It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

BLM Seizes New Mexico Ranch Land for a Jumping Mouse

page: 3
33
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 15 2014 @ 05:39 PM
link   
Ok people need too stop and just "think" for one second

"Welfare Ranching: The Subsidized Destruction of the American West "
was written in about the dirty 30's, so it is outdated and presents a false picture.

1.
The current system of federal subsidies to the western cattle industry
was born out of the Great Depression
and Dust Bowl era.
Going after these Government subsidies/Ranchers, at this point and time ,

2.
"All of Calif. in severe drought for 1st time this century"

www.usatoday.com...

3.
Deep-sea fish in deep trouble

Scientists find nearly all deep-sea fisheries unsustainable, call for stopping unsustainable fisheries and government subsidies that support them
September, 2011

www.lenfestocean.org...

Going after these Government subsidies/Ranchers/Fisherman,, etc,,,, at this point and time,,

who benefits??????

When the small Mom and Pop stores where destroyed,,,who benefited??

Its the same thing.


a reply to: Benevolent Heretic




posted on May, 15 2014 @ 05:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: BobAthome

originally posted by: mahatche

originally posted by: occrest


Also he is doing damage to the environment his cattle is wrecking the streams
a reply to: buster2010

Pardon me while i--


i'm done here as i can see you have no clue of the symbiotic relationship of animals and land.




I don't know how much damage cattle have done in this specific case, but I've lived in New Mexico, and have personally been effected by asshole farmers destroying land. It's not the cows, it's the people that come with them.

Some of my favorite childhood fishing spots are toxic and full of yellow fish. It wasn't BLM and EPA poisoning the water, it was careless farmers. Burgers and manure aren't always a fair trade off. Idiots who think they are harmless can easily destroy good things.



REALLY??? i quote "Some of my favorite childhood fishing spots are toxic and full of yellow fish"

WOW.,, name one spot, so we can go find it on the internet,, just one of these favourite spots of yours,,


sure look it up, I didn't see it in the news though, this is personal experience.

There's a small ditch by las neutrias where I caught 2 rainbow trout, a walleye and a cat fish. Their skin was yellow, and they looked bloated. Walleyes have some natural yellow tints, but this was more of a canary yellow and it was mostly the stomach. I've fished there my whole life, caught these same species my whole life, and they've never universally had any condition.

One of the local farmers gave me a heads up and said I was taking a risk. He pointed out a spot further ahead where some assholes cleaned some chemical waste in the ditch. They said authorities knew, so maybe it did make the news.

I don't know if the ditch is permanently damaged, but it is in my mind.

Do you think pollution is a myth? I have nothing to lie about.

edit...to help narrow your search, Last time i tried fishing las neutrias was about 5 years ago. If it made the news it might be around there.
edit on 05pm06pm312014-05-15T18:23:55-05:0006America/Chicago by mahatche because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 05:56 PM
link   
a reply to: BobAthome


Going after these Government subsidies/Ranchers/Fisherman,, etc,,,, at this point and time,,

who benefits??????


With respect to how this looks before digging into anything really deep on it for records and transcripts again, it isn't about "The Rancher" as some romantic mental image to protect from the ravages of big government.

It's about individual ranchers and whether they have the right to use (with permits) then go on to abuse (without permits) the land WE ALL own. Public is public and that means my kid's kid should be able to see the land in someting similar to it's current state of being. If not, then let that be by a change in the law, not a decision to simply ignore the law at will.

When it starts and ends with a guy's personal profit margin for not paying fees and not paying for feed as ranchers who DO NOT have such open land to abuse DO have to pay? It becomes unfair to the majority who actually do need protecting and consideration. That's a factor entirely above and beyond the land itself and damage hundreds or more grazing animals can do.

As noted, that damage isn't limited to hooves and mouths, but the whole system that goes into managing and controlling a commercial herd for market.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 08:39 PM
link   

originally posted by: occrest


Also he is doing damage to the environment his cattle is wrecking the streams
a reply to: buster2010

Pardon me while i--


i'm done here as i can see you have no clue of the symbiotic relationship of animals and land.




I should be the one posting that picture. I lived so far back in the woods I had to catch two buses to get to school my nearest neighbor was over two miles away as the crow flies. I would be willing to bet I have forgotten more about living out in the woods than you will ever know. What makes you think these cattle are part of a symbiotic relationship with that land? There presence there is not natural even when the buffalo roamed they never stayed in one area for very long. Btw you were done here a few posts back because you clearly know nothing about nature.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:31 PM
link   
Maybe I shouldn't have used the word toxic, I don't want it to seem like the ditch was Chernobyl. It was just polluted enough to make the life there sick. 3 species of fish don't turn yellow on their own.

I don't know if you fish, but there are some places you wanna show your kids, and it sucks when you lose one. I wouldn't feel safe now. The careless assholes still own the land with access to it.

What are you getting at by doubting a ditch could be polluted though?


edit on 05pm09pm312014-05-15T21:35:15-05:0009America/Chicago by mahatche because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 09:55 PM
link   
I know republicans dislike the EPA, and now the BLM, but why do i feel like some of you would be against any environmental protection? I know tree hungers are annoying, but when did respecting the land and life around you become a bad thing? Is money so important we'd go against our own self interests to get it? I know they slow profit, but some people really are assholes, I like having groups to hold them accountable.



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: mahatche
I know republicans dislike the EPA, and now the BLM, but why do i feel like some of you would be against any environmental protection? I know tree hungers are annoying, but when did respecting the land and life around you become a bad thing? Is money so important we'd go against our own self interests to get it? I know they slow profit, but some people really are assholes, I like having groups to hold them accountable.



Maybe because we are awake around here and realize that these Federal Organizations are all about doing deals with their Corporate mates who want to steal the land and then hand it over so it can be raped by Big Business.

These organizations care nothing for the land. Just look at how blind the EPA can be when Big Business is involved and even with the fines they levy, it is often cheaper for Big Business to abuse the environment and pay the fines, if any are levied, than to care for our world.

I hate it when Governments are so damn tyrannical and dishonest. Their Hypocrisy Sucks and always will.

This task is for the States to do, not the Feds.

P



posted on May, 15 2014 @ 10:56 PM
link   

originally posted by: occrest
Federally owned land = public land=my land=your land. Period!!!, Feds are our servants, not masters. We, the public, raise beef on our public lands to feed us, the public.

What is the problem?




This is actually the point. And also, its not just one angry rancher whipping at someone, there are many ranchers in this area affected. Not one. This is agenda 21.

In our country, very close to home, signs up to vote no on the national park. It turned out that they wanted to protect the desert area and rattlesnake or something, and this is an orchard, farming area with some ranches. Now the premier said that the people wouldn't support it anyway and so this was withdrawn but there was a small angry group claiming it was just selfishness on the part of snow mobilers and quads. The farmers spoke up in the paper and said not so, they've farmed here for over hundred years, and this would just be federal rules and regulations and penalize ranchers from accessing our own public land, our land, the people's land, not the governments land, they are but managers we hire for our estate.

In any case, they're trying the same tactics here. And obviously water is involved for now, Fortis wants to put a huge over 600 foot dam up near us, and subvert the smilkameen river , if they can't do it one way, why not short the farmers out of water, we alot of organic farms here and some ranches.

Whole thing stinks to high heaven. In addition, who would build a 600-700 foot dam in the crumpling mountains around here, where there are slides nonstop, this is extremely stupid and seems to be about grabbing farms, IMO, harming farms, IMO, agenda 21.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:28 AM
link   
a reply to: rickymouse
Let me say something that leans on protecting the farmers, cows and mice and whatever.... Cows crap all over the place, giving food for many bugs, those bugs are the food for the mice,take the cows away the mice are opt to look for food beyond their daily dinner plate..seems cruel to force them all to move even the farmers... I am curious now, Harry Reid is out of his jurisdiction now right, he is part of Nevada, so this means who is it for him to go sell lands that he does not own outside of his state, to me it seems Reid is trying to muster up cash before the old fart keels over and dies, I am so sick of hearing BLM and Reid, we now know who the real terrorist are..People will start waking up and seeing its all about land grab and sales, he cares less what roams or grows on any land...and he cares less about human welfare and lives...I knew after Nevada Bundy incident we were not going to hear about Reid, he is a Mafia just like the rest of the casino thugs, money talks BS walks and if you win they kill you and steal your money... someone needs to plug this thug.


edit on 16-5-2014 by takebackamerica2014 because: text edit,grammar corrections. and typo corrections



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 03:13 AM
link   
Look out!!!! It's the BLM



Hide the cattle and get your guns, cause here comes the government, to trample people and their lives in a immoral land grab. Time to enforce the reason for the 2nd amendment.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:13 AM
link   
The next step to watch out for is when the BLM has acclimated to its new position, and the "fence-sitters" have chosen sides. This is encouraged by starting out with events being publicized where the individual may be legally in the "wrong."

However, this technique is being used (and has been for several decades, WAKE UP!) to take land from private owning individuals.

Of course, this is how they have conditioned people for so long... that I am not sure it even matters at this point. People will define EVERY land grab situation in light of how they view Bundy. Amazing how it works...

Perhaps the only way to "win" is to pull on strings that pull the puppets in a different direction. Have a tug of war with the american populace..



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Serdgiam

This is FEDERAL land. It's NOT the individual's private land, in either case.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:19 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: Serdgiam

This is FEDERAL land. It's NOT the individual's private land, in either case.


That seems a 'fine point' many are just missing entirely. This never was, never will be and never COULD have been the land of the ranchers being denied temporary use permits into the future.

If this entitlement attitude is what they have to deal with every time they change status of a permit, it won't surprise me if they just shred the permit concept entirely at some point. I won't even blame them, given this level of nightmare to say 'no' to one. Jeeeze...... The sense of ownership over our land, in the most collective sense of the term, is infuriating.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:29 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic
a reply to: Serdgiam

This is FEDERAL land. It's NOT the individual's private land, in either case.


Ya dont say?

Dont worry, you will see why this was all a bad idea down the line. Of course, it seems justified now because of the presentation. That was intentional, and your reaction is predicted.

I suggest you look into the cases that are not as questionable, you know, the hundreds of cases that havent been publicized in the past couple decades because they werent quite "groomed" enough to be publicized in this manner.

You dont find it strange that we are just hearing about this now in the MSM, with all of this going on for more than twenty years in MANY areas of the country?

This is how it works. They present it this way, but I guarantee that further down the line, there will be an event that you will question. BUT, your reaction will be based on a historical precedent set right here and now. Can you guess how you will react?

I guess it is time to start pulling strings. Pity that people cant walk on their own yet.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 09:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Serdgiam
They present it this way, but I guarantee that further down the line, there will be an event that you will question. BUT, your reaction will be based on a historical precedent set right here and now. Can you guess how you will react?


I will react by looking up the details and finding out if the land is actually privately-owned land or federal land, as I have with each of these cases. So far, it's been federal land. You can't steal something that belongs to you.

I'm not much into conspiracies out of nothing but a hatred of "them" and some kind of suspicion.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: pheonix358
a reply to: xuenchen

It is obvious that the BLM want a confrontation, they just don't want to be the ones that actually start shooting. Land ownership and water ownership will be major cornerstones of society along with mining rights.

There is an agenda, that much is obvious. Try to discover what conglomerate actually wants this land and for what.

They will continue with this BS until they get what they want, and what they want is a fire fight. Look for a false flag this time. They will get someone inside the rancher's lines that will spark the whole thing off, they have to.

Why the hell doesn't the state step in and legislate these so called federal powers away. I acknowledge they should not have to but it is working well on those states that have backed up the 2nd with special acts. They need to pull the teeth of the BLM and it is an urgent matter. It is well worth calling the House for a special sitting.

P


YES!
They do want a fight...and they will have a false flag event soon...Power hungry control freaks are everywhere.
Listen to what Matt Bracken sent me... www.youtube.com...
Just a short 5 minute view of history on YouTube.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 10:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: Benevolent Heretic

originally posted by: Serdgiam
They present it this way, but I guarantee that further down the line, there will be an event that you will question. BUT, your reaction will be based on a historical precedent set right here and now. Can you guess how you will react?


I will react by looking up the details and finding out if the land is actually privately-owned land or federal land, as I have with each of these cases. So far, it's been federal land. You can't steal something that belongs to you.


You have studied every case of a similar persuasion that has happened in the past couple decades?

And yes, I know that is how you will react. "They" know it as well. Which is why they will present you with cases that you will inevitably agree with until you reach the threshold of saturation (become jaded) and then they will incrementally "up the ante" with the same reaction. There will be some that catch on, but not enough to matter.


I'm not much into conspiracies out of nothing but a hatred of "them" and some kind of suspicion.


I am aware. Thats a good thing, especially considering "them" is, ideally, "us." Perhaps there is a difference between us there, where I believe the federal government in the US should exist as a servant of the public that enables self-sufficiency and independence. I do not currently believe that is its objective, nor part of any of its actions.

But again, thats the whole idea. Its just drawing the lines in the sand right now, as with a few other select topics. One must make the presented topics as "obvious" in their conclusion as possible. At least at first. Then, one can start making more dubious claims. If it is done incrementally, most will accept it at face value regardless of the claim due to conditioning and historical context.

I am someone who has been following these land grabs for years and it is interesting that the MSM brings these specific cases to light while it lets all of the others go unreported. Well, interesting in that I know exactly what is going on, and its an interesting method. Would you get the joke if I said something like "I am surprised they didnt claim the desert as marshlands!"

They are still operating long term goals on a myopic basis though.. But, at least they have made it that far. Most in the population couldnt do it.

Their strings can be pulled as well.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:12 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 01:15 PM
link   
The federal government owns land ONLY in the name of the people they serve therefore we own the land. There is no entity called federal government that is able to buy sell lease or give away anything of it's own.



posted on May, 16 2014 @ 02:18 PM
link   

originally posted by: tmeister182
The federal government owns land ONLY in the name of the people they serve therefore we own the land. There is no entity called federal government that is able to buy sell lease or give away anything of it's own.


Well, that's part of my job, so since I am involved in selling excess government land and buildings, I say you are wrong. Thousands of deeds recorded in the county clerk records all over the United States say you are wrong also.



new topics

top topics



 
33
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join