Breaking: Bundy family unearths BLM mass cattle grave

I thought the whole point of the swat-style raid was to confiscate the cattle, and SELL them, using the money gendered to deduct from what Bundy supposedly owed on back taxes.
Slaughtering the cattle puts everything on an entirely different page; one I hope all Americans are reading.

Only time will tell just how close Reid is to the top echelons of corruption. I will be watching who sides with Reid VERY closely.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Wrabbit, so you are saying if my neighbor came to my house, kicked me out, pillaged my fridges, shot my dogs and decided to keep the place for himself, that I don't have a leg to stand on? Please tell me you have missed something here...because that is exactly what the BLM just did to Bundy.

a reply to: Peekingsquatch

Oh really? They came and kicked him out of his ranch house?

Area Closure Maps

The bottom link there shows the overall Virgin River valley and the specific boundaries of open land the BLM was sent there to clear.

Public Notice of Intent - Recorded in Federal Register - March 27

That is the advanced notice of intent, purpose and scope they are required to publish before doing what they did. This wasn't like Ruby Ridge. Nothing like it. Ruby Ridge had cowboys in Ninja suits ambushing Randy Weaver's kid in the woods like a patrol in a war zone. It's nothing even REMOTELY like Waco. Bundy isn't a psychotic nutjob with a fixation on apocolyptic prophecy. The ATF also ambushed the Davidian Compound with SO much overkill, they could only be described as having went with the full intent of a fight. They just hadn't planned to lose.

In this case... It's federal land, and this is a very wealthy and very powerful land owner and rancher. You know..the kind of person ATS usually doesn't care much for....and he found a way to play the system right back at the people who he didn't feel like cooperating with anymore. Well.. Doom on him, by all I've read thus far. The CAUSE of too much federal land is a valid one, to be sure ....the time and place is to profit an individual in raping our public land with his cattle...

I'll be happy to take up this banner for a cause, as soon as HE isn't the one holding it out front. The enemy of my enemy is NOT my friend. I just have to fight two directions at once, sometimes.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

How do we know Bundy is a very rich and powerful landowner Wrabbit?

I have heard that said before, but I have never seen any proof of it.

I understand you are approaching the topic at hand with a level head, (as you usually do) however have you seen the maps of all of the Federally owned land in the state of Nevada? Damn! Why is Nevada even considered a state anymore?

The other problem that I have with the Federal government owning so much land is when you add Agenda 21 into the picture.

There is much more behind the smoke and mirrors than a so called wealthy land owner, fighting against an over reaching government agency IMO.....

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Wabbit, with all due respect- Bundy owns the land they are trying to kick him off of that the cows are grazing on. The federal land in question. It was homesteaded, not just the parcel where his house is at.

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

In the early 90s this started not for just Bundy by all over the west . Go to Cuba,San yisidro, Espanola Farmington Bloomfield, Blaco, Laplata in N.M and talk to old ranchers they will parrot the same story as Bundy . Do the same in sw Colo or se Utah you hear the same story . Change the rules till they couldn't continue the lease .

Some of these lands have been grazing lands since before the civil war. Near me is one I grew up riding on a grazing lease . But since mid 90s its been closed off . Unless you work for a oil and gas company.

To me it is a long string of bad behavior. If I hadnt seen with my own eyes I wouldn't have believed it. These actions are not of the same government I grew up with.

a reply to: seeker1963

Exactly Seeker.

Why does federal government own 84% of Nevada and what can Reid do to give it back?

According to the ranchers’ argument, the federal government “owned” or controlled every territory before it became a state, but once statehood was reached, the land became the property of the new state.

So how is it that the U.S. government owns 84 percent of Nevada? It certainly looks like Nevada citizens are being treated unfairly. It is almost as if Washington, D.C., is treating Nevada like a child that can’t manage itself.

I've spent hours the past week pouring over property deeds listed online for the State of Nevada, and connecting the dots of just whom are listed as partners and officers in many of the corporate entities, that lay claim to a good portion of Nevada, especially the tracts surrounding the Bundy ranch. This goes much deeper than turtles and cows. Much deeper.
www.bizpacreview.com...

Des

originally posted by: Peekingsquatch
a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Wabbit, with all due respect- Bundy owns the land they are trying to kick him off of that the cows are grazing on. The federal land in question. It was homesteaded, not just the parcel where his house is at.

To return all due respect, that is a claim you are making. Even Bundy himself isn't making that claim and it's part of why I have a major problem with him. He paid the BLM fees right up to 1993. He recognized their authority then. He's acknowledged the State of Nevada and Clark County in particular as rightful owners of that land, in his view, as he's offered to pay them for the privilege of grazing 900 cattle across 600,000 acres of public lands.

Bundy said he has “no contract with the United States government,” and the federal government has “no jurisdiction or authority” on his grazing rights, water rights, access rights, ranch improvement rights or anything else that “belongs to ‘we the people’ of Clark County.”

The rancher took his argument back to the 19th century, when Nevada became a state. According to him, the federal government did, in fact, control the land when Nevada was a territory. But, he claimed, when the territory became a state, the government turned that land over to the sovereignty of the state of Nevada, and thus the federal government lacks the power to control it today.

Source (I don't care for Beck...but he can quote someone as well as anyone else)

If he were actually making the CASE...and not simply having the argument made for him as a public point to rally on...that he had legal and valid ownership claim? I'd spend the time learning about that to see if it's true...but again, he's trying to assert that Nevada trumps Washington, despite the specific text and terms Nevada entered the Union under with regard to it's open lands. On that? He simply isn't a sovereign to be arguing with 2 of them, as if he had an equal chair at that table. He'd have one at a private property dispute...but has nothing in a fight between State and Federal Governments for matters of reach and jurisdiction. (Especially when Nevada, as a state policy, doesn't agree with him)

He's also lost his court cases...so it's a 'tried and died' thing, while his Million dollars of hamburger keep munching on the public grass adjoining Lake Meade. It's upsetting he actually won...for now...and backed the BLM off *OUR* land, to continue letting his cows eat it.

I tend to believe that death was thier motive all along. Twas a blood moon sacrifice and without intervention there would be humans included. The timing is just too much for me since i no longer believe in coincidences. After all the years of refuseal of contract by the bundys they decide to come 200+ strong without any clear plan for the animals other than backhors. Now to me it brings up the question of what will happen towards oct. and the next blood moon. It only makes sense that if this is true then we will see more than cattle,chinese school children and sherpas.

a reply to: seeker1963

You bet I know the Federal land issues..and on this one? We'd stand shoulder to shoulder to a line of Feds. I wouldn't have any qualms about standing the line for the cause.



What that shows is obscene. Manifest Destiny taken to sick levels...(of course, some natives would question what Healthy levels are in that doctine..). I'm not looking at the West and Federal encroachment or outright thievery of our public lands from State control. That MUST be addressed, if we're ever to call ourselves a Union of states. No question.

The question is...time and place. Is this the time, the place and the specific trigger to fire on? Can this battle be fought, won and pride taken in it being the RIGHT fight for the RIGHT reasons ...to make possible tragic outcome a thing everyone involved could live with later? No.... I don't think this time and place fits anything like that. The cause tho...keep me in mind and look me up, if a better battlefield comes up. Something where the right side is actually right, anyway.

originally posted by: Wrabbit2000
a reply to: seeker1963

You bet I know the Federal land issues..and on this one? We'd stand shoulder to shoulder to a line of Feds. I wouldn't have any qualms about standing the line for the cause.

What that shows is obscene. Manifest Destiny taken to sick levels...(of course, some natives would question what Healthy levels are in that doctine..). I'm not looking at the West and Federal encroachment or outright thievery of our public lands from State control. That MUST be addressed, if we're ever to call ourselves a Union of states. No question.

The question is...time and place. Is this the time, the place and the specific trigger to fire on? Can this battle be fought, won and pride taken in it being the RIGHT fight for the RIGHT reasons ...to make possible tragic outcome a thing everyone involved could live with later? No.... I don't think this time and place fits anything like that. The cause tho...keep me in mind and look me up, if a better battlefield comes up. Something where the right side is actually right, anyway.

I'll give you that!

The "Time and Place" thing though?

Well, I am getting too old and tired. So my attitude which I will keep to myself for the time being is, "I am like an old and tired angry dog!". I just want to bite somebody and get it over with........

The more I try to be a good dog, the more I get kicked and beaten........sigh

BTW, some of you might be thinking, he said he was keeping it to himself but said it anyways??? Well, I just said it in a way I wouldn't get in trouble!

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

and backed the BLM off *OUR* land,

For me thats a key take OUR land from a rancher then lease same " protected species land " to coal mine oil and gas company and lock us off OUR land. In their eyes we are trespassers .

When someone hurts an animal for no good reason, it makes me want to do the same thing to that person (whatever it was they did to said animal).

a reply to: Wrabbit2000
I have come to the understanding that there is no current contract signed by him and the blm. He stopped paying grazing fees when the blm did not uphold there end of contract. The reason that he has paid no fees is because they would not allow him to unless he signed a current contract. Add along with that the history of other ranchers in the area that were forced out of simular situations once the new contracts were signed.

a reply to: Lostinthedarkness

(sigh) I've been on break the last couple weeks. This story..above ALL others..ALMOST made me break that much sooner than I did, for the sheer lack of anything factual being posted to back anything at all. I'm not being mean here, by any stretch. Just explaining the frustration and why, as some may wonder, I didn't say things days sooner.

Your reply leaves me baffled tho. This land was never, at any point, going to be given or sold to anyone. That is the opposite of what the whole point here has been. As stated and linked in a document Xuenchen posted earlier in the week (A report of the Dry Lake Solar project), the Gold Butte Mesa wasn't the site of building anything. It was the MITIGATION point for what was being done far to the South.

As current US Environmental policy goes, it's like the goofy carbon exchange. They can butcher the dry lake zone for the solar plant (or a future one, since the Chinese said screw it) but that DEMANDS...by law...they either fix everything they did on THAT site...or they find another location that can be preserved/restored to OFFSET the damage done at the project site. That is what was happening here and ..I believe it was P. 69-70 of Xuenchen's report explained, using the names of both locations directly, as linked and directly dependent pieces of the same overall project.

So...Actually..they've been trying to get him to pay up for 20 years...after he HAD BEEN PAYING without issue...but got pissed when they raised the fee. (Not worth fighting that claim until prices rose, eh?). With Harry Reid and his family stake in the Solar deal coming, it lit a big fire under something that had been in the works anyway, for 2 decades. Motivation is what Harry supplied....but this was happening with or without Reid. It started back when Clinton was just getting comfy in his new chair for context and it absolutely isn't over. These guys don't 'lose'. Ever.

I just remembered... Xuen posted a few threads on this topic, so my reference was hardly helpful. Sowwy...

Regional Mitigation Strategy for the Dry Lake Solar Energy Zone (This is a BIG PDF for load..so be warned if you don't load PDF well)

I double checked and what this all came down to for the recent push...the heart and core of this..is in section 2.6 and 2.6.2, covered on pages 69 and 70. That isn't the underlying dispute back 2 decades...That is the CURRENT issue overlapping it and "Why here..Why now..Why THERE?".

a reply to: seeker1963

"I am like an old angry dog..."

I think that almost describes most of us! Great analogy!

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

Hey Wrabbit, he's been making the claim about the homesteading of that land.

He said it again a few days ago on a radio interview. I think that's where we were missing with each other.
Yeah he said there are documents in existence of full ownership by homesteading. I don't know if he has shown them to anyone, or gave to attorneys etc. or not though but he is making the claim of full ownership of the grazing parcel.

And one more part of this is the Gold Butte area was first set for Tortoise transfers....

Gold Butte, which covers roughly 350,000 acres south of Interstate 15 near the Arizona border, was initially designated as an area of critical environmental concern (ACEC) by the BLM in 1998 as part of a land management plan for the Las Vegas area.

That plan prohibited grazing by domestic livestock in areas of critical environmental concern primarily as a way to preserve the desert tortoise, which the federal government considers a threatened species. At the time, Gold Butte’s assets were said to include cultural and historic resources, scenery and habitat for special status species such as the desert tortoise.

more general info in a recent story from a Las Vegas Local source...
Connection drawn between cattle roundup and BLM report

There's been more than one reason for the BLM "actions" to get Bundy to "comply".

The earlier "actions" in the early 90's had something to do with reducing Bundy's original grazing territory.
[looking for that story]

a reply to: Peekingsquatch

Maybe that has something to do with Dirty Harry's claim that he hasn't paid taxes..?

a reply to: Wrabbit2000

One other thing I forgot, when the dispute came about and he stopped paying -it was said either by him or one of the reporters that he HAS been sending checks for grazing, but to the state or county. He said the BLM made promises after presenting themselves as "land managers" and didn't maintain their obligation. So he started paying the one of the other entities instead while half heartedly attempting to resolve the issue. That's according to his interviews. I work with his grandaughter, and have been trying to catch her on her way to her car just to ask if she can clear up some of the information for us.