Originally Posted by EddyTheDog (Post 20046518)

There is a reason for that...

Originally Posted by SykkBoy (Post 20046505)

There's also a lot of scuttlebutt about the feds wanting to use the land for fracking

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 20046484)

he owes 300k.. and that's between 93-11

between 11 and now, he owes 1.1 million.

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 20046506)

do you have annnyyy links for this? been rumours but i haven't been able to get anything concrete

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20046532)

Just a theory so far
http://www.naturalnews.com/044670_bl...ndy_ranch.html

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20046527)

i don't get this, the government does not engage in fracking.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20046542)

They lease the land to the oil companies. Padre Island National Seashore which is a national park has gas wells on it owned by private companies and the land right is leased.

This was the big deal when Sarah Palin was running With McCain and the their whole "drill baby drill" slogan. She was trying to force the govt to open up more federal land in Alaska for drilling.

They let the oil companies on the land to drill and the companies pay a small fee and reap massive profits off US tax payer owned land.

No idea if that's the case here, but honestly I wouldn't be surprised.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20046528)

I assume the rapid increase from 2011 til now, is due to fines? Kinda like if you don't pay the IRS the fines quickly add up to more than the amount initially owed.

What it's starting to look like, is this guy was ranching there and paying fees. Then in 1993 for some reason he stopped paying the fees.

Some time along the way from what Dyno Mo posted the BLM decided to change the amount of cattle a rancher could have to a max of 150 head. That of course is a devastating reduction.

Now the issue is, why did he stop paying the fees in 1993 and when did BLM make the change to a max of 150 head of cattle? If they are connected, then I can understand him fighting. However if he stopped paying because of the Mormon BS and then later BLM changed the rules to 150 to force him out.. Then he has no rights as he wasn't paying his due.

Even still it is Federal land and the govt does have the ability to change the rules. Meaning just because people might of done some 50 years ago, doesn't mean it will continue today.

Seems over all there is far too much bias on all sides reporting and very little accurate reporting of what led up to this.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20046532)

Just a theory so far
http://www.naturalnews.com/044670_bl...ndy_ranch.html

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 20046521)

i am sure.. and if it's a fracking matter, there is reasons here that matter to all of us. and not just the good people of Nevada.

Originally Posted by EddyTheDog (Post 20046555)

He had no legal recourse because what he is doing is illegal - If he thought it was unjust he should go through the courts like everyone else - Not call up the militia...

I think most of us will be treated in a way that we feel is unjust - Its a good job that we don't all do what he is doing though.....

Originally Posted by EddyTheDog (Post 20046555)

He had no legal recourse because what he is doing is illegal - If he thought it was unjust he should go through the courts like everyone else - Not call up the militia...

I think most of us will be treated in a way that we feel is unjust - Its a good job that we don't all do what he is doing though.....

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20046550)

sure, but there's no reason to kick cattle off that land so they can lease fracking rights. also, this started way back in 1993, long before fracking was on the radar.

It seems like the blm is wanting the land for themselves and kicking peeps off it but I'm not seeing fracking as the reason.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20046586)

Yea I agree with you. I don't like fracking, but it's not like cows are going to stop it. The wells only take up small areas as well as the holding tanks.

There is just way too much bad info from all sides that seem to be cherry picking parts for their side. With out knowing first hand whats going on it's hard to make a call.

One thing I do not like is the lease for the 40 thousand acres of BLM land going for $1.27 mil and allowing 6 oil & gas companies to essentially pay peanuts to rape public land for profits. That may not be the case here in this situation as the fracking is just a theory but such a small amount of money for a lease like that is fucked up.

If that land was owned by private individuals there is no way in hell the oil & gas companies would get away with only paying $1.27 mil to lease 40 thousand acres. The US tax payer is getting fucked twice once by lack of income from public land and second by the oil & gas companies at the pump.

I will say this, as far as the video, the Rangers did do the right thing at the end. instead of making that situation worse at that moment and pushing the issue likely leading to a more violent confrontation, they got in their trucks and left.

Of course that was then and what happens next guess we will see when actual swat teams get used..

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20046561)

Here's the smoking gun that he could have used to legally resolve this matter::::::


Government plans to euthanize hundreds of threatened desert tortoises it was supposed to protect

Federal funds for a Nevada-based desert tortoise conservation center are running dry and wildlife officials plan to close the facility and euthanize hundreds of tortoises that were once classified as ?endangered? and are currently considered ?threatened.?

http://desertlocalnews.com/governmen...ed-to-protect/

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 20046611)

since the turtles didn't just show up, i can only assume they have been fending for themselves for the entire time humans have been in the area..

Originally Posted by sandman! (Post 20046655)

so its ok not to pay your bills now if you dont want to ?

i dont get it :2 cents::2 cents:

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20046456)

A fellow at Forbes by name of David Blackmon offers a level-headed analysis, filed in a different cabinet as it were, of what many consider to be the by-and-large unreported substance of the enmities:

The dispute in question goes back to 1993, when the BLM cut the grazing rights of the rancher in question, Mr. Cliven Bundy, from a herd of thousands of head of cattle to one of no more than 150 head in order to ?protect? a species of desert tortoise that inhabits the same area of the state. Most mainstream news media reports on this story naturally did not inform their readers of this fact, or of the fact that this tiny herd allotment would be spread over the 158,000 acres of land to which Bundy held the grazing rights.

Thus, by effectively slaughtering the bulk of Bundy?s herd in such a blunderbuss way that the varmint interest is scarcely served, BLM can be understood by reasoning folk to have attempted to run Bundy -- and other ranchers -- off the land entirely. Here again is Blackmon:

When one understands these key facts, one realizes that such a tiny herd of cattle on such an enormous space would have no impact at all on the desert tortoise or any other plant or animal that lives there, and that no rancher could possibly make any sort of a living running such a tiny herd. Thus, the obvious conclusion is that BLM rendered its absurd decision with the clear expectation of running the Bundys off the land entirely. And that is a very reasonable conclusion to reach. After all, Mr. Bundy is in fact the ?last man standing? here ? the BLM strategy has worked so well that every other rancher with grazing rights in the region has given up and abandoned what had been their family?s way of life, in many cases, for generations.

Thus, BLM?s regulatory determination and implementation was very arguably, in the language of judicial review as it applies to administrative ?lawmen,? ?arbitrary and capricious? -- and therefore unlawful, whether a federal court has so declared or not.

Originally Posted by sperbonzo (Post 20046867)

I was about to post something similar to this. People who are just saying that Bundy is just a thief needed to get more info on the background of this situation.




.

Originally Posted by EddyTheDog (Post 20046873)

It does sound like he has a genuine grievance - I don't think this the best way of dealing with it though - I also wonder if the whole thing has been hijacked by some groups and unfortunately this farmer is going to come out the worst...

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20046895)

Forbes and infowars lol

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20046895)

Forbes and infowars lol

Originally Posted by DWB (Post 20046905)

All this is because the US government wants money to allow his cows to eat their grass on land they are not using, and the guy isn't paying it?

Sorry, I have not been following this. But at a glance, it seems a little silly.

Originally Posted by bronco67 (Post 20046267)

I don't know who is wrong or right -- but I do know it's getting harder for cops be dicks when an entire crowd is taking smartphone video. Just imagine if there was no video of the incident. There would be some tazed people laying all over the place.

Every law enforcement org should be videotaping every interaction they make with the public. It would probably keep cops in line more, and show exactly how something went down.

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20046504)

Did you even read any of the shitty articles? Hell I even posted it here. He has almost one thousand cows and he stopped paying fees 20 years ago. :error:error:error:error

Originally Posted by dyna mo (Post 20046538)

that's a pretty extreme claim. Besides, fracking can take place with cattle around. those 2 things can mutually exist. Hell, companies are fracking in neighborhoods elsewhere, there's no reason to clear out the cattle so the blm can do fracking leases.

Originally Posted by SilentKnight (Post 20046983)

After readin' all this thread...still not sure which side to take.

I'll wait for the skirmish clips on YT.

Originally Posted by baddog (Post 20047029)

as I was saying . . .



I always loved his news sources

And if they let Bundy stay, why can't everyone else bring their cattle there?

Originally Posted by Matt 26z (Post 20047107)

...Yes, it was technically illegal for the rancher to continue using the land...

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20046284)

It seems ranchers are allowed to use the BLM land for cattle grazing, but they have to pay a fee. This guy seems to be the only guy whom refuses to pay the fee as all the other ranchers in the area do pay it....

Originally Posted by crockett (Post 20046284)

Well after digging through a bunch of shitty articles...


It seems ranchers are allowed to use the BLM land for cattle grazing, but they have to pay a fee. This guy seems to be the only guy whom refuses to pay the fee as all the other ranchers in the area do pay it. Added to this this Cliven Bundy guy used to pay the fee but he stopped paying in 1993 claiming he had the right to use the land for free because of his Mormon ancestors.

He claims he owes 300k in fees the fed govt says it's closer to 1.1 mil in fees from 1993 to now and it's just short of 1k cows.

So it's a case of some guy thinks he can use public land for free to make money with out paying a dime because his ancestors did, but they don't own the land nor does he. On the flip side regardless if it's $300k or 1 mil that's a lot of money to pay in fees, but I guess we are taking over 20 years meaning 300k probably isn't bad if he had on average a thousand cows each of those 20 years. 1 mil is likely pretty excessive..

Originally Posted by _Richard_ (Post 20046384)

this is hitting banoosh and OWS as of yesterday

tazering pregnant women is bad mojo

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20047297)

The guy said fuck you I'm not paying because of some Mormon bullshit. He said they had no rights to be the landlord. When consider he stopped paying in 93, they gave him lots of rope. Also info wars is fiction.people are posting opinion sites and op pages. Read the Las Vegas review article sums it all up without the hyper partisan bullshit. And vend if i posted daily kos or mother Jones links you would be bitching how they are bullshit.

Originally Posted by tony286 (Post 20047297)

The guy said fuck you I'm not paying because of some Mormon bullshit. He said they had no rights to be the landlord. When consider he stopped paying in 93, they gave him lots of rope. Also info wars is fiction.people are posting opinion sites and op pages. Read the Las Vegas review article sums it all up without the hyper partisan bullshit. And vend if i posted daily kos or mother Jones links you would be bitching how they are bullshit.

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20046243)

Not sure what to think about this so far, but I do think the BLM sending all those idiot officers with tasers out and dogs barking is not the right way to deal with protesters.

We have a right to protest, no matter what the cause, people on this forum bash the Tea party because they have a different view, but they have the right to protest. I hope this doesn't turn into another WACO, because believe it or not, there wasn't any illegal guns found there and that's why they "Said" They raided them for.

Originally Posted by trevesty (Post 20047465)

He's pretty much said "I don't have to obey the law, come try and make me assholes lol!! i'm so tough!!"

Now they're making him their bitch rightfully so.

Originally Posted by AaronM (Post 20047369)

All of what other ranchers are paying these fees? There are ZERO other ranchers as the BLM ran them all out. Bundy is literally the last man standing.

This thread is overflowing with misinformation and ignorant opinions...Even for GFY standards. :2 cents:

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20047468)

You putting words in someones mouth makes you look like a real asshole.

If he had threatened the officials, they would have arrested him, you're not very smart are you?

I've actually read a lot of this and I have yet to see where he has made any threats other than he has a gun. Stay out of these threads till you can muster an opinion based on fact and not hype!

Originally Posted by trevesty (Post 20047472)

Oh ok, well go have fun on infowars reading a bunch of bullshit by looney tune dorks off of their medication. :thumbsup

Originally Posted by Vendzilla (Post 20047476)

And you declare some defense of your stance defaming one of the sources used in this thread in defense of your ignorance, FAIL!

Look again dip shit, many sources have come up. Fuck, must be early in the morning for you!

Originally Posted by trevesty (Post 20047478)

Stop projecting old man. :winkwink: