As I understand it, the family has grazed livestock on the land as far back as the 1870's well before eminent domain was used (abused) to declare open
rangeland "public" land - the rancher refuses to pay for what he considers his rightful use of the fodder on that land.
What eminent domain? People keep repeating this--show me!
of the lands of the western states were originally acquired through treaty or purchase by the United States federal government. Not the
states, not individuals.
Congressional Research Service
Federal land ownership began when the original 13 states ceded their “western”
lands (between the Appalachian Mountains and the Mississippi River) to the central
government between 1781 and 1802. Substantial land acquisition in North America
via treaties and purchases began with the Louisiana Purchase in 1803 and culminated
with the purchase of Alaska in 1867. In total, the federal government acquired 1.8
billion acres in North America.
The 1976 Federal Land Policy and Management Act
=Title IV: Range Management= - Requires the Secretary of Agriculture and the Secretary of the Interior to study the value of grazing on the lands
under their jurisdiction in the 11 Western States with a view to establishing a fee for domestic livestock grazing on such lands.
Specifies a formula for the determination of grazing fees.
Directs that 50 percent of all moneys received as fees for grazing domestic livestock on public lands and on lands in the National Forest System be
credited to a separate account in the United States Treasury for the purpose of range rehabilitation, protection, and improvement.
Places a ten year limit on permits and leases for domestic livestock grazing. Grants to a holder of an expiring permit or lease first priority for
receipt of the new permit or lease. Requires that all grazing permits and leases incorporate an allotment management plan.
Directs the Secretary of the Interior and the Secretary of Agriculture to establish at least one grazing advisory board for each Bureau of Land
Management district office and National Forest headquarters office in the western States having jurisdiction over more than 5,000 acres of land
subject to commercial livestock grazing.
This measure began in the 94th Congress, Senate as S.507
. Once out of committee, it
passed by a vote of 78-11, and was sent to the House. The similar House bill called H.R.
passed with a vote of [169-155).
Incidentally, H.R. 13777 was co-sponsored by the Representative from Nevada.
Finally, the legislation passed conference, H. Rept. 94-1724
with a vote of (393-0),
and was signed in law as Public law 94-579 by President Ford.
This law, which can be found as USC Title 43, Chapter 35, Sub-chapter 1701
) also has a "Savings Provision":
(a) Nothing in this Act, or in any amendment made by this Act [see Short Title note above], shall be construed as terminating any valid lease,
permit, patent, right-of-way, or other land use right or authorization existing on the date of approval of this Act [Oct. 21, 1976].
Meaning, if Mr. Bundy truly had some legal claim to the land in question, when this law went into effect, he would have been protected. He has been
in court several times over the past 20 years--if I can dig up this info in an hour, surely with his vested interest, he could have done the same.
I suspect he does not have any legal title, lease, etc--except his ancestral usage of the land; but then again, so do other people, such as the Piute.
I truly wish for this situation to come to a fair and peaceful
resolution, before any others are injured.
edit on 4/10/2014 by Olivine because: (no reason given)
edit on 4/10/2014 by Olivine because: clarity
4/10/2014 by Olivine because: (no reason given)
edit on 4/10/2014 by Olivine because: rampant typos