Federal Snipers Train Guns on Family For Filming Cattle – Federal Bureau of Land Management Confiscate Grazing Land To Protect “turtle”…. Generational Rancher Faces Feds !

NEVADA [...]  “I counted, they had 11 vehicles all with at least two agents in each one, maybe more,” he said. “They also had four snipers on the hill above us all trained on us. We were doing nothing besides filming the area.”

None of the occupants in the four family vehicles were carrying any fire arms, Bundy said.

Over their vehicle loudspeakers, the BLM officers ordered the family to leave the area, Bundy said.

They said that we had no first amendment rights except for up by the bridge where they had established an area for that,” Bundy said.

The BLM has established two fenced areas near the City of Mesquite, that they have designated as free speech areas for members of the public to express their opinions.

First Amendment Area

This is a big one folks.   Mr. Cliven Bundy is well positioned to be the next “Randy Weaver”.  If the federal snipers take him out, we meet at the “Old Mill”, and ride at dawn !

The cattle were being rounded up by BLM officers as part of a crackdown on Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who has refused to pay “grazing fees” demanded by the feds as a result of a re-classification of 600,000 acres of federal land in northeastern Clark County which Bundy claims has been in his family for generations.

FULL STORYNEVADA - A man was arrested on Sunday afternoon in connection with the cattle roundup currently ongoing by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) on nearly 600,000 acres of public land in northeastern Clark County.

cliven bundy 1

Dave Bundy, son of Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy, was reportedly arrested by BLM officers while he was standing along the north side of State Route 170 between Bunkerville and Riverside, taking photographs of his family’s cattle that were grazing along the Virgin River down below.

According to Dave’s brother, Ryan Bundy, several members of the family had gone out for a drive in several vehicles to try to monitor the ongoing federal action to remove their father’s cattle from the range. They were not travelling on recently restricted federal land, but were travelling along the state highway looking north across the valley for signs of cattle, Ryan Bundy said.

Tensions have been high in the region over the past two weeks as federal agents have moved in to the area to remove what they are calling ‘trespass cattle’ belonging to Cliven Bundy.

The cattle roundup is part of a dispute that has been going on for more than 20 years. Bundy has insisted that he does not need to recognize federal government jurisdiction on land that his family has used, improved and ranched since the late 1800s.

Federal officials have ordered Bundy to remove his livestock from a grazing allotment that was retired back in 1999 out of concern for the federally-protected desert tortoise.

Lawsuits have been ongoing back and forth in the federal courts for more than two decades now. Last fall, a series of federal court orders required Bundy to remove his cattle within 45 days. If he did not, the federal agencies were authorized to seize any cattle left on the land and Bundy was expressly forbidden to interfere.

cliven bundy 2

On March 27, BLM officials announced a temporary closure of roughly 300,000 acres including everything on the eastern bench of the Moapa Valley, the Mormon Mesa, Virgin Peak range, Bunkerville Flats area and much of what is being called the Gold Butte complex.

Seizure of the Bundy cattle began on Saturday, April 5. By the end of the first day, contract cowboys had removed 76 head of cattle from the area south of the Virgin Peak range, according to a BLM statement. Another 58 were removed on Sunday.

A large number of BLM law enforcement officers have been dispatched to the area to assist and provide protection the contractors during the operation. BLM officials will not say just how many of these officers are on the ground. But they insist that these forces are necessary, given the tension in the area regarding this action.

“Mr Bundy has created a larger burden to the taxpayers through his statements,” said National Park Service spokeswoman Christie Vanover during a press conference call held Sunday afternoon. “He has said that he will ‘do whatever it takes’ and that his response to the impound will ‘have to be more physical’. When threats are made that could jeopardize the safety of the American people, the contractors and our personnel; we have the responsibility to provide law enforcement to account for their safety. The greater the threats, the more security that is needed to provide public safety and the greater the cost to the American taxpayer.

We are hopeful that lawful protests don’t escalate to illegal activity.”   (continue reading)

Learn MORE

About these ads
This entry was posted in 1st Amendment, 2nd Amendment, A New America, Abusive Cops, Dept Of Justice, Environmentalism, EPA, First Amendment, media bias, Police action, States, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

328 Responses to Federal Snipers Train Guns on Family For Filming Cattle – Federal Bureau of Land Management Confiscate Grazing Land To Protect “turtle”…. Generational Rancher Faces Feds !

  1. sundance says:

    April 19th is “Patriots Day”.

    If the feds are *intentionally* trying to provoke confrontation, and they are aiming to fire a warning shot to all non-compliant Americans, they’ll make their moves on the Bundy family that day – April 19th.

    • Edward Teach says:

      It’s simple really if you step back and look at it honestly.

      “Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy, who has refused to pay “grazing fees” “

      Bundy makes a living fattening his cattle on public land but refuses to pay for the privilege because he has been given a free ride for a long time.

      “Federal officials have ordered Bundy to remove his livestock from a grazing allotment that was retired back in 1999 “

      He has been fighting the ruling for 15 years the whole time making bank without paying for the food his cattle are fatting up on.

      “Last fall, a series of federal court orders required Bundy to remove his cattle within 45 days. If he did not, the federal agencies were authorized to seize any cattle left on the land and Bundy was expressly forbidden to interfere.”

      He had plenty of time to move his cattle from public land and he refused. His grace period came and went and the feds still gave him extra time to stop stealing from the public to fatten his cattle, and Bundy continued to profit from the theft.

      ““He has said that he will ‘do whatever it takes’ and that his response to the impound will ‘have to be more physical’.”

      He made threats that’s why the feds sent in the guns.

      Note: The free speech zone is the real tragedy here. Not the government collecting past due fines for theft.

      Just sayin.

      • Edward Teach says:

        If you dig a little deeper you will find that Bundy has not paid his grazing fees for more than 20 years. But I would venture a guess that he kept the money he got from his fat cattle.


        Good read to put things in perspective about grazing fees and BLM land use.


      • michellc says:

        You need to do a lot more research and not just read the recent reports. Most of these reports are leaving out how he tried to pay Nevada who rightly owns the land the grazing fees. There is no way any one report or any post can do justice to all the ins and outs of this.
        I’ve been following and reading this case for 20 years along with many others similar.

        Short version though is Nevada and this sheriff are the real losers, they should have stopped this a long time ago. This same thing happened to another rancher in another county and that sheriff told the BLM if they arrived with rifles they would be met with the same and the BLM backed off. That has worked in other instances around the country as well. This man took a stand and hoped he could force his state to do the same, they have failed him. A lot of people talk about fighting for what’s right and pushing back, stopping the federal government, yet when a person acts instead of talks, not only does he face the wrath of the government, he’s slandered by those same Americans for doing what they talk about doing. It’s never been about the cows or paying a fee, but I can see we have many that won’t ever be able to grasp that.
        I don’t have links to all of this because most of my information comes from mailed newsletters and farmer/rancher magazines that I’ve received over the years.

        Here is one link with some of what farmers and ranchers are suffering due to the federal and state governments. http://rangemagazine.com/

        • Edward Teach says:

          “It’s never been about the cows or paying a fee, but I can see we have many that won’t ever be able to grasp that.”

          Fact he owes the government over 300,000 in fees, not to mention the fines.

          “Cattle have been trespass on public lands in southern Nevada for more than two decades. This is unfair to the thousands of other ranchers who graze livestock in compliance with federal laws and regulations throughout the West,” the BLM website announced. “The Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter administratively and judicially. An impoundment of cattle illegally grazing on public lands is now being conducted as a last resort.”

          “Bundy says he “fired the BLM,” and vows not to pay one dime to the agency that he accuses of plotting his demise.”


          • michellc says:

            And you’re quoting the BLM, yeah that’s kind of like who am I going to believe Obama or the Pope?

            Like I said I’ve been reading about this for years and I have even met and talked to this man for about 30 minutes over 10 years ago.
            I actually have two rancher friends who I’m worried sick about right now who flew out there Saturday afternoon.

            Once again you’re missing the big picture. He never had a problem paying fees, he had a problem with the federal government unconstitutionally charging him fees for land that should belong to the state.
            Have you read one article where he has denied that he refuses to pay the federal government fees? Many rancher that they talk about are no longer there, because they left instead of fight.

          • Edward Teach says:

            “It’s never been about the cows or paying a fee, but I can see we have many that won’t ever be able to grasp that.”

            Now lets look at the other side of the coin and pretend he was paying his fees.

            He is the only rancher in the area who has had a government grazing permit. Wherein he receives a deep discount around 80% on grazing land. Where the GOVERNMENT holds a GUN to the head of other ranchers in the area giving him a huge advantage in the open market for his beef. For whatever reason the Government puts down the gun. (Actually they are pointing at him for grand theft.) Either way he has lost his federally subsidized unfair advantage of the state holding a gun to his competitors head.

            He had his day in court, well to be fair he has had over two decades in court where he lost on every front to keep his unfair advantage. And on top of all that he has not paid a single dime. His words not mine.

            • michellc says:

              He’s had his day in court fighting for your rights as well, courts got it wrong, courts ignore the Constitution.
              The real tragedy here is the state and the sheriff, who both refuse to stand up to the federal government. In the end I’m sure he will lose everything he has, very possibly even his life and he has always known that, yet he was willing to stand and fight. He knew things would be easier and a heck of a lot cheaper to pay the fees, but he also knew it was wrong and he also knew that if somebody didn’t stand up and take a chance that the federal government would continue to expand their power and he also knew eventually they’d kick him off the land regardless of what hoops he jumped through. His main reason though was trying to fight to stop them from abusing power, expanding power, and taking power they had no right to take. He’s tried to shame his state and his sheriff(s) into defending the constitution along the way.
              Not many people left in this world who will risk it all, not only his life but the lives of his children to defend the rights of Americans.

              • michellc says:

                Oh and when the government comes and takes your property to protect some 3 legged rare lizard, remember that you sat and criticized the ranchers who were warning you while the government was taking public and private land to destroy their livelihood.

                Yes the same thing is happening with private land.

              • Edward Teach says:

                “His main reason though was trying to fight to stop them from abusing power, expanding power, and taking power they had no right to take. “

                The fact is that a government grazing permit gives exclusive rights to property owned by the people. They do this by using force to keep other ranchers out. That’s right they use guns to keep everybody else out except the permit holder.

                Until now he was just fine with the state holding a gun to the head of honest hardworking ranchers for all the years he held an unfair advantage over them? He had no problem with the jackboot thugs of the state using force to ensure he got an unfair advantage over them? He only has a problem when the state turns the guns on him, and lumped him with everybody else by revoking his permit. Fifteen years ago I might add.

                He has always had a choice, he could pay landholders in the free market for grazing rights to fatten his cattle at fair market value like everybody else in the area. But instead he refuses to pay what he owes and wants the very same jackboot thugs who are forcing him off the land and keep their guns pointed squarely on all the other ranchers in the area so he maintains his unfair advantage.

            • LetJusticePrevail" says:

              Bundy stopped paying the fees when the BLM reduced the amount of acreage available for his use,claiming to do so to protect the habitat of the Desert Tortoise. THAT was why he stopped paying them. They were effectively using the tortoise to limit his ability to maintain his livestock.

              What good purpose does the Desert Tortoise serve to the environment?

              • Edward Teach says:

                If they cut his land allotment he could just do what every other rancher in the area does. Pay fair market value for grazing land. If he can’t make his ranch profitable without the GUNS of the state giving him a huge advantage then maybe he shouldn’t be a rancher. There is an abundance of land available for the going rate that every other rancher pays. The reason the other ranchers pay a fair price for grazing their cattle is because they don’t have the GUNS of the state to force the taxpayers to subsidize their overhead.

                • LetJusticePrevail" says:

                  Really? How does allowing this (or any) rancher to graze his cattle on public land cost the taxpayers a dime? What, do you honestly believe that taxpayers are paying to have the natural foliage cultivated?

                  And, you seem to be ignoring the point that X amount of cattle can be adequately grazed on Y amount of land. When the BLM decided to prohibit grazing on a large amount of acreage his family has used for over a century, they effectively dictated the size of his herd.

                  • Edward Teach says:

                    I will explain it one more time then you are on your own.

                    The government hires people to ensure all government land is being used in accordance with whatever the mandate is. The government sends an agent out to count the cattle to ensure the rancher pays his fair share. Well not really when you consider they charge 80% less than fair market value for grazing. They also have to check the brands to ensure no other rancher is cheating the welfare rancher. All this managing cost’s money, that is the reason states hand over land to the feds so they don’t have to cover the cost. The taxpayer pays for this regardless of which government agency does the actual managing.

                    I am not arguing that the government is managing the land properly, they likely are not. But they are managing it none the less.

                    As for paying for the foliage cultivated that is what this case is all about the BLM right, wrong, or indifferent want the foliage for the turtles. They have the foliage in place they are juts not selling it at a disgusting discount any longer.

                    Y land is just as available to this rancher who has been sucking at the government tit as it is available to the ranchers he is competing with at market. Only now he will have to pay the same as everybody else. No different than every other single rancher in the area has been doing and is currently doing without exception.

                    Once again where was this crusade when this rancher was using the jackboot thugs with guns to keep honest ranchers from using the exact same resources so he could have a monopoly on cheep grazing land that belongs to the people?

                    This all comes down to the argument of the commons. No matter where you stand on the issue of the commons you can’t say ONE rancher should have a monopoly on the use at 80% below fair market value. Oh wait I almost forgot he’s in arrears over 300,000 dollars not counting fines. So he isn’t even paying that.

                    Would you like to be one of the honest cattle ranchers in the area come sale time?
                    What price can you sell at that he couldn’t devastate you, and put your honest hard working ass out of business? All with the help of the GUNS OF THE STATE.

                    Bottom line is the honest taxpaying ranchers who looses out at market is paying for Bundy’s subsidy.

                • Maybe THIS is the truth? The BLM wants his land for oil and fracking? Seems to be where the arrows are pointing – just read the article!


              • ctdar says:

                I don’t recall anyone asking the turtle what he wanted 😏

            • truthfarmer says:

              It’s a pity you can’t actually think this through and that you somehow believe that preemptive rights -from prior to the establishment of the BLM- are irrelevant.
              Perhaps it might make a little better sense to you if you consider that the courts are federal, the agencies are federal, the change in the “rules” came from federal impetus, and this man and his cows are NOT federal.
              Unjust laws are not laws at all.
              This is a war against farmers and food producers and if you don’t grow everything you eat, you had better begin to grasp this fact. Look into the destruction of farmers and ranchers vis policy and government controls.

              • Anyone in Northwestern Oregon or passing through heading to Southeastern Nevada? I need a ride. No more Wacos…no more Ruby Ridges. Enough is enough! Of course my concern is for the desert tortoise (in case FEDGOV is monitoring this, and I know they are). Just wish to get to that “free speach zone” so I can express my true feelings. Thank GOD we live in a country where individuals have the right of self determination and where Government honors it’s commitments to same. My intent of course, is to be a human shield for a defenseless turtle trying only to survive against the relentless onslaught of bovine turtle stompers. “Oh the humanity”…..

  2. maryfrommarin says:

    “All your acres are belong to us.”

    Not meant as a joke.

  3. April 19th is a long and storied date. BATF raid on the Waco compound, OKC bombing, Warsaw uprising. Be a shame to add a new event to the list…
    The feds playing games with grazing rights is not a new thing. And they get away with it every time.

    • benzy says:

      It’s not just the land they are grabbing… it’s Bundy’s cattle too. And with NO compensation for the “confiscated” cows. Of course, to be fair, I can only imagine how much damage one of those cows could do if it stepped on a desert tortoise. /sarc

      • doodahdazee says:

        Obama Cattle Thieves. What next? I prefer a Burger and Beer over Turtle and Cactus Juice.

    • Sam says:

      April 19 is also Patriot’s Day in memory of the 19th of April in 1775 when embattled farmers fired the “shot heard ’round the world” at Lexington and Concord. Ironic that the modern day king’s soldiers pick that day to attack.

  4. vickie says:

    I have two ranches in South Park, Colorado, (yes there really is such a place). I keep them unfenced and open for the cattle ranchers to let their cattle graze on. The government owns so much of the land around there with no grazing rights and the Califorians have come in and fenced theirs off. Ranching is a hard life. I admire those who do it. This use to be the American way now they are getting squeeze out. The UN Agenda 21 says no one should be allowed to eat meat. They even went as far as to say people can eat bugs. I think this is a part of it. In Agenda 21 there is to be no private property ownership. People will be put into stack and pack units in the cities and the open land will be a play ground for the elites and the animals, it’s off limits for the rest of us. They call it substainable living.

    • stella says:

      Sad, vickie. I have been to South Park and to North Park, too (a friend of mine owned land near Walden). It’s a beautiful state, with so much variety, and mostly small towns, and nice people. Everybody (who hasn’t been there) thinks of Boulder, and Denver, and Colorado Springs. I think of Cripple Creek, and Walden, and Silverton and Ouray, and Telluride.

    • czarowniczy says:

      And I remember, back when I was stationed at Peterson, how the BLM was closing off owner access in parts of Colorado to land owned inside of Federally-owned areas. One woman has been allowed to access her ranch through the one dirt road that went from a state road through Federal forest to her family farm that was grandfathered. They cut her ability to access it by motor vehicle and then by horse (even with a horsey diaper) to the point where if she left to go to town she’d be denied the ability to return. I remember the wonderful time we had in Utah with the BLM and arguments over the water that was on/under our lands or trickled through it. At one point it looked like there was going to be a shootin’ war with BLM. that’s a big part of why i live where I do now and why I jealously guard my large lake – no BLM close enough here to see, never mind smell. BTW, with us here it’s a %^$#@ toad they hold over our heads.

    • Sam says:

      I’ve lived in Colorado for 46 years and I hear you. The Feds, whether Forest Service, BLM, National Park Service or other entity, have been closing off public land to the public for decades. They refuse to renew decades old grazing leases. They dig berms and ditches and put up gates and close off dirt roads that have been open to the public for decades. They remove those roads and lakes and creeks from maps so no one will know about them. They let brush and dried plants and dead trees build up until lightning starts a catastrophic fire the chars everything and sterilizes the ground. The feds in Washington decide what to do and they do it all on the basis of “endangered species” (whether the species in question is endangered or even a separate species or not) or simply because some DC bureaucrat decided the land should be “wild” and without people or cattle.

      This has been simmering in the Western US for decades and the pace is picking up under Obama’s administration. Yes, it’s UN Agenda 21 which will create a society much like that in The Hunger Games books and movies, only without the games. It’s past time the states fought back. I’d prefer legally and without violence. The feds may have other ideas.

      • nyetneetot says:

        “They let brush and dried plants and dead trees build up until lightning starts a catastrophic fire the chars everything and sterilizes the ground. ”

        And that is exactly what happened in our nations very first national park.

      • vickie says:

        I actually gave up on Colorado three years ago and moved to rural Georgia. I lived in Colorado for 60 years. It was sad to see what has happen to it. I love Georgia and find the people stick together. The state government here folds their power around the citizens of Georgia. It’s home now. I probably will own the ranches there in South Park Colorado untill the federal government steals them from me or I pass away. I will never go back to Colorado to live.

        • Ed Watts says:

          I absolutely LOVE Southerners! “Forty Miles from Poplar Bluff” — “…where a man thinks of his neighbor and not his neighbor’s wife…”

    • Stormy says:

      vickie, my great-great grandfather was Sam Hartsel.

      [ When did rootsweb get swallowed up by ancestry? ]

      • vickie says:

        Stormy, I have read about him. One of my ranches is The High Chaparral I’m sure he would have known it. It is right outside of Hartsel. Was it his?

  5. Aslan's Girl says:

    What would we do without our cattle ranchers? Why is the government trying to stop them? They provide food for the whole nation…

    Is it because of cow farts hurting the environment? Is it part of Michelle O’s war on obesity? The last 2 are j/k.

    • Crystal says:

      It’s prohibition of private property rights and controlling another food source. Look what the Feds did to the Central Valley of CA, the fruit & vegetable capital of the US. They destroyed farms that had been in families for generations, all for a minnow that’s not indigenous to the area. What this will do is force desperate farmers to sell on the cheap to either the government or one of its favorite oligarchs in order to set up their own collectives which will export fruits and veggies using the same migrant labor.

      I read a few months ago that the EPA was going to confiscate millions of acres of privately-owned ranch land in Western Montana to give back to the Indians. All part of the Communist takeover.

    • Stormy says:

      Beelzebub’s administration has been engaged in a war with food producers for quite some time now.

    • Ed Watts says:

      Ah, but the lefties would command us all to be “vegan” if the vegans/vegetarians had compromised enough of our legislators. Your “j/k” might be closer to “the truth” than you think.

  6. Aslan's Girl says:

    I know this is FBLM, but the EPA must fit in here somehow since it’s about a stupid turtle. EPA’s war on Americans continues?

    • LetJusticePrevail" says:

      The EPA’s regulations have worked so well to “legitimize” whatever action was levied against other citizens who had otherwise legal uses for their land, why not use them to put the independent ranchers out of operation, too? I mean, hey, if a business model works, why abandon it? /s

  7. Lawyer says:

    A few points. First, are you telling me the turtle cannot survive in such open land? Surely the cattle are not everywhere. What a crock.

    Second, doesn’t the govt. have to declare war on a group before sending out the helmeted and armed quasi military swat teams on unarmed human beings? Sure this is a rhetorical statement, but good Lord. For real?

    Bad stuff a coming I fear.

    • auscitizenmom says:

      I fear you are right.

    • LetJusticePrevail" says:

      “Bad stuff a coming I fear.”

      NO! “Bad stuff” isn’t coming, it’s already here and it’s been here for quite a while now.

      First they came for the loggers, but I said nothing, because I am not a logger.
      Later they came for the coal miners, but I said nothing, because I am not a miner.
      Next they came for the farmers, but I said nothing, because I am not a farmer.
      Then they came for the ranchers, and I said nothing, because I am not a rancher.

      When they come for me, will there be anyone left to ask for help?

  8. It amazes me each and every time our benevolent government, at the behest of the various environmental nut cases, puts human lives behind those of animals. I realized that there is a certain “order” to our ecosystem and that it is always a shame when a species becomes extinct, but human lives and livelihoods should never be sacrificed to the cause du jour when it comes to endangered species. Different species have become extinct over the ages and it is part of the cycle as Darwin explained – both within a species and outside – with the strong adapting and surviving. When man steps in and alters the natural course of events, bad things happen.

    Our government will use any excuse to infringe upon our constitutional rights and the environmentalists just add popular fuel to the fire, providing a PC excuse to confiscate property and use force, including deadly force, to do so.

    • doodahdazee says:

      The BLM Armed Forces Attack. Good Grief. Over a Turtle. Looks like the invasion of Iwo. Maybe people will wake up but doubt it until too late.

    • Sharon says:

      It amazes me each and every time our benevolent government…puts human lives behind those of animals.

      Internalize the reality that they are doing it intentionally. They intend to do it repeatedly until their purpose for doing it is fulfilled. It is not accidental on their part. It is not lack of understanding. Persisting in a response based on “I can’t believe they are doing this again….” tells them they are free to continue. Stop being amazed. Believe it.

      I mean no harshness toward you, txconsmom, I am attempting to address a common perspective of many normal Americans who “just can’t believe” what has happened.

      • LetJusticePrevail" says:

        Amen, Sharon. Each new revelation of the oppressive nature of our government is followed by exclamations of “I can’t believe thet’re doing this” and “Bad times are coming” which is, in essence (as you pointed out) a denial of the fact the “Bad times are ALREADY here” and that “They ARE doing this and have been doing it for quite some time.”

        The water isn’t slowly warming any longer. We’ve already reached cooking temperature and now it’s time for the frogs to jump out and fight, or die.

      • maryfrommarin says:

        Disbelief needs to morph into active resistance.

        • I agree that we need to “resist” but how? Who will lead the resistance? It seems that every time someone actually attempts to rally a resistance he turns out to be an extremist who is quickly either arrested, gunned down or demonized as a nut by our government and media. What we need is a movement of a huge segment of the population willing and prepared to die for the cause. Unfortunately, too many are all for it but only want to be involved on the fringes, cheering on the few who are willing to actually get out on the front lines – despite their belief in the movement. Our society is so fractured now, our lives so overwhelmed, our core families spread throughout the country and the world, that we tend to live in our comfort zones and unwilling to leave them. We are too busy trying to make a living and provide for the immediate needs of our families that we don’t have the time or resources to stage an effective resistance – much less the stomach for it.

          There are so many parallels to what is happening in the U.S. and what has happened historically in Europe and I continually think of music and scenes from Les Miserables when mulling over the solution here. This particular discussion brings to mind “The Last Battle at Dawn” when the resistance, the group of determined young men, realize that “the people of Paris still live in fear” and that the people did not rise in opposition to them, leaving them alone to die for the cause.

      • Diana S says:

        It’s called a normalcy bias.

      • It’s not that I “don’t believe it” I’m just amazed by it and not in a good way. It is incredible to me that we have deteriorated this far as a country in a mere few hundred years. Our government now has little resemblance to the government our forefathers gifted us with and the visions and dreams they held for future generations. Instead, it has become as corrupt as the oppressive government these brave men and women fled from in order to form this great nation.

  9. Jay says:

    Many ignorant statements have been made on this thread. First, the damage the cattle do to the Desert Tortoise is through habitat destruction, not trampling. This land is extremely marginal for cattle grazing because it is so arid. Any overgrazing removes plant cover that is the food of the tortoise. Second, this matter has been litigated and the rancher lost. If the rule of law matters to you, you should expect that he would have complied with the legal outcome and removed his cattle. Third, mouthing off as he did, the rancher gave the SWAT-team mentality a boost, as indicated by the Federal official’s comments regarding the extra cost for cattle removal having been caused by Bundy’s veiled threats.

    This website did a great job with the Zimmerman travesty, but it should have the wisdom not to get involved in disputes where there is not a clear injustice. The land is public and the Federal government has the responsibility to manage it for the public interest. That includes the protection of the habitat and the fauna.

    • stella says:

      Why don’t you educate rather than chastise? Provide citations or links, for example.

      • Jay says:

        I made three statements. The second and third were in regard to facts stated in the article that you reposted and certainly need no citation for anyone who is a careful reader. The first statement was in regard to the reason that BLM biologists want to close the area to grazing. Here is a citation regarding the status of the desert tortoise http://www.werc.usgs.gov/ProjectSubWebPage.aspx?SubWebPageID=44&ProjectID=216&List=SubWebPages&Web=Project_216&Title=Synopsis%20of%20conservation%20information%20on%20the%20desert%20tortoise.

        There are some rangeland agricultural researchers who claim that overgrazing helps desert tortoises. See https://journals.uair.arizona.edu/index.php/rangelands/article/viewFile/10776/10049.
        My point is that this is a scientific issue for which individual conservatives have no more reason to have a strong opinion than they do about which antibiotic should be prescribed for sinusitis. Unless that conservative is actually an anarchist who believes that the public good is irrelevant. Well, in my view, such a conservative is just as much a piece of crap as the scofflaws who terrorize neighborhoods with boom cars. You folks need to have better judgment about what Federal actions are worth resisting.

        • stella says:

          That’s a little better, and more in line with the crowd sourcing that helped during the Zimmerman trial. Ask yourself: Did you mean to educate, or just show how smart you are? Your first comment was: Many ignorant statements have been made on this thread. Now, you say, Such a conservative is just as much a piece of crap as the scofflaws …….

          Since you are obviously superior to the rest of us, it amazes me that you stick around – unless you are just trying to demonstrate that you think you are superior to everyone else in this thread. Maybe you are, but what exactly does that accomplish?

          • joanfoster says:

            Stella, you need to cool your jets a bit. Jay makes some valid points, to enlighten – not to show how smart he is. We like to harp on this board about being a nation of laws and yet after reading a multitude of articles on this issue, it appears to me that Rancher Bundy believes he can ignore the ones with which he disagrees. He has chosen to ignore orders of the court to limit the scope and size of grazing and to pay the Federal Land Management his grazing fees. He has chosen to ignore both orders. Let’s try to stay on the side of truth.

            • stella says:

              I have as much a right to express my opinion as Jay or you. Which do you prefer being called – a piece of crap, or ignorant?

              There is a way to make a valid point – particularly when you are a new voice in the conversation – without insulting or belittling others.

              Perhaps he is right, and you are right. The point can be made politely. I didn’t say he was a liar – I said he was a smart ass, and he is. As an admin, I will always point that out.

              He began by praising the work done on Zimmerman. It was done by cooperating as a group. Name calling isn’t necessary to find the truth.

              Did I call him a liar? I did not.

              Jay has made a total of five comments on this board – all on this thread today. None of them were particularly civil; in fact, they are confrontational.

              It’s a matter of tone, Joan.

              • joanfoster says:

                “Since you are obviously superior to the rest of us, it amazes me that you stick around – unless you are just trying to demonstrate that you think you are superior to everyone else in this thread. Maybe you are, but what exactly does that accomplish?”

                Indeed Stella, it is a matter of tone, isn’t it?

                Facts do matter and Jay and Michael Teach have taken an approach which I believe to be more in line with the facts of this case than the “moral outrage” often found here over “big, bad government”. That not to say that in every instance government is not found wanting, but in this case I believe the moral outrage is not appropriately applied. By the way, the validity of one’s comments is not predicated upon whether one has commented five times or five thousand times. I thought perhaps we should just clean that little misconception up for future instruction.

                • stella says:

                  Well, joan, you’ll have to put up with my “tone”, like it or not. Sorry. It’s part of my volunteer job to moderate conversation here. Jay is a newbie, and I took exception to his tone.

                  That’s the way it is. I did not question him about his facts. If you don’t like it, that’s just too bad.

            • Sharon says:

              I’m admin also. Believe me – stella does not need to cool her jets. Stella’s jets aren’t even warm yet.

              • joanfoster says:

                It seems the administration is in a bit of a twit today over controlling the conversation. How phony and how sad!

                • LetJusticePrevail" says:

                  How so? I’m not witnessing any “control” over the content of the conversation. Just a request that the “tone” of the conversation remain civil.

                  • michellc says:

                    I’ve been gone awhile and I admit my memory before is still a little hazy, so some of these names may have been here before, but I don’t remember such sassy posters.

                • PatriotUSA says:

                  For real joanfoster?? I think you you need to read again it is about civility and proper decorum on this forum. The admins here do an incredible job of managing the site and comments and yes, there are boundaries here. It is quite simple, keep it civil and clean.

    • doodahdazee says:

      Is them Turtles any good to eat?

      • Jay says:

        The desert tortoise is closely related to the gopher tortoise of the Southeastern Coastal Plain. Gopher tortoises are protected in Florida. In spite of this, ignorant and inhumane people still “eat” them. Let me tell what “eat” amounts to. After catching a sack full of gopher tortoises, the criminal doesn’t kill them humanely. No, he takes a hammer and bashes a hole in the front end of the lower shell, pokes two fingers into the hole and pulls out the muscles of the pectoral girdle, which yields a quantity of meat about the size of a chicken-nugget. Then throws the tortoise down to die in agony, and hammers a hole in another one. It takes killing forty tortoises to have a meal. Anyone who thinks that is constitutionally protected, red-white-and-blue behavior is not someone I want on my side when the SHTF.

        • Chip Bennett says:

          There’s a difference between protections against poaching (which is essentially what you described) and destroying the livelihood of private citizens in order to treat the very presence of a stupid creature as sacred.

          Progressives’ infatuation with placing the value of rats, spotted owls, and tortoises over the livelihood of humans is a form of idolatry.

          • Jay says:

            Bundy is a private citizen who wants to do what he pleases with public land. He has no right of that sort. I answered dooda’s question as I did to illustrate the extreme end-point of the anti-environmentalist attitude. If you want to be associated with “human beings” who kill inhumanely for a tiny morsel or who believe they are above the law in their use of public land, then you need to think about your values.

            • Chip Bennett says:

              Can you respond to what I actually wrote? The activity you described: killing 40 animals in order to acquire a chicken-nugget sized amount of meat from each is an act of poaching. There is no need to destroy the livelihood of ranchers in order to prevent such an act. Conflating the two merely destroys any argument you may have had.

              “Public” lands belong to the people – after all, We The People are the public, and We The People are the government. Presumably, ranchers are part of the public.

              • joanfoster says:

                Yes, public land belongs to “the people” – not just Mr. Bundy. The real argument here is being conflicted by the reference to saving the turtles. While that may be part of it, the real issue is Bundy’s ignoring the latitude by which he was allowed to graze and for not reimbursing the government for those grazing rights. He was allowed to graze 150 head of cattle but it appears he got greedy and decided that the land belonged to him and he would do simply as he damn well pleased. The government probably allowed this to go on for far too long.

                • LetJusticePrevail" says:

                  Ahhh,but Mr Bundy isn’t trying to deny the use of that land to other members of the public, is he?

                  • joanfoster says:

                    Ahhh, but I never implied that Bundy was attempting to deny others from use of the land. Don’t know how you came to that conclusion.

            • joshua says:

              well, we are ALL private citizens, and we all OWN public land. He did not DO AS HE PLEASED, he had agreement for years to do as he did. He had EVERY right to pursue his personal efforts, and NO other humans were harmed at ALL by his actions. No one lost their livelihood, or were threatened with violence, nor had their private property confiscated without compensation under threat of guns.

              • joanfoster says:

                Please refer to the facts. He did as he pleased by ignoring the order to limit the number of heads he grazed and ignored the government’s billing for more than 20 years of the price to graze the cattle. I would say he did what he damn well pleased and now he will reap the consequences. Just because his family has used this land for generations doesn’t give him ownership rights. I know farmers who allow people to hunt deer on their farms and have for years. The day they say “stop”, is the day the deer hunters have no more rights. Why is this so hard to grasp.

                • LetJusticePrevail" says:

                  What right did the government have, in the first place, to charge for grazing cattle on an open range that existed long before any settler, or any government formed by settlers ever existed? Bundy’s family has been grazing cattle on that land since 1877. The Taylor Grazing Act wasn’t written until 1934 and the BLM wasn’t formed until the Grazing Service and the General Land Office were merged in 1946. Why is THAT so hard to grasp?

                  The Desert Tortoise seems to have survived quite well prior to this intrusion by the federal government.

                  • joanfoster says:

                    If you are implying that Bundy essentially has ownership rights to the land because of his “claim” that his ancestors have been grazing there since the mid l800s and that his opined ownership trumps the establishment of the FBLM and the Taylor Act, then why not take your argument back a few thousand years and just say he has some rights to the Garden of Eden. Now that is a stupid conjecture, of course, but the fact that his ancestors used this land is not germane to the facts or arguments which the government has about this case.

                • LetJusticePrevail" says:

                  “If you are implying that Bundy essentially has ownership rights to the land…”

                  Nope, never said that or implied it. And neither did Cliven Bundy. What he claims is that his family has made efforts to sustain the land and that he should be allowed to have use of it for the purpose of grazing cattle, and that the state,not the federal government, should be the body that decides how the land can be used, and by whom.

                  As to the suggestion about the Garden of Eden, well that StrawMan argument just went down in flames, didn’t it?

            • michellc says:

              What exactly in your opinion is humanely killing? Do you prefer cattle and hogs have a bullet or bolt in their head? Would you rather chicken have it’s head pulled off or chopped off with an axe? How about rabbits? How about fish? Crawfish and lobsters? Frogs, I bet you’ve never tried to kill a frog before you cut off his legs, I can tell you it’s not easy.

              I just wonder though since you’re so concerned with inhumanely killing of animals, how do you feel about abortion?

              I very well could be misjudging you, but I’ve had this discussion with people before who are so concerned with humanely killing an animal, who see nothing wrong with abortion and then question me about my morals. If you’re not one of those people I apologize in advance.

        • joshua says:

          ever watch how a slaughterhouse kills swine and chickens? you are a pathetic whiner, like all the people that do not identify food as food, but as tender little souls of animals. If our forefathers had thought and acted like you pontificate, they would have died off like the Indians when their “food” was slaughtered for FUR, not for food.

          • michellc says:

            Many times over the years I’ve had someone who wanted to learn about their food, usually they want to see the process because they want to raise their own poultry for meat. Most never get past the head removal part before they’re gagging or vomiting and/or calling me barbaric and/or inhumane. Then they tell me they’re going to continue buying their chicken from the store where they’re not inhumanely killed because they could never be so inhumane.
            We’ve decided to not try to teach people who ask to be taught anymore due to the risk of having some animal rights fanatic demanding we be charged with animal cruelty. But it sickens and saddens me that people are so removed from reality that they don’t comprehend that somebody must kill their food before they can eat it. As for killing it humanely, what exactly is humane? Like I asked in the other post, bullet or bolt, pull a head off or chop a head off? Either way they’re killed and being as how I’ve never had either, I go with my gut and do what I feel is the quickest, easiest, painless way as possible.
            I’m also not going to apologize for killing them or claim to feel bad about it. When they’re alive they get well fed and plenty of fresh water and I do my best to keep them safe from predators who will eat them alive.

            • stella says:

              Funny, the killing part never bothered me, but I would never consider a chicken as a “pet”. What bothers me is singeing the feathers. I can’t stand the smell.

              • michellc says:

                The killing part is the easy part, the dunking them in hot water is the nasty part I agree. The plucking I never cared much for either, but my dh made an electric plucker and now that part is a breeze.
                This pet chicken stuff is just a little crazy these days. Chickens in the house, chicken diapers, chicken treats, pretty little water and feed dishes. Going to the chicken aisle in some of the farm stores is like going down the dog aisle.

                • stella says:

                  You’re kidding. Not to be insensitive, but chickens are stupid, and they poop everywhere. Who would want one for a house pet?

                  • michellc says:

                    I kid you not. They are taking backyard chickens to a new level. The chicken diapers were just an internet thing and I laughed at them, then I saw them for sale at our local farm store.
                    There is a lady that comes into where my daughter works and wants to talk to her about chickens all the time because she bought chicks from us last year. She’s proud of the fact that one of her hens lays her an egg every morning in her dining room behind the curtains.
                    She says now her friends want chickens too because they think it’s so neat that it lays in her house. That is so disgusting to me.
                    Search on the internet for some chicken forums and you’ll either want to gag or laugh until you can’t breathe.

                  • michellc says:

                    Told ya. It’s a crazy world we live in today.

                    My husband says they want a chicken which is the dumbest animal on earth next to a turkey for a pet because it’s smaller than a turkey and they can be smarter than their pet.lol

        • doodahdazee says:

          Wonder if it is as good as Manatee..(Sea Cow).

        • texan59 says:

          Jay – I don’t think anyone here is in favor of tortoise genocide as a general principle. However, living in TX for over 30 years I’ve seen what the gov’t. does with respect to “saving” animals. If you don’t think this is more of a political game than a political one, you haven’t been awake for about the last 40 years. I’m old enough to remember when the Alaska pipeline was built and the tree-huggers got the pipeline rerouted so the caribou wouldn’t all die. Now the caribou follow a substantial length of the pipeline. Here in San Antonio, a multi-million dollar road project was halted for a couple months because someone found a spider long thought to be extinct. To determine if it was in fact said spider, the gov’t. had to kill it first. Our oil industry is being threatened because of some prairie chicken. In CA, smelt are being “protected” over folks being able to use water to grow crops. Although more smelt are killed by this action than if they were released. Here’s a little tidbit about the tortoise.


          The gov’t. owns nearly 85% of the land in NV.


          It’s always about politics. :evil:

          • kkdgrace says:

            And what about those salamanders- or whatever they are- in New Braunfels? The preservation of which has had a big impact on water use policy. And they aren’t even “native” to the springs in which they reside. “Dumped” there years and years ago, yet we must now preserve their “natural” habitat. Horse- hockey!!

            • kkdgrace says:

              It’s always about CONTROL!

              • texan59 says:

                There are thousands of stories just like this. I can’t kill a bald eagle but if I own a windmill it’s no problem. :evil:

                • michellc says:

                  Can’t kill a chicken hawk either because they’re protected, yet anytime I’m driving down the road I see them on every electric pole. I’m thinking of getting me a huge windmill so I can legally kill them.lol

            • michellc says:

              A few years ago we found a weird looking bug, something I had never seen before. We searched and searched and finally found a picture of it, I can’t remember now what it was called but it was supposedly endangered and wasn’t native to this area. I told my dh that we’d better keep our mouths shut or they’d come take our land and our neighbors’ land to protect the darn thing. I really wasn’t joking though.

    • Rob Crawford says:

      The land has been grazed for decades; if the tortoise is at such risk, it’s gone. If there are still tortoises on the land, then grazing doesn’t put them at risk.

      And where in the Constiution does it say our rights are only effective in areas designated by the government?

      • doodahdazee says:

        They set up free speech zones now. Like at the GOP convention and the Zim trial. Amazing. Maybe if they put up bleachers around the zone people could watch the free speech. They could even sell tickets. Free Speech is more endangered than that Turtle.

      • Jay says:

        The land is public. An individual has no “right” to use public land for private profit. National parks were declared in many places in the Philippines to protect the biota and the watersheds. But the corrupt government there allowed politically-connected timber barons to clear-cut almost all of those parks and that country is an environmental disaster. If you don’t recognize any limitation on your rights, that makes you an anarchist.

        Regarding your first statement, you have absolutely no understanding of either population biology, demography nor restoration ecology. Even if the tortoise population was extirpated, elimination of grazing and reintroduction of some tortoises can allow the restoration of the population.

        • doodahdazee says:

          How big is the Free Speech Zone? Is it fenced in for safety?

        • joshua says:

          WAIT….Public means BELONGS TO THE PEOPLE….maybe MANAGED by the GOVT organizations BY CONSENT OF THE PEOPLE. National Parks have been hijacked by nannystaters for their conceited elitist ideology….NOT for the good of the PEOPLE.

        • Rob Crawford says:

          Why should I give a rip about the fate of a tortoise? Think of it as evolution in action.

          Why should our corrupt government favor a different species over citizens who were quite clearly using the land in a safe, sustainable manner? Because Green cultists place the fate of a borderline species over the fate of honest men?

          I happen to value people and our Constitutional rights more than I value a tortoise. I’d sacrifice every tortoise in the world to keep us free.

          • michellc says:

            I’ve told the story before about an Oklahoma city that has been trying to build a lake for the city water supply for years and the EPA and federal government have continued throwing up roadblocks, for insects, reptiles, birds, amphibians, there have been so many different creatures I can’t keep up with all of them.
            They borrowed the money to build the lake, had a 20 year note that’s long been paid off, yet they still have no lake because when they pass one hurdle and start again they’re stopped again for some other creature.

        • LetJusticePrevail" says:

          The Desert Tortoise is being used as an excuse to limit the use of this land, just like the Delta Smelt is being used as an excuse to divert water resources in CA. The EPA regulations are merely legal tools being used to eliminate small farms and ranches so that corporate conglomerates become the only suppliers of food to the American people.

          Tell me what biologically essential role is played by either the Desert Tortoise, or the Delta Smelt? And, if it’s so easy to achieve the “restoration of their population”, why not start “farming” both the Smelt and this Tortoise, for later release if, by some remote chance, their existence is essential to the environment? (which I strongly doubt)

          Face it, no matter what humans do, we will have an impact on the environment. And that impact will increase as our population density increases. There is more than one way to manage the environment, and it does not have to amount to a strategy of completely limiting our population to “sustainable levels” in the manner that some are currently claiming. This is merely a ruse so that humans can be managed by other humans.

          • Murse says:

            A voice of reason!

          • maryfrommarin says:

            “The EPA regulations are merely legal tools being used to eliminate small farms and ranches so that corporate conglomerates become the only suppliers of food to the American people.”

            YES x 1,000 ! And that is exactly the unspoken reasoning behind CA’s High Speed Rail. Construction of which, peculiarly enough [major sarc] began in Central CA–the most idiotic place for setting up a commuter rail to ease road crowding BUT the very best place for seizing generationally-owned and operated family farms through “eminent domain”, and then selling the huge remainder of the seized land to Agribusiness after the rail line is built.

        • Malik Nidal says:

          Wrong. The lard owner owns and holds title to the land.
          The federal gov’t makes claim to the water and mineral rights on behalf of the public.

    • Chip Bennett says:

      Screw the desert tortoise.

      The livelihood and rights of life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of American citizens trump the plight of a freaking tortoise.

      • doodahdazee says:

        If yer Harse steps in one of their holes it will break his leg. They are dangerous hazards to safety.

    • michellc says:

      Courts have ruled against him and the courts time and time again ignore the rule of law. Just look at Obamacare for the greatest example of this.

      The constitution has been trampled, what is the ultimate rule of law, with the land grabbing by the federal government.

      One thing you are right about is this has been going on for years and some of us have actually been aware and following it for years along with many other cases. This man has done what many haven’t done and fought to the bitter end but there are others who are fighting like this man. I’m sure this is a warning to them what will happen if they don’t stop fighting. Not all of these cases are on public land either(public land that the federal government unconstitutionally declared public land) but private land as well and courts have ruled against the landowner as well.
      This though might turn out differently than Ruby Ridge and might get real ugly if militias get involved, which is being said everywhere by militia members.

      There has to come a time where we either stand and fight like our founding fathers did against what the government called the rule of law or we bow down to the feet of our king. There were those like you then too who would rather be ruled than claim your rights.

      As for the stupid tortoise, it’s a tortoise not a human and other humans other than this man and his family are going to be harmed due to this, Nevada residents can be guaranteed they’re going to see their beef prices skyrocket for one.

    • yankeeintx says:

      It sounds like you feel the BLM knows what is best for the land (and the turtles), but how do you reconcile the fact that they are also in charge of the feral horse population? The feral horses/burro populations are out of control, and the BLM does not have the funding to do anything about them, but they do have the money to round up these cattle.

      • michellc says:

        They do nothing about the feral horses for the same reason they choose the wolves over ranchers livestock, the animal rights and environmental nutcases.
        It’s always real easy for people to blame the ranchers and farmers and call them the unreasonable ones when it’s not their livelihood at stake.

        • yankeeintx says:

          I’ve lived in Wyoming, Colorado, and now Texas. The ranchers I have known are good stewards of the land because their livelihood depends on it.
          Like you mentioned above, there is so much more to this story. His family has been ranching and improving this land long before BLM even existed. Why not just fence off 5-50 acres and herd the turtles instead!

          • michellc says:

            People don’t understand what his family has done to improve the land. They don’t understand the half of it, they read a statement by the BLM and automatically turn him into the bad guy.
            Does any of them know about a Nevada law where grazing fees are to be paid to the state and those fees to be used for land conservation? Fees going to BLM are just swallowed up into the big hole of federal government. Does anyone know how much land in Nevada has been swallowed up by the federal government much without a whimper by the state?

    • Murse says:

      The “rule of law” is relevant when the courts follow the Constitution, not the edicts of some extremist sitting in the EPA/BLM bureaucracy. The EPA especially has been running roughshod over the Constitution and if the court is left-leaning it affirms EPA decisions. So, don’t come on here and talk about the “rule of law” when every day there is a new example of the government making their own rules that usurp the Constitution. Obamacare is the most blatant example of what I speak.

    • Stormy says:

      Is it Troll Tuesday in the Treehouse?

  10. dsb steve says:

    Another reason to dump Bohner. Republican congress should be passing bills that cut the funds that provide BLM with weapons.

  11. Yakmaster says:

    These Liberal Federal judges are dangerous for our Republic. We need them replaced by a Conservative administration because they are, by court orders, following Liberal agendas. Obama has his people in place to implement his Executive Orders to go around any laws he doesn’t like, Federal Judges to interpret the law in his government’s favor, and Holder’s Justice Department to cherry pick prosecutions against enemies of the State. If this sounds diabolical, don’t forget Obama is clearly our LAWYER-IN-CHIEF. His “fundamental transformation” of America is proceeding just as planned.

    • doodahdazee says:

      They oughta order Pajama Boy out there to round up the Turtles and get them out of the way of the Cattle.

  12. doodahdazee says:

    Another routine Par for the Obama Administration. Every single day they screw up something new.

  13. ctdar says:

    “read more” link of thread didn’t work for me?😔

  14. ctdar says:

    This will get ugly. I for one would like to see some sort of link to Bundy of the original property parcel….which would establish his rights against the govts “reclassification”. However if he has made claim of land but not paid taxes for years as alleged, he is screwed.

    • P.Spinach says:

      Except hopefully, by touching private property, Bundy’s cattle, they’ve negated it. Maybe a lawyer can help us understand, but the land claim was being disputed so the Feds technically had no rights to take action?

  15. P.Spinach says:

    Cattle have no rights, but the desert tortoise does.

    What will they do with the 78 confiscated cattle? The SWAT team have to feed them, no? Will they buy and bale hay? If any of the herd die, time to sue.

    Battle is on. In more ways than one!

    • LetJusticePrevail" says:

      “Cattle have no rights”

      Maybe that explains the “Ban Bossy” campaign?

  16. P.Spinach says:

    I can see Obama’s Swat rounding up the cattle, and then scratching their heads once they boarded them up on a truck to fed land somewhere, wondering, OMG now what? Cow patties everywhere on their fed trucks. Although they probably hired contractors on tax dollars.

    • joanfoster says:

      While we are attributing this to the Obama Adm., it is very likely that Geo. Bush would have been conducting the same operation unless, of course, he needed the agency to help him find those missing WMDs.

      • Chip Bennett says:

        I do love the way that Trolls can’t help but out themselves.

        • joanfoster says:

          What a brilliant comment, Chip. Someone makes a comment you disagree with and they are automatically “trolls”. This is a code word used by people like you who cannot find the words or the arguments to make your points except to make the Obama Adm. the culprit. Indeed the Adm. is the culprit for many things, but this is not one of them. The issue here transcends administrations and if you believe that baby Bush would not be conducting the same operation, you are sorely misguided. I can still smell the stench of his compassionate conservatism. I just happen to believe that those who think for themselves don’t always sing in concert with the choir director.

          • WeeWeed says:

            Is this a verbose way of saying, “It’s Bush’s fault!” ? G-d, that gets old…

          • Chip Bennett says:

            You’re welcome to be critical of the GWB administration; I certainly was. But in this conversation, your GWB reference was a complete non sequitur. Used in that context, it is an attempt to divert the conversation, and to incite. Such behaviors are indicative of Trolls. I just call ‘em as I see ‘em. Your continued attitude merely supports the conclusion.

        • LittleLaughter says:

          It’s inevitable isn’t it Chip? ;-)

      • P.Spinach says:

        Geo. Bush? Ya think so? He was reading pet goat to kindergarteners not setting up a Presidential Podium replete with Teleprompter and Oval Office Obama Logo, in a third grade classroom, while his Old Lady fed the elementary school 5 to 13 year old prisoners “prison food” on cardboard moldings more expensive than the 3 little grape tomatos served, attempting to deprive young minds of nutrition and thereby subject them to ready adoption of liberal and common core (note the key term common as in common, base, unspectacular, brown shirt, rote parroting) cult brainwashing. With you though, all he has to do is pay less than minimum wage. $5 an hour and a free internet connection. Admit it. Obama’d swoop a drone on you in a New York second if it served his Agenda 2X.

  17. Shannon says:

    I hope Gerry Spence’s firm hears about this and comes to the Bundy’s aid.

    • Murse says:

      Yes. Spence once was asked by friend why he decided to defend Randy Weaver (Ruby Ridge), that he thought he was wrong to defend such a man who holds despicable ideas. Spence wrote the friend a letter explaining his decision:

      “This man is wrong, his beliefs are wrong. His relationship to mankind is wrong. He was perhaps legally wrong when he failed to appear and defend himself in court. But the first wrong was not his. Nor was the first wrong the government’s. The first wrong was ours.

      In this country we embrace the myth that we are still a democracy when we know that we are not a democracy, that we are not free, that the government does not serve us but subjugates us. Although we give lip service to the notion of freedom, we know the government is no longer the servant of the people but, at last has become the people’s master. We have stood by like timid sheep while the wolf killed, first the weak, then the strays, then those on the outer edges of the flock, until at last the entire flock belonged to the wolf. We did not care about the weak or about the strays. They were not a part of the flock. We did not care about those on the outer edges. They had chosen to be there. But as the wolf worked its way towards the center of the flock we discovered that we were now on the outer edges. Now we must look the wolf squarely in the eye. That we did not do so when the first of us was ripped and torn and eaten was the first wrong. It was our wrong.”


      • Shannon says:

        Great passage. I read that book when it came out. Thank God for people like Gerry Spence.

        • jordan2222 says:

          I have all of his books and need to make myself get motivated to read them. He has retired but it would nice to see him take on this case.

          Ruby Ridge is not over for many of us.The money could never replace the blood the Feds shed intentionally that day.

          • I met Randy Weaver some year or so after his ordeal (only because of the Hell FEDGOV subjected him to before that), through a mutual friend. I was living some 25-30 miles away at the time. He is NOT, nor did I believe he was, a racist anti Government wacko, but a TRUSTING (to his misfortune) guy next door, every man type American. To know the horror he experienced when the FEDGOV murdered his son and wife before his very eyes is to understand evil itself. We now have another family in Nevada facing the very same fate. If I had the means, I would not, COULD not stand by and let this happen again. Pray for the Bundy’s……they not only NEED it, but they DESERVE it!…… I no longer recognize my Country…..

            • jordan2222 says:

              I was quite surprised to read what Spence said about racism. I had never actually heard that before.

              During the fiasco, I had friends who knew Randy and his family that kept me updated. IMO, it did not get nearly the national attention it warranted. My friends also knew two others involved…. both Bo Gritz and Gerry Spence. During that time, I realized just how small our world is and how easy it is for like minded people to find one another.

              • As was I about Spence’s remarks regarding Weaver’s supposed racism, but as we all can see now, that pejorative has been used by the usual suspects as well as (anymore) some that surprise us. As far as like minded people finding each other, wouldn’t you agree that the TREEHOUSE is the most AWESOME place for such? ……. side note….. I always appreciate your contributions to the discussions here.

                • jordan2222 says:

                  This is an awesome site for meeting people who have similar beliefs. Many of us got here via the Zimmerman story but soon found sundance to have amazing talent. The “management” team keeps us focused.

                  Thanks for your compliment.

                  • Yessir…..the best most awesome collection of Patriots since Lexington. Isn’t it amazing how the WWW has removed our fear of being “alone” in our beliefs!?!? I thank God for my own “stumbling” upon this “sanctuary” of reason and the collective knowledge and rational display of wisdom, compassion, Spiritual Christianity, Constitutional adherence, and rememberence (Sharon) of better times experienced and the desire to return there. My daily prayers will, and have from day one, always include this “refuge” and the exceptional people who occupy a “branch” here. My life has truly been enriched and blessed by you and the majority (99.9%) of those who “climb” the tree and take a perch therin. Thanks must go to Sundance and his admins’ for giving us this outlet and the opportunity to express our oppinions on any given subject, or indeed, any subject or thought we might choose independently. God Bless you all, and jordan2222, again, I appreciate your wise and altruistic posts. Many times when a subject du jour has my ire enflamed and I wish to explode, your posts will bring me back to a position of quiet introspection and the realization that everyone else is experiencing the same ire, and thus my “want” to vent is unnecessary. Thanks for being here…..

      • Stormy says:

        Constitutional Republic … until 1913, anyway.

  18. Abagail says:

    An appropriate and valid use for this SWAT team would be in Louisville against marauding black animals who threaten endangered white lives.

    It appears the desert tortoise can hold its own.

  19. joshua says:

    where does it state that SNIPERS GET TO THREATEN CIVILIANS? SNIPERS???!!!!

  20. eweturn says:

    Similar stories reported here, by FoxNews

    “105 day grazing season, the family was visited by government employees 70 times and received an additional 40 certified letters containing various citations and notices. ”

    The full program included Gibson Guitars and True the Vote

    • doodahdazee says:

      Paying BLM EE’S Millions to watch Cattle chew their Cuds seems about right for The Obama Administration. They probably weight each Cow Pattie and test it for possible endangered grasshopper remains too.

    • hoosiergranny says:

      And in the Fox News Special, the government (BLM) confiscated the cattle and then charged the rancher for confiscating and disposing of those same cattle. Anyone who says this is about rule of law rather than government intrusion and power hungry bureaucrats is only fooling themselves.

  21. Sassy1 says:

    America’s “Free Speech Zone” extends from the northern border with Canada, to the southern border with Mexico, from the Pacific Ocean on the west to the Atlantic Ocean on the east. The Feds are acting unconstitutionally in that regard by setting up “free speech zones.”

    Secondly, the farmer has pointed out that the turtles eat the cow dung, it provides a source of protein for them. But if the Feds were truly concerned about the turtle, and interested in providing for its safety, it would be a simple thing to take a portion of the land and designate a refuge area for them. Problem solved.

    However, as we know, it is not about the turtle. It is about control, similar to Obamacare, Common Core, you name it, “control the people.” This is over the top, though. Snipers trained on unarmed American citizens. Too much.

    • ctdar says:


    • michellc says:

      Yet when people fight back against the government, they’re called the extremists.

      • LetJusticePrevail" says:

        Only if they’re white,productive members of the populace. If they’re black, they’re called “victims” and if they’re unemployed illegal immigrants they’re called “undocumented residents” who deserve an “Act of Love”.

    • Coast says:

      Bush and Cheney did that “free speech zone” garbage too. Wrong is wrong.

    • Stormy says:

      I saw a story in a 5th grade Common Core READING textbook last week about GLOBAL WARMING.

  22. chitownmom says:

    I’m a bit confused. Why was it necessary to prevent grazing in order to protect the turtle? Wasn’t this land originally grazed by plains bison? What is the justification for this?

    • czarowniczy says:

      BLM logic determined by people in the DC Beltway who get nervous whenever they’re out of sight of a Starbucks. Lot like the USDA ‘farm experts’, many of who’s experience with agriculture doesn’t extend beyond the meat and produce sections of their local Wallyworlds.

      • kadar2012 says:

        Kinda like the social workers in the children and youth services who have no children but know better than you because of their degree in book learnin’. ;)

        • czarowniczy says:

          Yep, as retired Fed I can authoritative say that the Feds have proven (to themselves) that ethnic and gender statuses are far more reliable indicators of job performance than skills, knowledge and abilities. Especially true when you solve the problems associated with that policy by doing away with any ratings of performance to rate…performance.

        • P.Spinach says:

          Kinda like Mooch who raids bison ribs at midnight who doesn’t need the calories for lack of want in 120 personal White House taxpayer servants cooking, cleaning, washing, manicuring, writing memos for her dictating that young growing children with bountiful playful and learning energy stick within an ounce of each food group minus some for good measure. A huge monstrosity of a woman bullying school age children while her husband forces them to listen to him drone standing a pulpit for height, drilling fear and respect for the podium into the next generation of Americans.

          • P.Spinach says:

            I said that already, didn’t I? :( Just staying on the topic of bison being free to graze on land.

    • stella says:

      Very good point.

    • LetJusticePrevail" says:

      Well, that makes sense until you look at a map of the natural range of the bison:


      And the natural habitat of the desert tortoise


      Only a small area of their natural ranges overlap, probably because of the difference in environments (grassland needed to sustain Bison while the tortoise requires the drier desert climate)

      But look at the locations that the BLM has closed for the collection of Bundy’s cattle:


      The Bureau of Land Management’s temporary closure of the Gold Butte, Mormon Mesa and Bunkerville Flats areas takes effect today and lasts through May 12. During that time, federal officials and contract cowboys plan to impound several hundred cattle left on the range by Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy as part of a dispute that is about to come to a head after more than 20 years.

      Gold Butte, Mormon Mesa, and Bunkerville Flats are in the northeastern corner of Clark county (same county as Las Vegas) which is in the southeastern area of Nevada, near the border with Arizona. This is just outside the natural range of the Bison. But, more importantly note that the range of the desert tortoise is not limited to the area used by Cliven Bundy, and that that range includes nearly ALL of Clark County, including Las Vegas. Yet, I don’t see Harry Reid, objecting to expansion in Las Vegas, do you?

      • LetJusticePrevail" says:

        Interesting facts about “Federal Land”:

        The Federal government claims title to nearly 28% of all land in the US (27.7%) including:

        (top ten by percentage)

        81.1% of Nevada
        66.5% of Utah
        61.8% of Alaska
        61.7% of Idaho
        53% of Oregon
        48.2% of Wyoming
        47.7% of California
        42.3% of Arizona
        36.2% of Colorado
        34.7% of New Mexico

        but only

        0.3% Connecticut
        0.3% Iowa
        0.6% Kansas
        0.7% New York
        0.8% Rhode Island
        1.1% Illinois
        1.1% Maine
        1.1% Nebraska
        1.5% Indiana
        1.6% Massachusetts
        1.6% Oklahoma
        1.8% Texas


        • michellc says:

          Just wait on Oklahoma, Kansas and Texas, if we don’t fight back they will soon be claiming our land for the darn prairie chicken.

          I’ve been flooded with mail recently about the darn prairie chicken and what I can do on my property to save it. I put it in the shredder and use it for chicks to poop on. I blame the GOP and Wildlife Department for these people getting my address.

          • LetJusticePrevail" says:

            My solution to the “Prairie Chicken” problem:

             photo grilled-chicken-ck-1809129-x_zps3108ee23.jpg

          • Murse says:

            The federal government will only take what the States allow them. Nullification is a valid strategy. The problem is that backroom deals are made between the Fed and the State politicians, especially if the current State pol has aspirations of holding a national office. Think Chris Christie, he is the poster child for sell-out Republicanism on the State level.

            • michellc says:

              Oh our governor has kind of been doing her own doublespeak. Much the same as she’s done with Common Core, drones and playing her own version of queen. But she’s highly popular in this state so I guess I’m the stupid one with fears about our land.

    • Coast says:

      There is no logice…its an excuse. Logic would say that the impact is nill. That’s the real tragedy…its about control, not a true environmental problem.

  23. czarowniczy says:

    The Republican budget contains a provision to sell off a lot of the excess Federal lands that fat little urban-dwelling Federal civil servant bureaucrats have been using to produce retirements for decades. Beer bet on how that one will go? I can see the BLM and USDA circling the SUVs and deploying snipers as we speak.

    • Murse says:

      That is why the GOP leader has to be a Tea Party type. If the GOP can capture the Whitehouse and Senate and consolidate the House we can push for things like that and rollback some of the damage. The problem as someone has stated on here before is that the bureaucracy’s have to be gutted of the extremists that run them. Some believe that this is next to impossible given the federal employment laws, so those laws have to be challenged and repealed.

      • czarowniczy says:

        Problem is that during his reign the POtuS will infuse the Federal system with people who cannot be removed when he leaves – his necrotic appointments will metastasize through the system for decades.

  24. LetJusticePrevail" says:

    Might the real issue here be the water on that land, and how Harry Reid wants to see it used to supply the city of Sodom (Las Vegas) in Clark County, which is one of only three Nevada counties that voted to elect him to the Senate in 2010?

  25. LetJusticePrevail" says:

    Maybe our nation’s small ranchers should stage a “Million Cattle Drive” into Washington DC?

  26. LetJusticePrevail" says:

    The specific gravity of Methane is only 0.5537. Maybe we can fill Goodyear Blimp with cow farts and fly it to BLM regional office and then vent it into their air conditioning intakes?

  27. IntoTheFray says:

    As I don’t know what, in total, is going on here, I take no position on the cattle grazing, but
    since when does BLM have the authority to declare public/state lands a “Constitution free zone” and tell us where and when the US Constitution applies and where it doesn’t? When did they get the right to descent on innocent, unarmed people on public/state land with a militia armed with automatic weapons and snipers on the hill? The cattle/tortoise issue is a smoke screen. The real issue I see here is a government agency trampling the rights of citizens with overwhelming and unnecessary force to prevent the people from having full disclosure via photographs and observers.
    By the way, this same crap happened in Kalifornia. They used the desert tortoise as an excuse to close much of the southeastern desert to public use. Now, damn the tortoise and several other endangered species, they are building giant solar farms, the kind that sterilize the ground they are built on, fry birds when they fly through the beam, and wind farms, whose blades kill all kinds of protected birds when they hit the rotor arms. They established an off road vehicle park in a prime desert tortoise breeding area and a campground next to one of the best falcon rookeries know in the area, essentially preventing the falcons from using it.

    • LetJusticePrevail" says:

      “Now, damn the tortoise and several other endangered species, they are building giant solar farms, the kind that sterilize the ground they are built on, fry birds when they fly through the beam, and wind farms, whose blades kill all kinds of protected birds when they hit the rotor arms.

      You NAILED IT! These environmental issues are NOT about protecting natural resources, they are about allocating them in the manner the progressives deem fit. Just like individual wealth is being redistributed through federal “Tax and Spend” programs, our natural resources are being similarly “redistributed” through dictatorial fiat, and it’s not being done for the benefit of the American people:


    • carterzest says:

      Same thing happened on Hatteras Island. I shared this thread with a good friend and here was her reply:
      About a year and a half ago, I accidentally saw a documentary on the Internet about a place called “Hatteras Island”. It’s actually where the Cape Hatteras Light House (very famous) is located. 3 major ocean “streams” come together there, and the fishing is like the best on the East Coast. People go there from all over the World to go fishing (that is their income pretty much, fishing and tourism support.). There are not a lot of people who live on the island, but the ones who are there have lived there for 5 or 6 generations. They used to run the lighthouse so the ships wouldn’t crash into the island. Well, apparently the Audubon society and some other tree-huggers decided that some birds which are native to the island ( and which the islanders had been conserving for generations) suddenly needed to have like 100 square feet around every nest. They closed down the beaches. Even the ones they DIDN’T close could only be approached by going through the areas which WERE closed, so they were essentially off-limits too, since they could only be reached by boat (remember the place needed a light house!!). Can you imagine the effect this is having upon the island and its’ natives? There is only one road/bridge (which has needed to be upgraded and maintained for several years but the Feds just never seem to have enough money to do that) into and off of the island, and many families which had been there for generations are taking it off the island because there is no work on the island. The general fear is that once the population gets below a certain number the Feds will just move the rest of the people off the island forcibly and close the bridge, so every family which closes up their home and leaves is a major loss to everyone. I guess the Feds can have a claim on the island because of the light house and it’s located within a couple of miles of the mainland.

      At the same time, those homes and properties are BEAUTIFUL, the fish practically jump out of the ocean for you, the beaches are full of beautiful white sand, and I can just imagine the “Agenda 21″ folks looking at that island and licking their lips in anticipation of spending halcyon days in their own private vacation spot……..

      I have never seen anything else about this, you’d think it would be ALL OVER the Internet, Willie Nelson could do an Island Aid concert, etc. But, nothing. I wonder how many OTHER places there are in the Country which are experiencing the same type of take-over by EPA and their gov’t-sponsored organizations?

      • michellc says:

        So much is not heard because so much the national media refuses to cover and where ranchers and farmers are concerned for a long time the thought was band together and fight through the courts and that non-ranchers and farmers couldn’t or wouldn’t understand. So such things as websites and blogs and other methods of reaching out were late in trying to educate the public. Trying to get the media to cover it is an uphill battle, you can get sometimes local newspapers and local news media to cover it but it’s never picked up by the national media and usually dies as a blip one night 3 minute report on the local news.
        Then you have others who see the attacks coming from all directions, the government, the media, animal rights and environmentalists and big ag and it seems as if they’re on an island all alone.
        Money is another hindrance, it’s hard to fight a government with an endless supply of money and the special interest groups are about as bad as well as big ag. Then when you add in the government pits one against the other, you have some farmers separating themselves from the fight because they’ve found their subsidies to keep them going.

  28. Sharon says:

    I think one of the reason that well-intentioned conversationalists (let’s assume….) end up talking past each other on issues like this is because we waited far too long (as a nation) to start having the conversation. [ADD: And those who were attempting to be heard were ignored and mocked and told to shut up because they weren't smart enough to have an opinion.]

    The abuses and the over-reaches and the deceptions are about ten feet deep from sea to shining sea where the BLM and a few hundred other agencies are concerned. So it finally reaches the point where there is a trigger and a significant percentage of normal people say, “Ok. That’s enough. You’ve been wondering when it would be enough? THAT’S enough.” And guess what??? When those abused and lied about folks finally start speaking up, they probably won’t be using their inside voices.

    It’s kind of like the 5-foot nothin’ gal who takes her boyfriend’s head off with the 12-gauge about the 30th time he beats her up and everyone is shocked because, “She was always so sweet.”

    You have a nation of people who have been abused and lied to and manipulated for a very long time, and have tolerated it (in the name of good manners and against their better judgment), and they finally blow their top – it’s a little late to say, “Well, can’t we talk? You need to lower your voice now.”

    Too late. Think back to the colonies before the Revolutionary War. By the time they start speaking up, their supposed betters had mistakenly assumed that it would be possible to nitpick them to death by just pointing out that they weren’t doing their pushback right. Guess what? They didn’t care any more whether they were doing it perfectly right, or with the best of manners. They were sick to death of being shoved around.

    Those who now want to take the side of the government in the name of law and order and good manners are welcome to do that. Just stop being so offended when the government’s targets indicate they’re not listening to that level of “reason” any more. Y’see, they are fully aware of what it got them in the past – shafted.

    You want to talk to the farmers in Minnesota who, as a result of a series of wet years, have far less land to farm because (on THEIR PROPERTY) standing water has been a problem for several years in a row and – guess what??? There’s a new law on the books that says if water has been standing for that amount of time, the farmer cannot reclaim it for crops – it’s now considered wetlands. Isn’t that special.

    Guests should not presume on their own moral superiority when they’re late to an argument or a living room where they are a guest, and on top of that – using the very arguments that laid the groundwork for this national disaster a long time ago.

    • michellc says:

      Very well said Sharon.

      Some of us have been aware of this land grabbing and running farmers/ranchers out of business for years. Some of us have been fighting it for years in our own different ways. Some of us have sat in meetings all across this country to discuss how to fight peacefully, how to fight within the law, and sometimes that avenue works, but far too many times it doesn’t. I don’t have hundreds or thousands of acres nor do I use public lands that some have used for hundreds of years, so so far I’m not on their radar. So some may ask why did I care. I cared because some of these people were my friends but more than that I cared because I knew that when they get through with them, they’ll come after me and when they came for me and others like me with the smaller operations then they’d come for those with the backyard gardens and the house pet. Then they’d come for anyone who owned a house and a lot.
      Some of us cringe when we hear protected anything, because we know what that means.
      So yes some of us who have been aware get mad when those who haven’t been paying attention start defending the same government who have ruined the lives of those people we watched crumble before our eyes.
      We’ve made our mistakes along the way, one of them was not being outspoken enough to make others understand what was happening. I wonder though could we? I see so much, not just here but comments all over the internet now about this man being a lazy bum wanting to freeload. Yet they don’t even realize this man watched many of his friends and neighbor crumble before his eyes by the hands of the government. They don’t know the battles this man has faced and how many times he’s been knocked down and had dirt kicked in his face to get back up and keep on fighting. I wish everyone could spend just 30 minutes talking with him. Instead many are trying to label him as the bad guy. He’s bad for standing for principle and for standing for what he believes and knows if somebody isn’t brave enough to fight back then we all lose.
      People are calling him crazy for saying he’ll give his life and that he brought this on himself. I say most men would have given up long ago and knuckled under the government and moved out like many have done or the second choice like very few have continued to do and pay the mob.
      So yeah, he’s fed up, yeah he’s angry, because he’s tried nice, he’s tried the law, he’s tried getting his state and others to have backbone, for his troubles he’s been threatened, bullied, surrounded by guns and is now facing what he’s warned for years would happen if others didn’t stand with him. He was willing to fight and lose everything, and is now being condemned by some for it.

      • joanfoster says:

        Yes in indeed, rancher Bundy is fed up all right. He is finally going to have to pay the taxpayers for using their land and the costs of having his cattle removed. Don’t hold your breath on a big show of force on his part. Discretion is sometimes the better part of valor. Chances are Bundy has more support here than he does from fellow ranchers who didn’t find it unreasonable to play by the rules. Basically, Bundy is a squatter who picked on the wrong owners.

        • michellc says:

          All I can say is some people will deserve it when they find themselves in the crosshairs of the government.
          Also don’t speak to me about his supporters among ranchers, he has support more than just in Nevada but all across the country from ranchers and former ranchers who became former from the same government mobsters.

          • LetJusticePrevail" says:

            Well said Michelle. Some people just.don’t.get.it.

          • joanfoster says:

            Could you share some of that “massive” support information with us, especially from ranchers who have been playing by the rules while Bundy believes the rules don’t apply to him. I would really welcome seeing this vast outpouring you speak of put in some quantitative form.

            • michellc says:

              You know not everything can be found on the internet. Although if you really want to find some of it on the internet, you can check out FB and you can even search his name and find several websites with rancher owners and rancher participants who support him.
              Or you could have spent the last 20 years reading newsletters and magazines put out by farmers and ranchers or spent some time sitting in meetings with farmers and ranchers who have spoken out and for not only him but many other ranchers who have came in the crosshairs of the government.
              I personally have rancher friends who have flown out to show their support for him.
              Now will many of these ranchers broadcast across the internet their support, no they won’t, they’re busy trying to keep their ranches going and fighting with actions on the ground.

            • LetJusticePrevail" says:

              Cliff Gardner, a Ruby Valley rancher whose family was active in Nevada in the 1860s, called Thursday morning vowing his help.

              “I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone,” Gardner told the DVT. “I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984. Perhaps it’s difficult for the average American to understand, but protecting the individual was a underlying factor of our government.

              Other similar calls of support came from South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming and Arizona.


            • LetJusticePrevail" says:

              More than 100 supporters violated a crudely taped off “First Amendment Area” to rally in support of the Bundy family, erecting two flagpoles with the words “We the People” attached, above a flag which read, “Liberty Freedom For God We Stand”. The first amendment area stood empty, with one sign nearby declaring, “1st Amendment is not an area.”


              • michellc says:

                You found some I haven’t seen. But I don’t have the will to play the game anymore of providing links for them to just be ignored when they don’t fit the agenda.
                But he has a lot of supporters that you will never see on the internet as well. Some prefer to show their support directly to him, but he appreciates all his support no matter where it comes from.

                I’m really starting to wonder if the government doesn’t have employees who are paid to do nothing more than promote the government on the internet. I say this because you read comments from one site to another and the writing style is identical.

                • LetJusticePrevail" says:

                  “I’m really starting to wonder if the government doesn’t have employees who are paid to do nothing more than promote the government on the internet.

                  It’s a known fact that the government pays people to “astroturf” the internet to create the illusion that a large number of people support their progressive policies.

                  “You found some I haven’t seen.

                  It was my pleasure to do so.

                  • carterzest says:

                    Thanks MichelleC and LJP for your input! This has been very educational.

                  • michellc says:

                    I see you got what I knew would be gotten with your time of finding and posting them, ignored because it doesn’t fit the agenda.

                • Irish Eyes says:


            • LetJusticePrevail" says:

              “Range biologists demonstrated years ago that desert tortoises actually do better on land that’s being grazed by cattle and managed by ranchers. People who have lived in Southern Nevada awhile know that this business of “protecting the desert tortoise” is an example of government interference at its worst. In the 1990s, the feds insisted that tortoises were in danger of extinction. They blocked off huge areas of land from development, and charged exorbitant fees to developers, which were used to establish a Desert Tortoise Conservation Center. You may have read recently that the center was so overcrowded with tortoises that they had to euthanize many of them. They couldn’t release them into the wild because that would cause overcrowding in the native population. How can an endangered animal population be overcrowded? That’s government logic for you.

              Cliven Bundy may be on the wrong side of the law according to the courts, but to my way of thinking, we need more citizens like him to stand up to the federal government instead of giving in to their insatiable power grabbing. Let the cattle graze and the cowboys ride the range, and if they occasionally step on a tortoise, that’s a small price to pay for living free.


          • joanfoster says:

            Is the phrase “don’t speak to me” something heard only in Nevada? As requested earlier, show us the support.

            • michellc says:

              Why, you’re ignoring what has been given to you. As for don’t speak to me, don’t know if it’s Nevada speak or not, it’s my speak to people who think they know something because they read it on the internet to people who have been with the people who have lived it.
              I tell you when you help a rancher and his family load up their belongings to leave a ranch that has been in their family for generations after you’ve spent years watching them battle some government agency in courts that are stacked against them and you see the tears in the eyes of fellow ranchers who are also helping them, then you can tell me how ranchers don’t support him or any other rancher.
              This is a blip on the radar to you, a story to talk about and give your opinion on, yet it’s real life for these families. You have shown with your words that you can’t even begin to comprehend the bond families have with the land and their ancestors and the history or how the depths of their sense of failure that they were the generation who lost it.

              • LetJusticePrevail" says:

                Outstanding response.

                • michellc says:

                  It doesn’t count though justice because she couldn’t read about the experience on the internet.
                  The same as the ranchers who have flown out there in support or who are giving him support the old fashioned way with phone calls and prayers, they don’t exist because she can’t read about their support on the internet.

                  • michellc says:

                    Or the many ranchers who have sat in a courtroom with him or sat at his side after another defeat. Not on the internet so they didn’t exist.

              • joanfoster says:

                I believe I do understand the pathos you express. However, I have attempted to extract the emotional out of the argument and look at the events from a legal point of view. In my opinion, Mr. Bundy does not have a leg to stand on despite all of his emotional arguments. That may be a hard issue to swallow for most of the people who support him and let me make it clear, I do not in any way lack some sympathy for this man, but I do believe that he played his hand of cards way too long given the facts of the case.

                • michellc says:

                  Not many have a legal leg to stand on when the government has government ran courts that don’t follow the rule of law. The federal government never had rights to this land. The federal government ignored the constitution and claimed it of course Nevada failed to use their constitutional rights to stop it or take it back.

                  However, you’ve completely changed the subject and now ignore the fact that he has supporters, that was your argument that ranchers don’t support him. I believe you demanded I show you proof of the support. I didn’t bother, but Justice did and then you conveniently ignored it.

    • hoosiergranny says:

      As always, Sharon, you hit the nail on the head. Glad to be reading your posts again.

  29. joanfoster says:

    “You have a nation of people who have been abused and lied to and manipulated for a very long time, and have tolerated it (in the name of good manners and against their better judgment), and they finally blow their top – it’s a little late to say, “Well, can’t we talk? You need to lower your voice now.”

    Who is responsible for allowing the nation to be abused, lied to and manipulated? The voters. Isn’t is also true that ‘the people” get the government they deserve? The blame is ours – not the government. The “guests” may be late to your living room, but it appears the host doesn’t take kindly to having his/her moral superiority questioned.

    • nyetneetot says:

      “Who is responsible for allowing the nation to be abused, lied to and manipulated?”
      I know I’m personally guilty of making statements on here where I didn’t have a full understanding of the facts or history of a particular subject. I end up a bit embarrassed, but then I go to research and educate myself so I don’t continue to repeat that particular mistake.
      How do you mean “The blame is ours” when none of us were alive when the voters were tricked into supporting policies and platforms that created the situation we find ourselves in today. Your arguments supporting the governments position in this case are lacking a solid foundation in history. There is no “moral superiority” to question. I suggest starting with the Populist movement (socialist first try) and see where these government agencies materialized from.

      • joanfoster says:

        My comment was based on the fact that we as voters have the power to change government, albeit more slowly than perhaps we might wish. We are responsible for the government we have as a result of our complacency and lack of civic involvement. As stated earlier, the people get the government they deserve. Just look at all of the idiotic reasons people voted for Obama. Now after five years some who voted for him have buyer’s remorse. It’s still their fault, however. They bought into the “first black President”, the wealth redistribution and what the fools thought was going to be free healthcare. Some stayed home and didn’t vote for the opposition in two election cycles because the candidate did not meet 100% of their conservative bullet points and yet they bellyache the loudest.

        • nyetneetot says:

          You’re not really addressing (or understanding?) Sharon’s post or my own. We are not talking about this latest administration (outside the fact that the current actions are what has caused many people to finally take notice – and wake up) necessarily. These things started in the late 1800’s. Our culture has been changed slowly ever since. Now it’s to the point that people like yourself are arguing things as if it just happened since 2008 or 2012. It would take 20 years at least to reverse course (if that is even possible – do you think those in power will willingly give up the power they have?).

          • joanfoster says:

            I really wasn’t trying to address either you or Sharon and I am certainly not of the opinion that our current political, cultural and social problems only reared their ugly heads in 2008. I addressed that election only because on this and many other conservative blogs, the first dog that gets hit with a stick is the Obama Administration. They deserve each and every strike – don’t misunderstand. However, when we have voted for so-called conservatives, they too have done little to alter the course of liberalism/socialism in this country.

            • nyetneetot says:

              Having an clear understanding of how we got to this point is the only way to begin to have a meaningful discussion, otherwise people are just parroting slogans at each other. The “so-called conservatives” you reference are easily understood in the context of people that have grown up in our current society and not knowing thing were much different before their birth. Of course, that was done on purpose and continues to be done to the children in school today.
              But I digress. Since you’ve admitted you’re not really participating in a conversation here and your intent is to just post inflammatory statements disguised as arguments, I’ll leave you to your work.

        • g brass says:

          Voting is what got us into this mess, bummer for two terms being an example. I’d guess that a good reason many people don’t vote is that they only have the choice of “the lesser of two weevils”. I won’t vote again until there is a choice of C: none of the above. I do NOT deserve bummer as president because I didn’t vote for him. Nor am I to blame because I had no real choice for an alternative. The present system is rigged to favor power and money and voting, at present is a joke. With a choice of C, a representative republic is more likely than our present democracy which the founding fathers abhored.

    • joshua says:

      joaniephoneybaloney, you have bloviated all day on this….don’t you have some green peas to shell or something worthy of your mental capacity?

  30. g brass says:

    Issue 1: Who owns the land? “My ancestors created the rights to that land 100 and some odd years ago,” Bailey Logue said. “And we’re not giving them up.” At what point in time did the federal government(BLM) claim to own the land, and by what authority did they make the claim? Land like that was worth virtually nothing. It was available for grazing only if there were water resources made available for the cattle that grazed that land. Ownership of the necessary water resources in itself made the land worth grazing. So, owning a few acres of land with a water resource gave control of grazing land that would otherwise be worthless. Bailey has evidence of construction and maintenance of water resources owned by his family or purchased from previous owners that is prior to the establishment of the BLM.

    Issue 2: Who is better at managing the land, Bailey or the BLM? “He has been running more than 900 cattle while he only has the authority to graze 150,” It isn’t possible to graze 900 cows where there are only resurces to graze 150. As long as Bailey and his family have manageded that specific land they have more experience in managing it than some BLM specialist doing a periodic drive-by assessment. If they have been successful in the cattle business for over a hundred years, they ain’t stoopid. Bailey is the sole remaining cattleman in that county where there were previously 52. Cattle numbers in that county and state have drastically declined in recent years. That would also seem to be evidence that he’s a good manager.

    The flippin’ turtles have been coexisting with cattle for over 100 years and if they have suffered no serious provable decline then that point is moot.

    • Malik Nidal says:

      In Nevada, the property owner holds title to the actual land. The federal government asserts rights to the water and minerals on that land.

    • Edward Teach says:

      Bundy was in contract with the state to graze his cattle on state owned land from the time his family cut their first check to the state, and every check after that. Only after the state repurposes the land does he claim ownership. And in doing so he has refused to pay to use it for 20 years.

      He had his decades in court the land isn’t his. It’s the states right wrong or indifferent that is how the system works.

      If you own land you know it, and Bundy knew all along his family was leasing that land. He knows it and anybody who has ever owned land knows it.

      Bundy never paid one thin dime in property taxes on that land. Yes he paid grazing rights to use it until he stopped because he says they were trying to run him out of business. By making him compete in the open market for grazing his cattle the same as every other rancher in the state.

      I for one applaud the fact that the state stopped holding a gun to the heads of all the other ranchers in the area giving Bundy an unfair advantage.

      Who is better to manage the land? Well for starters just about anybody with a pulse would do a better job than the state.

      The question of the commons has been plaguing societies forever and the consensus is far from decided. What is not in dispute is they should not be given to one individual at a disgusting discount against fair market value. Especially at the barrel of a gun. I think we can all agree about that. If Bundy was willing to pay fair market value for grazing rights to that land it would be a different matter.

      But with that said If Bundy was and is still willing to pay fair market value for grazing rights he would not lack for a place to graze his cattle. There are millions of acres up for lease at fair market value prices available to him. I would venture a guess the cattle wouldn’t know the difference.

      But if he did that he would loose his unfair advantage the Jackboot thugs of the state have been providing his family ranch for decades. Perhaps that’s what this is about.

      The flippin turtle excuse sucks eggs. The state is full of shit.
      BUT! Show me where he paid property taxes on the land like all the other ranchers in the state and I will say it’s his land and stand besides him.

      • joshua says:

        edward, you junior high gym class is waiting for you to come show them how to play dodgeball now.

      • joanfoster says:

        Congratulations, you actually got your post published. Thank you for speaking the truth.

      • nyetneetot says:

        Your augment (and a couple of other people) is that Bundy is not following the law or regulation.
        Almost everyone else here is arguing that the law, regulation, and regulatory agency shouldn’t exist.
        What is your point?

        • Edward Teach says:

          If that is what you read then you should read it again. My point is that Bundy was using a law that should never have existed in the first place. Which has given him an unfair advantage for decades. I am simply stating that if all the other ranchers in the area are forced to follow the law at gunpoint what makes Bundy special?
          Because he has been taking advantage of the states monopoly of violence to profit from land owned by the commons for decades he should be able to keep doing it?

          What’s your argument? Are you saying that the state should keep their guns on every other rancher in the state forcing them at gunpoint to keep their cattle off that land so Bundy can graze his there for 20 cents on the dollar and cut their throats come sale time.

          Or are you saying that the state should open all lands to anybody who can fog a mirror to do with as they please?

          Look the turtle crap is just that, CRAP.

          But I still like the fact that the state is no longer using the threat of violence to give one rancher an unfair advantage over all the others in the state.

          If your all for the state’s monopoly of violence for the sake of Bundy, where do you draw the line?

          This story has me dumbfounded when so called conservatives are rallying behind the last welfare rancher in Nevada.

          And worst of all is the fact that a “Free Speech Zone” was set up and nobody has a problem with that.

          • WeeWeed says:

            Though I have no idea what the history is behind Bundy, this “Free Speech Zone” bothers me greatly. I agree with ya on that, and wonder what else is going to happen to these “tortoise-stompin” guilty cattle and their equally “guilty” owners.

          • nyetneetot says:

            To cut it short, the Bureau of Land Management (as well as all other regulatory agencies) should be dissolved and as you put it “the state should open all lands to anybody who can fog a mirror to do with as they please”.

            • Edward Teach says:

              Alright now were getting somewhere. You believe the commons should be open to all. And since there not open to all currently.
              How can you support the state using the initiation of force and violence to give Bundy an unfair advantage over all the other ranchers in the state.

              • nyetneetot says:

                You’re misunderstanding. All federal land should be given back to the state. National forests, etc.

                “How can you support the state using the initiation of force and violence to give Bundy an unfair advantage over all the other ranchers in the state.”
                Again you misunderstand. I never commented on your assertions in the first place.

                • Edward Teach says:

                  No I am not misunderstanding, In fact that is the reason for the question, you have not weighed in yet on the real issue here. Do you think Bundy should be able to use the states monopoly of force until the commons are open to all? The fact that Bundy has been taking advantage of the states violence for decades is irrelevant. Should Bundy be able to continue to profit from it now? Regardless of the stupid turtle argument.

                  • nyetneetot says:

                    I disagree. The “real issue” is if I want to waste my time in your argument by assertion.

          • Eddie….the former territories upon statehood were supposed to revert to such states when created/accepted into the Union. Then as now, the FEDGOV ignored the LAW and sought only to increase it’s power and CONTROL. Also, your apparent contempt for ranchers (farmers too I imagine) and in this case, a family who’s heritage goes back to the 1880’s when “Rugged Individualism” MADE this great nation, baffles me. I suspect you, as am I, are appalled at the way the American Indian tribes had the treaties (laws) they agreed to arbitrarily changed if not outright scrapped at the whim of Washington (the district, not the man….in case what you post is off a script or something and you might be confused by the two). Why in this case, and the FAR too many similar ones, shouldn’t EVERY American that loves this Republic NOT be on the side of Mr Bundy and family? He was MORE than willing to pay his taxes to Nevada. Nevada chose, like the rest, to ALLOW the FEDGOV to trample the enumerations clause and become neutered and impotent. I will stand with a Cliven Bundy before I EVER would with a thumbsucking, knee knocking capitulator. And eddiejoan, I’m going to go out on a limb here and speculate that tortoises are and were long before the first cow came to the region, more concerned with predators than malicious bovine turtle stompers. And remember, soybeans are CULTIVATED in the ground, by farmers……just sayin’…

            PS. On your attempt at redeeming yourself with “Look the turtle crap is just that, CRAP.” and “And worst of all is the fact that a “Free Speech Zone” was set up and nobody has a problem with that.”………..I’m going to be generous and give you a “4.8”….had it not been for all the rest, it would be much higher…….

            • Edward Teach says:

              “Also, your apparent contempt for ranchers”

              Where did you get that. I have stated repeatedly I stand with every other rancher in the state, all of them many who were there long before Bundy. I am only speaking out about ONE rancher who has been using the state and their monopoly of violence to give him an unfair advantage when it comes time to sell their beef.

              “He was MORE than willing to pay his taxes to Nevada”

              That’s a lie he has never paid a single red cent in property taxes on the land he was leasing from the state. He even stopped paying his leasing fee when this dispute started. He knew from day one he never owned the land. Because every other rancher in the state who owns their own land pays property taxes to the state. And those who lease grazing land in the free market don’t have the guns of the state to force the owner to give them an 80% discount.

              And as for those damn turtles I don’t give a crap about them, What I do care about is that the state has used them as an excuse to stop giving ONE rancher an incredible and unfair advantage over EVERY OTHER RANCHER IN THE STATE! I am for 99.999999% of the ranchers in Nevada, just not the only welfare rancher left. Who owes the state $300,000.00.

  31. Aslan's Girl says:

    Feds send snipers against ranchers but they can’t protect our border with Mexico?

  32. Aslan's Girl says:

    This same government now protecting turtles and minnows, once killed off almost every single bison in this country. They’re ones to talk!

  33. sundance says:

    The other ADMIN’s on this site have *FAR* more patience than I.

    This thread could be a case study in “concern trolling”.

    • nyetneetot says:

      :) It kept me procrastinating for hours.

    • joshua says:

      it is So hard not to hand back blather to blatherers.

    • joanfoster says:

      So sorry to have you express so much insecurity about your own opinions particularly after so many posts by you that have been both informative and thought provoking. Does it really take patience to listen to an altering opinion? If so, should you not be a bit more reflective about your own convictions that those who might challenge them now must be dealt with a large does of patience? Is this your legacy as a writer or purveyor of ideas that those who might suggest a modicum of disagreement must be banished to your trash heap of trolling? Maybe you should think about your own credibility for once.

      • Ad rem says:

        Dear joan….
        I’ve been at the dentist most of the afternoon, so I’m a little less tolerant of trolls than usual. Thanks for playing….
         photo fe206ead-8cde-4683-8fdd-5534908e76fd_zpsecf3f7ce.jpg

      • stella says:

        You really ought to consider starting your own blog – you can instruct the world wide web. Sundance ain’t insecure, honey, and he’s been pretty polite, considering. As for an alternative (not altering) opinion, we’ve all listened to yours all day. And stop bloviating; it doesn’t suit you.

        • auscitizenmom says:

          I lost interest several hours ago. Just thought I would check back in. This was the longest seige I had witnessed. :shock:

  34. sundance says:

    Screw the turtle, here’s a word for you “evolution”. Brontosaurus’s didn’t make it either !

  35. sundance says:

    I carry my free speech zone with me. So long as my use of it does not endanger your life or liberty, I can present my free speech zone wherever I choose – and I defend your use thereof with a similar disposition.

  36. Wow…”uber” trollish today!! Methinks that those who STILL believe the FEDGOV has “our” best interests at heart, will skip joyfully to the “camps” because after all it will be for OUR own good! Gonna stop there before I say how I REALLY feel !!!!!

    • joanfoster says:

      Wow, uber trollish ? I happen to think wow if someone is willing to challenge the commonly accepted opinion without question. If you think conservatives will ever win the White House and the Congress again, I would hope that many conservatives will begin to have the courage to explore all sides of the issue. This is not to say that they must revoke or rescind their core values, but every coin had two sides. One of the biggest weaknesses of both conservatives and liberals is the unwillingness to consider a point of view which does not fit their talking points. Conservatives will be doomed to failure at the polls unless they learn how to discuss and communicate their ideals without resorting to accusing others of “trolling” (how pathetic if that’s all you have). I would likewise give the same advice to the ultra liberals.

      • WeeWeed says:

        And this, children, is concern trolling at its finest. Our lesson is done.
        You’re welcome.

      • Ad rem says:

        WOW back atcha…and let me thank you regarding your (sincere?) CONCERN for the future of the Conservative agenda. I would only ask that you take that projector your running and turn it towards yourself. Lecture time over….now back to the ivied halls of your personal mind castle.

      • Oh no, that’s NOT all I have, but I already addressed that joan. And the people who GENERALLY post here certainly DO consider both sides of an issue, and discard the WRONG side. Pretty simple…really.

  37. P.Spinach says:

    One cannot preserve constitutional rights by cooperating because it is akin to negotiating with a malignant groups of cells. They keep inching forward each time the other party acquiesces. They become stronger.

    Freedom of speech is not allowing an errant troll to run amuck — having lost its sense of reason, duplicating itself in every comment, causing self-doubt in constitutional argument. Rest assured, that good sense is when a farmer is accused of not paying his dues, the concerned federal management (BLM) who charges him with this aggrievement does not send in a military style SWAT to confiscate 78 cattle, probably breaking every animal humane law doing so, costing the state ten times more buckaroos then the missing tax they rightly failed to collect. Give it up! Don’t get desperate and don’t get stupid sending in the Federal SWAT clowns dressed to the nines in military camouflage. P-leease.

  38. michellc says:

    Small update from the ground, federal guys don’t much like being filmed according to the ranchers, they were told if they didn’t stop filming they’d be arrested. They resisted more showed up and the feds backed off. Another group of folks showed up and ran a few feds off.
    Rancher friends are also disgusted with how they’re running the cattle to death and say most of them won’t live to be rounded up. Ranchers were also told to get back to the 1st amendment zone, ranchers told them they carry their 1st amendment with them and pulled out the constitution.lol
    Not sure how many people have showed up as they keep coming in batches, but a lot of Nevadans and a lot of Americans from across the country.

    Check out you tube, they’re all trying to load video as fast as possible of what is going on.

  39. michellc says:

    I was busy getting everything together for daughter’s wedding, so have not been able to talk to anyone but have been sent texts all day. Militia and oathkeeper members have arrived along with even more ranchers/farmers. However BLM and other federal LE are growing in numbers as well. One text said it’s now a tinder box and a match could set it off at anytime.

    Was just sent this FB page as I was walking through the door so I haven’t had time to read through it yet, was sent it by somebody not there. https://www.facebook.com/guerillamedia/photos/a.422318171212718.1073741828.422296034548265/508178502626684/?type=1&theater

  40. michellc says:

    I found this letter written by his daughter, Shiree Bundy Cox and she does a good job of being able to explain the long battle, without going into each detail. I found it on the above FB page in comments. (When I had my conversation with what seems to be a troll yesterday, I found it funny that she kept claiming he had no support of the other ranchers in the area and how the other ranchers paid the fees, I think I even once tried to tell her there were no ranchers left, but now if she/he is still reading they can hear it straight from the family.)

    “I have had people ask me to explain my dad’s stance on this BLM fight. Here it is in as simple of terms as I can explain it. There is so much to it, but here it s in a nut shell. My great grandpa bought the rights to the Bunkerville allotment back in 1887 around there. Then he sold them to my grandpa who then turned them over to my dad in 1972. These men bought and paid for their rights to the range and also built waters, fences and roads to assure the survival of their cattle, all with their own money, not with tax dollars. The rights to the land use are called preemptive rights. Some where down the line, to keep the cows from over grazing, came the Bureau of Land Management. They were supposed to assist the ranchers in the management of their ranges while the ranchers paid a yearly allotment which was to be use to pay the BLM wages and to help with repairs and improvements of the ranches. My dad did pay his grazing fees for years to the BLM until they were no longer using his fees to help him and to improve. Instead they began using these monies against the ranchers. They bought all the rest of the ranchers in the area out with they’re own grazing fees. When they offered to buy my dad out for a penance he said no thanks and then fired them because they weren’t doing their job. He quit paying the BLM and tried giving his grazing fees to the county, which they turned down. So my dad just went on running his ranch and making his own improvements with his own equipment and his own money, not taxes. In essence the BLM was managing my dad out of business. Well when buying him out didn’t work, they used the endangered species card. You’ve already heard about the desert tortoise. Well that didn’t work either, so then began the threats and the court orders, which my dad has proven to be unlawful for all these years. Now they’re desperate. It’s come down to buying the brand inspector off and threatening the County Sheriff. Everything their doing at this point is illegal and totally against the Constitution of the United States of America. Then there’s the issue of the cattle that are at this moment being stolen. See even if dad hasn’t paid them, those cattle belong to him, regardless of where they are they are my father’s property. His herd has been part of that range for over a hundred years, long before the BLM even existed. Now the Feds think they can just come in and remove them and sell them without a legal brand inspection or without my dad’s signature on it. They think they can take them over two borders, which is illegal, ask any trucker. Then they plan to take them to the Richfield Auction and sell them. All this with our tax money. They have paid off the contract cowboys and the auction owner as well as the Nevada brand inspector with our tax dollars. See how slick they are? Well, this is it in a nut shell. Thanks”

    • Ad rem says:

      Thanks for posting this Michellc….I’ll make sure SD sees this.

      • michellc says:

        I just received this request: Please help get the word out that although the Bundy family needs all the support they can get, be careful and follow the law and keep cool heads.
        No idea if government is going to keep cool heads with all the helicopters, guns and tanks have been spotted.
        Cows have died, calves left behind when moms taken. They’ve ran them to death, injured them and caused them to die from heat and no water.

        • Ad rem says:

          Follow the law and keep cool heads.

          Amen! I’m glad these people have still have there wits in tact….after the hellz they’ve been through.

  41. teach ed a lesson says:

    How will Harry Reid’s “solar farm” affect the turtles???

    • teach ed a lesson says:

      And something to read here…
      The U.S. Interior Department announced Wednesday it was approving two large solar projects in the Mojave Desert that may displace or harm more than 2,000 desert tortoises.
      [...] According to an assessment of the projects released by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2013, the two projects are expected to displace, injure, or kill up to 2,115 federally Threatened desert tortoises. Most of the mortalities will happen to young tortoises and will likely be killed without even being detected, the agency noted.

      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.”

      • teach ed a lesson says:

        And something to Google or Bing the text for…
        Marcus Stern (Reuters)
        “[Sen. Reid] and his oldest son, Rory, are both involved in an effort by a Chinese energy giant, ENN Energy Group, to build a $5 billion solar farm and panel manufacturing plant in the southern Nevada desert,” he wrote. “Reid has been one of the project’s most prominent advocates, helping recruit the company during a 2011 trip to China and applying his political muscle on behalf of the project in Nevada.”

        “His son, a lawyer with a prominent Las Vegas firm that is representing ENN, helped it locate a 9,000-acre (3,600-hectare) desert site that it is buying well below appraised value from Clark County, where Rory Reid formerly chaired the county commission.”

  42. If this situation has a lot to do with the endangered desert tortoise, why did the federal government kill about 700 of them?


    • stella says:

      No, it isn’t. Read the article you linked. The land is in the northeast part of Nevada, in Elko county, which is nowhere near the Bundy ranch. It is more likely about planned solar plants or real estate development (the Bundy issue).

      Do you really believe the current government is favorable to fracking, or oil production of any kind? Yeah, they sold some oil leases, but you will notice at the end of the article that they are conducting environmental impact studies. No drilling has yet occurred on these oil leases.

      Here is a map of Nevada. Point “A” is Wells, where the oil leases are, and point “B” is Bunkerville, where the Bundy ranch is.

       photo a81bf671-4a83-46a7-94d6-dc67286c315d_zpsf2e2db77.png

      • Yes, I do believe the government is favorable to fracking..that is already proven.

        • stella says:

          How is that proven? Is the government providing Federal grants for fracking like they are for solar plants? What’s wrong with fracking, anyway?

          And please don’t post pictures of flaming faucets and claims that someone’s water is contaminated with “nuclear grade plutonium”. Please don’t.

      • Do you not pay attention to reality?

        • stella says:

          What does that mean? Are the leases anywhere near the ranch?

          • Go beyond the scope of the tip of your nose…

            • stella says:

              Instead of insulting me, why don’t you admit you screwed up? You are wrong – leases in northeast Nevada have nothing to do with the ranch, which is in southeast Nevada. I have no doubt that the government has some nefarious object in mind, but it isn’t leases in Wells, NV.

              • Um, no – I didn’t screw up. I’m just not closed minded.

                • stella says:

                  Why don’t you provide some evidence, instead of just saying you are right and some great intellectual genius. I am reading all that I can about this, and if you have evidence, then let’s have it.

              • There is certainly a lot more to this story than you’re willing to acknowledge.

              • There has been some water issues in Clark County..major issues.

              • The fact that you totally ignored the article, with actual proof staring you in the face, doesn’t say a whole lot…the article clearly says: “U.S. Bureau of Land Management geologist Lorenzo Trimble tells the Las Vegas Review-Journal the Elko County oil and gas leases sold Tuesday for $1.27 million to six different companies.”

                but you want to berate me with your snide remark about do I really believe the government is interested in fracking and oil???

                • stella says:

                  Elko County is not near Clark County. I read this article early this morning – long before you showed up. Elko County is shown as “Wells” on the map I posted. Don’t you get it? They sold gas leases, yes, as the government has done for years. They also say that they are doing an environmental study of the company’s plans before they will allow drilling. Did you read that part?

                  • The clause, known as the Enclave Clause, authorizes Congress to purchase, own and control land in a state under specific and limited conditions, namely “for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings,” and not, as the feds now insist, to protect an endangered tortoise.

                    And one reason why I gave you the link about the government killing nearly 700 endangered tortoises, that which the government says Bundy’s cattle poses a threat to…

                  • stella says:

                    I understand and agree about the tortoises. I also understand and agree about the Enclave clause.

                    What I don’t understand is why you think the Bundy ranch issue has anything to do with fracking, or any other oil exploration. There isn’t any evidence for that. It may even be true, but the article you posted about oil leases isn’t evidence.

                  • We are a nation led by a tyrannical leader…odd, this president isn’t saying a word, nor intervening..he is simply allowing it to unfold – just as past presidents did..like Ruby Ridge, Waco Texas, Kent State…America is now a despotism nation.

                    What is happening at the Bundy Ranch is the same that happened to the Native Americans and those governmental railroads who forced people off their land, or be killed. America has a dark history of taking what they want, when they want it.

                    And why has this issue with Cliven Bundy been allowed to go on for roughly 15 years, only now to come to a head, and why has the Nevada Courts ignored Bundy’s requests? Bundy offered to pay the fines to the state of Nevada..not the federal government.

                    And the false flag about the endangered desert tortoises? After the federal government relocated the healthy turtles, but allowed the others to be killed…

                    …and if you REALLY don’t think government isn’t interested in being self-reliant on fuel, then you haven’t heard anything Barack Obama has said in the past four-plus years!

                    Engaging in discussions with a closed mind is really quite difficult, and a waste of my time. Later!

                  • stella says:

                    Barack Obama has decreased the number of oil leases on public land, and his government has spent vast amounts of money subsidizing alternative energy, including two new huge solar plants in California and – Nevada! Anyway, I hope we become and stay energy independent. Exactly why do you think Obama is in favor of it? You just keep calling me stupid, and don’t produce the “goods”.

                    P.S.: Where is the evidence for fracking on the Bundy ranch? And you really ought to do a blog post about it – complete with links – on your own blog.

                • stella says:

                  One word you should take to heart when entering into a discussion – FOCUS.

  43. teach ed a lesson says:

    Oh, oh. Now the death threats are starting…
    I was just told by commissioner Collins of Clark County NV that all of us folks from Utah are a bunch of “inbred bastards” and if we are coming to Clark County NV to support Cliven Bundy we all “better have funeral plans”. We should “turn our asses around on mind our own f—ing business”. Now there’s some classy leadership for you.
    — Darin Bushman — Piute County Commissioner
    Las Vegas Review-Journal:

Comments are closed.