I’m an Oregon rancher. Here’s what you don’t understand about the Bundy standoff

So, this according to you was never about the Hammond's and the fine they incurred for letting the fire get out then? You see, right there the militia has zero credibility with the stories they tell. This is all about ranchers getting welfare to grow their cattle for their profits, while the tax payer pays for the land. And let's not even begin to talk about the sensitive plant and animal life the taxpayer paid for originally, that the ranchers are destroying. So there in lies the truth. The tax payer gets hit with a double wammie. The tax payer gets ripped off by ranchers destroying the integrity of the land that we originally pay for, then paying welfare for ranchers to get free grazing land. Yea, from a ranchers point of view we the tax payers get it.

 

The database tracks $256 billion in farm subsidies from commodity, crop insurance, and disaster programs and $39 billion in conservation payments paid between 1995 and 2012.

http://farm.ewg.org/

 

You just killed the thread. Nice job!

 

Have you been to Yosemite lately ? I don't think John Muir or Teddy Roosevelt would be happy campers what Yosemite has become, it's no longer the wilderness. Just the traffic and smog has Los Angeles blushing.

The American West. What is the American West ?
Any state that is west of any state that borders the Mississippi River. For those who are lacking in geography, any state that is west of the states of Minnesota, Iowa, Missouri, Arkansas and Louisiana is the American West.

Except for Texas because Texas was a sovereign nation before it joined the Union most of the land is West is owned by the federal government. But it's open range, public land that is administrated by the Department of the Interior.

People who live east of the Mississippi have no idea what the open range or public land is. Because almost all of the land east of the American West is either privately owned land or land owned by the states. The only federal property you'll find east of the American West will be military reservations, Indian Reservations, National Parks and National Refugees and National Monuments and a few federal prisons.

But most of the land in the West that isn't privately owned is owned by the federal government not by the states. That's what these ranchers, hunters, sports fishermen, farmers, etc. are asking for, turn the land over to the states.


Federal land in the American West:

In California, 45.8% of the land is owned by the federal government. Oregon, 52.9%; Utah, 64.9%, Nevada, 84.9%; Wyoming, 48.1%; Texas, 1.8%

Texas and the feds only own 1.8% of the land !!!
That's right, Texas use to be a sovereign nation before it joined the Union. That 1.8% of federal owned land is military reservations. Something to do with the "Common Defense" you see in the Constitution. Texas doesn't even have any federal Indian Reservations, how could that be ???

That's right, the Texas Rangers killed most of the Indians in Texas.

Federal land east of the American West:

North Carolina, 7.7%; Wisconsin, 5.1%; Massachusetts, 1.2%; Maryland 3.1%; Alabama 2.6%; New York, 0.3%; Rhode Island, 0.8%; Main, 1.1%; Illinois, 1.1%

You get the drift and what it's all about ?

Here's where you will find how much land the federal government owns in each of the 50 states. -> https://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R42346.pdf

You know that's a lot of property tax revenues the states loose out on, the federal government doesn't pay property taxes, in fact the feds pay no taxes.

 

The lease cost to graze a cow on Federal land is $1.69 per year.

There are apparently two types of ranchers. Those who turn the cattle out in the spring and collect them in the fall.. and those who move their cattle to prevent overgrazing which evidently destroys the eco system.

And, there is an added benefit to the second kind of management in that you can run more cows per acre.

 

As of now they haven't acted as terrorists. They made a big mistake and that's why other militiamen like oathkeepers want nothing to do with this occupation. The Feds are sitting pretty in the driver seat. They can cut the water and power, and just close off supply routes. No need for the Feds to make themselves look bad with another Waco. They can just let them get cold, thirsty, and hungry.

The black lives matter rioters (or by your standards, "terrorists") were an immidiate threat to locals, so the police dealt with it differently.

 

Which begs the question, when are you and I going to Burns Oregon to protest the ranchers who are stealing our land we pay taxes on, while ranchers reap a profit, then up and decide to complain about it?

 

Trespassing upon and occupying Federal property while armed is terrorism.

BLM did no such thing.

Further, it was government agent provocateurs that created violence during their peaceful protests:


https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=agent+provocateurs+at+BLM+and+ferguson

 

And let's not forget the Malheur Lake in Oregon and how the ranchers used welfare to steal water from that lake, by diverting the water for their cattle. Let us remind ourselves that the lake was built during the time of Teddy Roosevelt for migrating water birds. Not for ranchers to build drainage ditches where they were grazing cattle. Those ranchers wouldn't even have cattle there, if it wasn't for the federal government, because that area is one of the driest in the country. They are simply stealing land and water resources on the backs of tax payers. They aren't patriots. They're just common thieves.

 

Big business bought it's competitive advantage from the government. Obama has carried on and improved these practices.

 

How is this Obama's fault when we the taxpayers have been paying for folks like you to steal water on a wildlife refuge that Teddy Roosevelt created over a century ago, and was intended for migrating bird life?

Sympathize with what position? Stealing?

Why because the Obama administration didn't supply enough water in the lake to take care of the cattle that have no business being on a fragile refuge?

 

So they steal the land from the tax payer along with taking it from the wildlife refuge and the critical water supply it is supposed to be providing for migrating bird life. But instead, it is being used to water cattle and destroy the integrity of the refuge while the taxpayer gets ripped off and the militia ranchers decide to complain about resources they've already been stealing? And you want to call this government over reach and this is the fault of the Obama Administration? Wow, that's a good one!

Then if that is the case, those ranchers need to find another line of work. Because right now, they are stealing land and abusing it.

If there is an endangered plant or animal species that needs protection, what business is it of yours? The taxpayer paid for that sensitive species on lands, you shouldn't be on to begin with.


[Not punishing the Bundys for the Nevada standoff led to the occupation in Oregon]

Again, the entire country pays taxes for the Sage Grouse, and not to cater to your profit margins on lands not owned by you.

Then the next time you are in Washington D.C. you be sure to tell the good folks there that you want to turn the west into one big pasture so as to feed the big fat meri-burgers of this country, and to discontinue the tax burden the American people pay for these lands, so you can duke it out with the states that don't want to pay taxes on these lands either.

It goes with the territory of paying taxes folks like you don't want to pay, while leaving that burden to the regular tax payer. You want it both ways. It will never work that way.

Thanks, now you're talking sense. And that is the gist of the problem. Too many ranchers trying to make a buck off the taxpayer, and there just isn't enough land, unless the rancher steals it. And that is why the rancher/militia blames the Feds. Which is nothing more than a cop out for an excuse to get what a few ranchers want.

And that economic activity is only possible by help from the tax payer and the federal government for letting ranchers steal land use rights to make a profit. Because if the ranchers and the states were left with the land, your economic activity wouldn't be possible because of the tax burden it would impose upon the states. Let me throw out a spoiler alert for you; it's why the Feds own it.

Here's another spoiler alert for you; that area around the refuge is some of the driest desert around. If it weren't for the lake built by the Feds, you wouldn't have been grazing cattle there anyway.

Refer to my last sentence. No need in repeating it.

 

if they stop anything from getting in or out... not long... starve them out, my guess is once the beer and chips are gone they would be gone

but the minute they surrender.. of to prison with them, and guess if guilty of a felony, can never own a gun again

.

 

It's not really Obama's fault. Obama is not the face of big business. The problem is that most of congress is. And in order to get anything done, you have to do it through congress.

 

What an easy way out with that argument. Blame Obama instead of Congress, when it is the do nothing/ obstruct at all costs Congress keeping him from changing that corporate control. And to think, it wouldn't occur to them to blame the worst Congress ever, when they usually hover around zero to 10% approval. Go figure!

 

Look, I understand that you had a lot of hopes in Obama, but he is a corporatist tool.

 

That right there says it all!

 

Oregon Judge Plans to Bill the Bundy Militia $70,000 a Day to Cover County Security Costs



http://usuncut.com/news/ammon-bundy-fined-70000-a-day-by-harney-county-judge/



The small group of camouflage-clad, rifle-carrying, snack-deprived jamokes occupying a federal building in rural Oregon may have just met their match.

Harney County judge Steve Grasty has ordered Ammon Bundy to pay $70,000 a day in fines to cover the extra security costs the county has incurred since the occupation at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge began. Security costs have included the blockade set up by the Sheriff’s office to protect local law enforcement from possible attacks by Bundy’s militants, as well as extra staffing to monitor the occupation.


“We’re going to send Mr. Bundy the bill,” Grasty said at a town hall meeting on Monday night, encouraging residents to let the militia dry up its own resources. “No matter how you feel, do not bring food and supplies up to the refuge.”

At that same town hall meeting, Harney County sheriff David Ward made it clear that Bundy’s gang wasn’t welcome in their community.

“There’s an hourglass, and it’s running out,” Ward said. “Go home.”

Public schools in Harney County have finally re-opened, making it the first time the county’s students have returned to school since the occupation began on January 2nd. U.S. Fish and Wildlife employees, whose personal information was inside the wildlife refuge and likely obtained by the Bundy gang, have been relocated for their safety.

“As folks from out of town arrived over the past few weeks, harassment of our employees has increased,” Fish and Wildlife spokeswoman Megan Nagel told KOIN 6 News, who added that agency employees have reportedly been harassed by militia supporters while conducting day-to-day errands. “While not direct physical threats, these activities are clearly designed to intimidate.”

Ammon Bundy has yet to respond to the county’s $70,000 per-day penalty.





It is time to make these freeloading welfare cheats pay up.

 

What should a Federalist lacky, County Judge have to say about the occupation of a
Bird Sanctuary on Federal Lands?
Lets get the lines correct. City, County, District, State, Federal.
Similar to the Affluenza judge, this one needs to go suck an egg and get out of our lives!

Mr_Truth, I do not believe YOU understand FREEDOM, the American Constitutions or what it is all about!


Moi
The FREEDOM Lovingest Member on Board!&!

r > g

View attachment 40342
Across an immense, unguarded, ethereal border, Canadians, cool and unsympathetic,
regard our America with envious eyes and slowly and surely draw their plans against us.​

 

He understands as I do, that we the honest tax payer pay for that refuge for purposes other than free welfare for cattle ranchers who steal grazing land and water for a federally constructed lake made for the "SOLE" purpose of being a refuge for migrating birds. Not a water source so ranchers could steal it and water their cattle on. You know, the lake that wouldn't be there if it weren't for the federal government. The only lines you understand are the one's that say theft by taking.

 

For example, a federal government agency might decide that it wants to limit the number of days a rancher can graze their cattle to protect a certain endangered plant or animal species, or they might unilaterally decide that ranchers can’t use as much water as they need because of a fight over water rights.

And this is a bad thing because why?

 

They shouldn't be using the water at all. We the tax payers pay for that lake for the purpose of providing a sanctuary for migrating birds. We shouldn't be paying taxes for a lake that the ranchers are draining so as to receive welfare water for their cattle. Never mind the fact that the cattle probably wouldn't be there anyway if the lake wasn't there. And here these goons sit at a wildlife refuge complaining about land rights they were already stealing.

 

The magistrate in question is a County judge, and the County Sheriff's department has been in charge of security in the town and surrounding areas as the uninvited and unwelcome "militia" thug creeps have mounted their criminal invasion …

Or are you suggesting that The County must just roll over and play dead … ???

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/terrorism

This definition could cast a wide net that includes a small minority within Black Lives Matter. It could include the more violent and mindless goons of any movement. You don't need to set up camp at an empty federal building in the middle of nowhere to classify as a terrorist.

Whether or not it includes these 20 or so morons in Oregon depends on their intentions. Are they actually trying to scare anybody with their firearms? Or are they just meant for self defense from the feds in an ill advised protest?

 

HAHAHAHAHA!!!!


I only have a law degree and am FAR more qualified to understand the subject than you can ever hope to.


Thanks for the laughs.