Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    3,600

    Default Bundy Cattle Hunt Anyone?

    After the cameras left, look who remembered what all this was about.
    https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/...off-gold-butte

    Been trespassing since 1993...
    Attached Images Attached Images

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    12,000

    Default

    Call me skeptical, but I suspect these groups are really concerned about their own self interest and find this a good marketing plan, more so than it is their commitment to "what all this was about."

    That said, I'm glad to see it being part of the continued discussion, even if some of those involved are paint themselves with colors of hypocrisy by not doing the same as it relates to feral horse and burros that are having a far larger impact on a much larger area than this specific area that Bundy is trashing. Given a lot of these groups get money from supporters of feral horses and burros, focusing on landscape healthy does not fit their business model when it would require an honest assessment of the impact their own "cash cows" of horses and burros have on the landscape. As such, I don't expect to see them focusing their attention that direction anytime soon. But, if their pressure forces the BLM to get Bundy's cattle operation in compliance with the grazing rules, their efforts have my support.

    $500 to anyone who can convince these groups to join on a support letter to reduce feral horses and burros to the limits "agreed to by law." After all, the valid "according to law and regulation" idea is the premise by which they are asking for Bundy's cattle to be removed, and they should be removed.
    My name is Randy Newberg and I approved this post. What is written is my opinion, and my opinion only.

    "Hunt when you can. You're gonna run outta health before you run outta money."

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    3,600

    Default

    You know I'm just prodding you. I posted an article earlier where CBD was for removing wild horses in one area (actually, preventing it from being occupied by horses IIRC), but asking them to sign onto the feral horse/cattlemen issue is a bit like asking RMEF to sign on to this and other public land grazing issues. It is not really in either group's mission or operating style. Nonetheless, there is value is having CBD, WWP, etc take the crap so other groups don't have to.

    Best,
    Rob

    " I also suggest that we open a hunting season on range cattle. I realize that beef cattle will not make sporting prey at first.... But the breed will improve if hunted regularly." -- Edward Abbey
    Last edited by RobG; 06-27-2016 at 01:33 PM.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Wittmann, AZ
    Posts
    577

    Default

    Cattle in competition with desert tortoises on Gold Butte. What a joke. There isn't a single desert tortoise on Gold Butte but I'm sure the CBD will find a way to sue the federal government and take some more taxpayer money.
    "You can fly a helicopter to the top of Everest and say you've been there. The problem with that is you were an asshole when you started and you're still an asshole when you get back. Its the climb that makes you a different person".
    - Yvon Chouinard

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    3,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sagebrush View Post
    Cattle in competition with desert tortoises on Gold Butte. What a joke. There isn't a single desert tortoise on Gold Butte but I'm sure the CBD will find a way to sue the federal government and take some more taxpayer money.
    Find a way? Uh, yeah, the BLM is afraid of local political pressure and isn't following the law. However in this case the threat of lawsuit will likely give the BLM the justification to move forward. If the BLM continues not to follow the law then the groups will collect, but I doubt if it will get the far.
    Last edited by RobG; 06-28-2016 at 11:51 PM.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Dec 2013
    Location
    South Dakota
    Posts
    143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Big Fin View Post
    Call me skeptical, but I suspect these groups are really concerned about their own self interest and find this a good marketing plan, more so than it is their commitment to "what all this was about."
    As a country and society we need to get over our skepticism. As a conservationist and a law abiding citizen we should be happy our environmental friends are taking a stand and more conservation groups should be taking a similar stand on this issue.

    I gave up long ago the thought that everyone is going to see things my way. That does not mean I should write them off, if there is an area of agreement that we can work together on we should do so. It all comes back to the unhealthy polarization of our society. We need to get over it and work together when we do have areas we can agree on and stand opposed when we don't.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Wittmann, AZ
    Posts
    577

    Default

    The Center for Biological Diversity is a business that makes its money solely from suing the federal government. They have no interest in conservation whatsoever, only in generating income. I will always be on the opposite side of the CBD.
    "You can fly a helicopter to the top of Everest and say you've been there. The problem with that is you were an asshole when you started and you're still an asshole when you get back. Its the climb that makes you a different person".
    - Yvon Chouinard

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jzeck2 View Post
    As a country and society we need to get over our skepticism. As a conservationist and a law abiding citizen we should be happy our environmental friends are taking a stand and more conservation groups should be taking a similar stand on this issue.

    I gave up long ago the thought that everyone is going to see things my way. That does not mean I should write them off, if there is an area of agreement that we can work together on we should do so. It all comes back to the unhealthy polarization of our society. We need to get over it and work together when we do have areas we can agree on and stand opposed when we don't.
    Those people aren't interested in working with you. The only thing they like about you, is that you pay your taxes (I'm assuming) and they get a piece everytime they abuse the EAJA.
    Most of them deserve to be in the same place Bundy is in. Some deserve the Finnicum treatment. They are eco-terrorist scumbags.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    3,600

    Default

    Gomer, they aren't going to make any government money off of this. Sagebrush, you apparently don't believe the laws are warranted and that is a valid perspective too, but until they are changed they need to be enforced.

    Here's the deal - you don't have to like these guys, but you should understand they do serve a role. That is why I posted this. This is one of things where you should put up or shut up. As I said, after the cameras left the biggest screamers also left. That's fine, all of the advocacy groups have their membership to appeal to and they use different tactics.

    If the ugly groups hadn't intervened in 2012 the BLM would still be pussy footing around with the Bundy's like they had the previous 20 years. Yes, 20 years of pussy footing. As you can see from this current action the BLM still needs some incentive and if you think any of the federal agencies don't need the threat of lawsuit to do the right thing when under local pressure you are very uninformed. I do believe you will find some related stuff out about lawsuits and the Durfees soon.

    So if you think people should be exempt from laws on public land, fine, hate these guys with all your heart. If you are an NGO protecting public lands and don't want to be associated with these guys that is fine too. I've had that conversation in board meetings and on some topics it is best to let the ugly guys do the work that needs to be done without calling attention to your own group.

    That doesn't mean all of their suits are helpful or I agree with all of their agendas, but they do take on a role that the mainstream groups can't take because the membership doesn't like lawsuits. I have no problem with that, but if you are critical I will ask you to put up after the cameras are gone or shut up.

    No, I am not a member of any of the groups mentioned.
    Last edited by RobG; 06-30-2016 at 05:10 PM.

  10. Default

    That $1.79 a month per cow unit must be bankrupting the whole bunch

  11. #11

    Default

    I don't live in the West, nor do I ranch, so I'm sure my perspective is different than the locals. But, I've never understood the support these guys like Bundy generate. I mean they took over a wildlife refuge in Oregon, what if that was my duck spot? Now I can't hunt there while these guys are staging their sit in? If he wants to run cows or sheep over whatever BLM land without paying anything, well why can't I put my herd of whatever on that exact same piece of property?! To me it looks like someone is trying to claim public land as their own.. Down here in LA & TX the only people that benefit from public land swaps are politicians or friends and family of politicians, so I'm pretty jaded about the subject. As I said that's my uniformed outsider's perspective, happy to hear a different opinion.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2014
    Location
    Fort Peck, MT
    Posts
    835

    Default

    They get support because the big, bad gubment is keeping the little man down.

    "I'd be no guest at the table of the Lord. His food was not to be mine, cause I cursed his name every chance that I could and I reckon that's why I'm still alive" -Lucero

  13. #13

    Default

    I am not sure I am a fan of anyone who runs their business on public land. As an east coast guy we can't relate with the exception of waterman who essentially "farm" a public place (bays and the ocean) for free via killing fish for profit and precious little money goes to the state or federal government. I can't imagine anyone taking a tractor and tilling public land for profit with so little income going to the owner. Oh well, once you legalize theft everyone wants some.
    Last edited by mdhunter; 12-21-2016 at 08:16 PM.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Wittmann, AZ
    Posts
    577

    Default

    See if I can boil the history down to one small paragraph. In AZ, the graze is rez nullius, meaning no one can own it. The same as the air we breathe. If you want to keep cattle off the graze within your property lines, you must fence them out. The graze on public land was free to all until the Taylor Grazing Act. The BLM was formed to manage the number of cattle that could be on the public range and keep the range sustainable for grazing. The funding for the BLM came from the ranchers agreeing to pay an allotment per head in exchange for management by the BLM to continue or improve the grazing. Unfortunately, the BLM has moved far away from the purpose for which the ranchers agreed to pay. The BLM is now about building trails, establishing wilderness areas and no vehicle areas, building OHV use areas, riding trails, interpretive paths, shooting ranges, etc. All nice things for everybody but the ranchers who are paying an allotment to the BLM to manage their grazing. These grazing allotments are appurtenant to the private property owned by the ranchers, meaning the rancher's bundle of rights to the property includes the grazing allotments and adds value to the real property. A rancher may own 1600 acres and have grazing rights to 3,000 public acres. Since the BLM has abandoned their initial purpose two things have happened. The BLM has now turned against the ranchers and want to keep the cattle off the public land so it can be used for the new purposes. The BLM has used some pretty underhanded methods to this end, such as diverting water of the grazing areas and adjacent private lands and allowing the ranchers to turn their cattle out only after the first of October. What's the big deal about letting cattle out to graze in October? In the country we are talking about, the first freeze is usually in late September. That means the graze starts to lose its nutritional value. The best time to turn the cattle out is in July during the monsoon when the graze is tall, green and at peak nutrition for the cattle. All these tactics hammer the ranchers by making it impossible to make a profit by raising cattle and making their ranches worth cents on the dollar. No one wants to buy a ranch on the AZ Strip to build a subdivision when the only access is 50 miles of dirt road and the nearest grocery store is 60 miles away. I may not agree with a some of the tactics of a few of the ranchers, but I can't blame them for not wanting to continue to pay allotments to an organization that is trying to put them out of business. It would be the same as if a community agreed to pay a sales tax to hire a police force to protect them from criminals and then the police they are paying for started to burglarize their homes.
    "You can fly a helicopter to the top of Everest and say you've been there. The problem with that is you were an asshole when you started and you're still an asshole when you get back. Its the climb that makes you a different person".
    - Yvon Chouinard

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    12,000

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sagebrush View Post
    See if I can boil the history down to one small paragraph. In AZ, the graze is rez nullius, meaning no one can own it. The same as the air we breathe. If you want to keep cattle off the graze within your property lines, you must fence them out. The graze on public land was free to all until the Taylor Grazing Act. The BLM was formed to manage the number of cattle that could be on the public range and keep the range sustainable for grazing. The funding for the BLM came from the ranchers agreeing to pay an allotment per head in exchange for management by the BLM to continue or improve the grazing. Unfortunately, the BLM has moved far away from the purpose for which the ranchers agreed to pay. The BLM is now about building trails, establishing wilderness areas and no vehicle areas, building OHV use areas, riding trails, interpretive paths, shooting ranges, etc. All nice things for everybody but the ranchers who are paying an allotment to the BLM to manage their grazing. These grazing allotments are appurtenant to the private property owned by the ranchers, meaning the rancher's bundle of rights to the property includes the grazing allotments.......... .
    Not the first time I've read claims similar to this. I've asked folks for legal citation and supporting evidence. I never get anything that would meet the threshold of legal citation.

    Can you help with that? Every legal mind I talk to on the topic nearly rolls on the floor when the dots are connected this way.

    I'm hoping you have the legal citations.
    My name is Randy Newberg and I approved this post. What is written is my opinion, and my opinion only.

    "Hunt when you can. You're gonna run outta health before you run outta money."

  16. #16

    Default

    My conversation on this issue on another forum ended when the other guy claimed that I just didn't understand. He quit responding when I admitted that was probably true, and asked for clarification on two of the facts. Did Bundy own the land in question, and did he keep using it after he quit paying in protest of BLM policies? I'm all for the man's right to protest, but I will bet a million dollars that the same guy who uses the land for grazing without paying the fee bitches about all the money that the welfare queens steal from us taxpayers.

  17. #17

    Default

    Question: I remember a book that was circulating back in the 90s. It was large (8.5" X 11" and maybe 3' thick or even larger). It had stiff paper covers. It was said to be a comprehensive study of the history and laws involving public land ranching, from beginning to date. It showed all the warts and included tons of data on cattle, the industry, the impacts, relations with government, etc. I never did get around to reading it. It may have come out of High Country News but I'm not sure.

    If anyone remembers the name and/or author(s), please share. I would first like to read any critiques of it, then see if there has been any updates to it or subsequent additions. Then, maybe, get it and read it. Thanks in advance for any leads.

  18. #18

  19. #19

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mtmiller View Post
    Thanks, mtmiller. That one appears to have been first published in 2002. It look like an interesting book. In searching for it on Amazon I found other books like it and I *think* the one I was looking for, first published in 1991: https://www.amazon.com/Waste-West-Pu...TDMMBQ8B5MPYKE

    Yours is more current and I may be better off with it. Another that looks interesting, first published in 1999 is https://www.amazon.com/Western-Range...TDMMBQ8B5MPYKE

    Looks like I have my reading cut out for me. Again, thanks for the help. My search term selection and google-fu are not what they should be.

  20. #20

    Default

    The BLM should have taken care of this public land freeloader about 20+ years ago. Cliven Bundy is no better than a welfare mamma spitting out kids in Chicago for welfare checks.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    Bozeman, MT
    Posts
    3,600

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by shootbrownelk View Post
    The BLM should have taken care of this public land freeloader about 20+ years ago. Cliven Bundy is no better than a welfare mamma spitting out kids in Chicago for welfare checks.
    Maybe someone with connections could send in Seal Team 6.

  22. #22

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RobG View Post
    Maybe someone with connections could send in Seal Team 6.
    I'd pay good money to see that Rob.

  23. #23

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RobG View Post
    Maybe someone with connections could send in Seal Team 6.
    I see what you did there. ;-)

  24. #24

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by James Riley View Post
    Question: I remember a book that was circulating back in the 90s. It was large (8.5" X 11" and maybe 3' thick or even larger). It had stiff paper covers. It was said to be a comprehensive study of the history and laws involving public land ranching, from beginning to date. It showed all the warts and included tons of data on cattle, the industry, the impacts, relations with government, etc. I never did get around to reading it. It may have come out of High Country News but I'm not sure.

    If anyone remembers the name and/or author(s), please share. I would first like to read any critiques of it, then see if there has been any updates to it or subsequent additions. Then, maybe, get it and read it. Thanks in advance for any leads.
    I'd also suggest reading the CAST report for some information not included in the referenced coffee table book.

    http://www.cast-science.org/publicat...productID=2857

  25. #25

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 1_pointer View Post
    coffee table book.
    Hhahaahah.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •