arrested, fined and overall harassed by the federal government for doing what appears to be almost nothing.
I read of one case where a man built a pond on his property and was arrested and fined. Or another man removed a log dam at a culvert on his property and loss the use of his property and was fined.
Here the fine is a million dollars. That seems a little extreme, unless they are trying to take his land and bankrupt him.
With all the funny business going on, that seems to be the plan.
I really don't understand why they don't recall Harry Reid. Glad I live in Texas.
He needs a lawyer to speak for him. That is what all us people who are not as well spoken do when they have to deal with the press. Surely with all this attention there is a glib freedom loving one out there to help this man.
SAHM to four precious children. Wife to a loving husband.
"The women of this country learned long ago those without swords can still die upon them!" Eowyn in LOTR Two Towers
Whenever I hear about Federal courts doing what feels like a "rubber stamp" on a particular case, I am always reminded of the Wisconsin National Guardsman who was sent to jail for ten years due to the malfunctioning AR he loaned a friend, and the Feds said it was a "machine gun". It wasn't made or altered to do that, it just malfunctioned. Instead of simply confiscating the weapon (and it was unsafe because it was broken), they went full-meal-deal on the guy...probably to make an example out of him. And this incident feels the same way in that they sent what amounts to a small army at great cost to round up those cattle. As was pointed out earlier, since the Feds claim it to be a monetary issue, why not just go the liens route? Because they wanted to make an example out of him, and that smacks of intimidation and bullying. Even if the rancher is in the wrong, I still don't like HOW the Feds did this one little bit.
Cedar Park Dad wrote:I have no sympathy for a grifter that does not pay his fees to run his cattle on Government (read my) land, loses two lawsuits, and continues to do so.
That's what makes America so great.
Does "that" refer to the rancher continuing in his defiance, or Cedar Park Dad not having sympathy?
The latter.
I have no sympathy for welfare queens er kings in this instance.
The environmental groups were willing to compensate some of the permit holders if they'd give the permits to them. 
