Cliven Bundy Ranch, Nevada- Opinions??

Yes and no. He is made out to be worse than he is I think, however he has kept himself in this situation of his own free will. I don't really agree with the BLM but they are the ones in charge, the reality is that the courts probably will rule in favor of the government more times than not even if they are overstepping themselves. Takes two to tango
 
I farm full time and raise cattle, but I do not identify with that guy on any level. As I understand, he has been squatting on federal land for close to twenty years while other ranchers have been paying their BLM grazing fees. So he has been a free-loader and by doing so he has accumulated the grazing benefit of over a million dollars worth of grass. Yet he complains about the free-loaders of the world and those on welfare. To me, he is a welfare rancher. I understand how it would be frustrating to lose grazing land because of an endangered species, but we all have to live with rules and change with the times.
 
Well, grazers on public land have always paid about a tenth of what private land grazers like myself pay. Grazing for free for 20 years, sign me up.
 
No matter how many years you live on rented land, you never own it. He's just another guy that wants to make up his own rules to benefit himself. Maybe he should run for congress.
 
(quoted from post at 18:08:41 04/24/14) This guy seems like a nut!

Greg

Those old west ranchers can be a stubborn bunch.....when they are Mormon, watch out! They have an inbred hatred for the Feds....
 
He's wrong on all levels. If I don't pay my mortgage the bank comes along and throws me out. If you don't pay your rent ,the landlord throws you out. He is not any different than those on welfare. Just wants to take and take. Doesn't matter if three generations of ancestors have rented the land before you, you still don't own the land.
 
He had enough of the BLM taking his money and using it to buy his neighbors out..so he quit paying them. Right or wrong? difficult to say. But think about what the EPA is trying to do with regulating all the streams and waterways in the USA. Then think it cant happen to you.
 
I read that his ancestors had ranched that land since the 1850's. Seems to me the BLM took it away from them.

It was on the internet so it has to be true:)
 
I have not really paid any attention to the brief reports on the news.

Just what little I did hear made me think of Ruby Ridge and Waco . Don't trust the government as they are the most corrupt organization out there.
 
BLM is acting for Harry Reid. His son brokered a huge sale of some of those lands to a Korean Billionaire for some sort of green energy program. It doesn't work if there a re cattle there.
 
I think he may very well be in the wrong BUT it was over reaction by the Feds to show up with snipers and pay someone $ 900,000 plus to round up his cattle.
 
Even if your mortgage is paid you don't own your land. Try not paying your land taxes and see what you own. The government lets you rent your generational family farm from them by form of taxes.
 
I'm a semi retired western cattle rancher I do own or use a federal permit. I did serve 6 years on a Regional Advisory Council for the Blm But I understand some what where Bundy is coming from. He does have a property right,the water is his. I would say that the Blm was attempting to get him to relinquish his water rights back in 93 in order to comply with their management plan,this was a common tactic.
The IRS taxes ownership of grazing rights in the estate of the holder.
During WWII the military need a huge area in eastern New Mexico for the White Sands Test site they paid the grazers well for their permits and water.
True costs of grazing federal land are very close to private pasture the rancher pay a fee plus is responsible for water development fences weed control movement of cattle
Please feel free to contact me by email with your Ph # I will call you all and discus the BLM at anytime.
Bill
 
Call me a nut too, but based on what I have read and heard thus far, his problem with the Feds is recognizing their authority over the land instead of the states. Supposedly he has said he would have no problem paying fees to the state, if they were to ask for them, but not to the Feds overland that they took and then began demanding payment for. The latest report I read says that the Feds involvement in regard to the land, now, has a lot to do with some 'endangered' desert tortoise more than anything else. I don't know what happened with the land prior to 1993, the time he either quit paying, or that the Feds started demanding payment, and haven't seen anything about that, so there has to be more to the story than is being told. Think about it like this, if the Feds all of a sudden started demanding payment for the right to do something your family had been doing for free for many, many years....and then decide you really need to stop completely because of some endangered tortoise (kind of what the latest article I read implied) how would you react.

I think, given the way many of us on here feel about the Feds desire to be involved in EVERYTHING we do nowdays, that if put in the same situation, and with all the facts in hand, NOT just what can be gathered here and there from news articles, we'd probably all be in the same shoes he's in.........and have others calling us crazy too...........

Don't forget 200 plus years ago, when our ancestors fought against an oppressive government they were called PATRIOTS. Nowdays, simply disagree with what they are doing, refuse to pay what they demand, stand up for the rights given to us my those Patriots in our Constitution, etc, etc, and your now crazy.................Really makes me wonder and truthfully somewhat afraid for our children, grandchildren, and future generations...
 
You have part of it right. Reid wants to sell land to a communist Chinese engnery company for a solar field.
 

It's hard to form an opinion based on what is passed off as news these days. There's always 2 sides to every story but I tend to believe that the BLM is mostly in the wrong on this one. If the EPA gets it way on controlling the water there may be a lot more of us see Bundy's side.
 
Ultimately, we are a nation of laws. Mr. Bundy seems to think he only needs to obey those laws and court orders with which he agrees, an attitude common among self-described "libertarians". And whether or not they think a law is constitutional tends to be directly related to whether or not it personally benefits them.

I admit a certain amount of bias in this matter, because I have a stepson who is another one of these so-called "patriots". He can't be bothered with keeping a job and supporting his kids, yet he can devote plenty of time fighting with local government officials and the "corrupt" court system. He's now in jail for the second time for failing to appear in court in matters related to his efforts to oppose the evil forces of the Building Department and Code Enforcement. Ol' Clive sounds a lot like my stepson.
 
(quoted from post at 19:48:37 04/24/14) I have not really paid any attention to the brief reports on the news.

Just what little I did hear made me think of Ruby Ridge and Waco .[b:0094db4f01] Don't trust the government as they are the most corrupt organization out there[/b:0094db4f01].
What he says ^^^
 
There was a report that a local news outlet/reporter looked into his claim. Turns out his grandfather (father??) did not start ranching until in the 1940's and did not start using the BLM land until 1954. Or something close to it.

(quoted from post at 03:37:01 04/25/14) I read that his ancestors had ranched that land since the 1850's. Seems to me the BLM took it away from them.

It was on the internet so it has to be true:)
 
Around here crep program money has now increased with new contracts to well over $300 an acre to pay people not to farm. It is impossible for me to rent hayland. Does this not seem idiotic? I live in KY. and am an avid environmentalist but they are paying a lot of bigshots on relatively strong farmland. I agree strongly with the watershed programs but to pay someone not to farm good land when commoditys are artificially high and money short seems ridicules.
 
I don't think Mr. Bundy is any prize, but he does make some good points and the gov't response was just plain tyranny. I'm still researching it, but it appears that in 1976 the gov't passed a law dictating the gov't was to return most of the BLM type lands, non-military type if you will, to the states. I understand Nebraska got 98% of it's lands back while Utah and Nevada have gotten what amounts to none of theirs. The reason why the return was stopped is unclear, but appears to me to be related to environmental concerns at this time. IOW- the gore-tex and granola crowd with their billions (Sierra Club, etc) and the "Save the 7 toed spotted lizard" types with their billions got some Senators and Congressmen to somehow stop it. I don't think I have to point out to anyone the lengths politicians will go to to earn their campaign donations. IMO the Federal Gov't should not own a single foot of real estate more than it needs for basic gov't functions. The same goes for the States. I've seen here in NY what happens when the gov't uses it's essentially unlimited tax dollars to buy up real estate, go into direct competition with private enterprise, regulate people into poverty. My sentiments may not lay exactly with Bundy, but I support at least some of the basic ideas he's trying to get recognized.

As far as the Federal response, way, way over blown. I've been in the middle of a crowd of 10-20K angry people and you don't win by pointing guns at them and tazing people who are in your face. I can 100% guarantee that if the Feds had been state or local cops from Alabama or Georgia and the crowd had been black, or from Texas or Az and the crowd Hispanic, or NY or NJ ad the crowd gay that the press reports would be entirely different. The mistake Bundys supporters made was in showing arms right off the bat. You don't win in the battle for public perception with guns. I fully support the 2nd Amend, but that's for later in dire, dire circumstances. All it does at the initial juncture is make you look like Harry Reids so called "domestic terrorists". You want to win these things, you do what every other successful group has done in the past 40 years- you put the women and kids and old people out in front and you wait for the first idiot on uniform to step on a toe. After that it's all gravy. I don't like it, but them's the facts folks. It's worked every time it's been done. If the gov't responds with force, nothing wins the argument like some bloody innocents. It's either that or you have to have access to billions of dollars.

Welcome to "Winning hearts and minds, 2014".
 
I agree. Too many radio freedom fighters were willing to jump on board and make this about the government instead of the guy who had refused to do what every rancher out there was doing.....PAY THE GRAZING FEES.
 
Apparently the guy doesn't recognize that the fed gov exists, or something like that. These guys always makes comments like that when its to their financial gain. Should be interesting if he signs up for social security or not..He will probably recognize the fed gov when he can get some of their money.
 
Why would the citizens of the USA think they should obey the laws when the Attorney General and the President don't obey the law?Along with many in Congress and many in the Gov't agencies.Laws in this country apparently don't mean anything anymore as we regress to 3rd World status.If Bundy had contributed a hundred thousand to Harry Reid's reelection campaign he'd of never had a problem.Big Gov't no matter what party is in power leads to corruption.
 
The real answer to the whole situation is for the Gov'ts both Federal and State to sell off the land and get it in private hands.Gov't owns over 70% of the land in Nevada thats crazy.Of course a lot of ranchers that have been getting Gov't grazing lands for next to nothing would be the first people to object to selling it.
 
By the way, did you see the guy ask our president yesterday about China now chomping at the bit to take away a group of islands from Japan, if China does, would we (HE) just huff and puff and draw another ficticious red line like he did with Syria, Libia, Putin and Ukraine, and allow China to conquer those Japanese islands? Proably not. Won't hear much about things like the goings ons in our current oval office...with Bundy now being a racist to focus on. And, what else is new with three more years of this guy to go?

Well, I'll thank Bundy for one thing. Now that he's a racist, it will give our "mainstream" news media reason to leave Alaskan landfills and give up on trying to dig something more on Palin and now focus somewhere else.

Mark
 
The govt owns 81% of Nevada...The BLM and their policies have chased lots of Nevada ranchers out of business..Bundy actually owes about 300K in back grazing fees...The rest is fines and interest..Right or wrong theres lots more to this story than is being told..
 
I know very little about Nevada land taxes, but this situation begs the question that say, if the BLM lands were sold off to private individuals, how would yearly land tax bill compare to BLM grazing fees? Bundy seems to respect county government, would he pay county land taxes? Would they be higher than BLM grazing fees? Could he afford to run same number of cows on same amount of land? (Of course you would have to assume that he DID pay BLM fees, nothing is cheaper than free).
 
How do their grazing contracts work out there? My understanding is they are long term and require certain improvements but are pretty much perpetual as long as the payments are made. The problem Bundy had was the government decided to change their contract in the early 90s(?) and refuses to accept his payments because they are based on the old contract.


The MUCH BIGGER ISSUE is the 90,000+ acres the governemnt is getting ready to seize in Texas from farmers and ranchers that have owned and paid taxes on for over a 100 years. They own the property with deeds - not a lease contract.
 
Thanks for the information - that's what I was wondering about. Is there a website that coves in more detail how these grazing contracts worked? Some people think a grazing lease is like renting an apartment.
 
TF, didn't your mother ever tell you two wrongs don't make a right?

In the case of Mr. Bundy, we're not talking about an isolated infraction. He has a twenty year history as a scofflaw. He has had his day in court, several in fact, and lost every case. He has defied multiple court orders. Now, if you repeatedly break the law for twenty years, it's going to catch up with you. Whether the crime is unpaid parking tickets or assassination of US citizens with drone aircraft, there will be a day of reckoning. Ol' Clive's day has been postponed, but not cancelled.
 
>The real answer to the whole situation is for the Gov'ts both Federal and State to sell off the land and get it in private hands.

If Ol' Clive won't pay the rent he owes the federal government, why do you think he's going to pay it to a private landowner?
 
My understanding is that the Feds will put a lien on every branded cow he tries to sell at auction or contract. So they will get their share one way or the other. Best to handle this is economically rather than with guns. Guns only exacerbate problems, they do not solve them. But this event is scary that there are those among us that would sacrifice their lives and especially lives of their wives and children to make a point over a cattleman not paying his rent (grazing fees).
 
Even George Washington deployed an overwhelming force during his presidency, when he put down the Whiskey Rebellion. Most times, extreme odds will do more prevent bloodshed rather than encourage it.
 
Interesting comparison.

Although I believe the farmers involved in the Whiskey Rebellion had actually attacked federal agents.

Let's see...

Yes, here it is...

"The alarm was raised, and more than 500 armed men attacked the fortified home of tax inspector General John Neville. Washington responded by sending peace commissioners to western Pennsylvania to negotiate with the rebels, while at the same time calling on governors to send a militia force to enforce the tax."

So while it was kind of cutesy, I wouldn't say it was an apt comparison. 500 men attacked the home of an agent, nothing of the kind took place in Nevada.

But you keep trying.
 
personally i dont we are getting all the Real information even to make a good opinion. But if the man is supposed to pay to let his cows graze then he should pay.If everybody else is paying then he should also. If the Beef is because the ( Feds,State) or whoever raise the rent then Tuff Crap pay it or get your cows off the property. It is no difference than a landlord raising someones rent on a appartment,if you dont like it move, walking aint crowed. Iam sure there are points from both sides that make sence. Personally i have never seen a Cow eat a Turtle but now days i guess you cant never tell. But on personal note If you think for a minute the Goverment is on your side and there to help you, You might want to Read back to what they did to the American Indian
 
Now i dont no if this is true. But i heard Sara Palin could see Putins footprint on the back of external_links butt from her house
 
Pretty easy though to be a Monday morning quarterback. If unarmed agents had gone in without backup,not knowing the mental state of the folks they might be up against,and an agent had been harmed,there would have been a bunch of arm chair quarterbacking with questions about why they didn't have backup.
Six of one,half dozen of the other. Those armed agents were no doubt on the payroll anyway,why not have them on hand to do what they're paid to do?
 
I hate it when that happens.


I didn't read anything about Washington shooting cattle or destroying water supplies either. As a matter of fact Washington was well known for his extremely abusive acts towards those he caught tresspassing on his land.
 
The people at the top the so called 'Leaders' are supposed to set the example and they have set a very sorry example not saying any of its right but whats right left town years ago.
 
A private landowner would either 1)Use it theemsleves or 2)Kick his butt off after 1 year not let it go 30 or so years thats gross neglience from whomever was supposed to be collecting the $$.
 
And rumor has it the lawyer of record for the Chinese company- the one that would collect a fat "legal services" fee- is Reids son. Family makes some money on poppa"s Senate actions. This sounds sort of like old Chicago politics- just a opinion. RN
 
I'm not sure I'm following your logic, TF. Are you saying the feds were justified in what they did, but they just waited too long to do it? That they shouldn't have bothered with that "due process" nonsense? Or are you saying the feds had no right to evict Bundy, but a private landowner would be justified to use force to kick him out and and take his cattle? Please go on.
 
(quoted from post at 15:27:51 04/25/14) And rumor has it the lawyer of record for the Chinese company- the one that would collect a fat "legal services" fee- is Reids son. Family makes some money on poppa"s Senate actions. This sounds sort of like old Chicago politics- just a opinion. RN

I agree with that - AND this is about State's rights ...... the feds are over-reaching in so many areas where they have no right to .... BUT 'We the people' don't seem to care that much that they are. So, as far as the Bundys are are concerned all I can say is: GOOD LUCK TO YOU!
 
The one issue is as I have heard it is who actually owns the disputed land Nevada or the Feds.If a private individual owned the land Bundy was using then they could only go back 3 years to collect the debt as limitations would have expired
on being able to collect.Also if Bundy had use the land without the owners permission for 30 years he'd also be in a great position to file an adverse possession suit and claim the land as his own.Lots of murky leagl issues.I'd like to know why the Feds wait 30 years ot collect any rent andnow they send a small Army out to basically serve a warrant of eviction way over reacted.
 
(quoted from post at 16:13:51 04/25/14) My understanding is that the Feds will put a lien on every branded cow he tries to sell at auction or contract. So they will get their share one way or the other. Best to handle this is economically rather than with guns. Guns only exacerbate problems, they do not solve them. But [b:9eacb721f0]this event is scary that there are those among us that would sacrifice their lives and especially lives of their wives and children to make a point over a cattleman not paying his rent [/b:9eacb721f0](grazing fees).
Those that would sacrifice their lives aren't concerned whether the guy paid his rent or not. They were there because they wanted to make a stand against the government.
 
(quoted from post at 17:23:06 04/25/14) I have a problem with 200 armed federal agents showing up for a problem that has not included violence of any kind.
I concur.
Don't take that as an endorsement of Bundy's actions.
IMO, given the rules of the game, Bundy is wrong.
As Bret very accurately posted, the protesters were wrong.
And the feds were wrong.
I also think the rules of the game are wrong. The feds have no business owning that land. Neither does the state.

Bundy is small potatoes. Really a non issue to me.
The protesters lost me with their tactics.
The feds actions concern me. They don't surprise me though.
 
He must be a cross between a banker, lawyer, or tea partyier. He was just ahead of the bankers of the Bush era.

Jon Stewart showed it best, "Apocalypse Cow"
 
And that begs the question...why does BLM, Dept of Education, and others HAVE swat and sniper teams in the first place? 200+ government types showed up brandishing guns, tazing people, video of one flatening a lady from the backside. Takes big tough guys wearing combat gear and full body armor to do that. Well, some of their bosses that pay their salaries showed up with guns, countered them, and were and are willing to die for me, and my nation. I owe them. If I ever get a chance, I will repay them. Maybe the one brewing on the Texas-Oklahoma border that actually IS private owned land that BLM says is now theirs.

Mark
BLM at it again, elsewhere this time
 
Why do think he is a nut?? Is it because he is willing to stand up for his rights? This guys family has been ranching there for over 100 years, suddenly the federal government wants to push people off their land, so they make up new rules to force a farmer that feeds the country out so they can give our land to a chinese solar company, now that's nuts.
 
I don't think he's a nut. I think he's freeloading blowhard and a scofflaw.

Oh, and it seems he's also a racist. That's not a requirement for membership in the libertarian fringe, but it does earn you bonus miles in their Frequent Freeloader program.
 
The States can do whatever they like. If the
citizens of a state say they want their government
to own land, that"s their business. The Founders
encouraged diversity among the states, thus the
"laboratories" thing. States can watch each other,
see what works well and what doesn"t, and adopt the
ideas that work.

State parks are fine with me. National parks
aren"t.
 
(quoted from post at 09:13:51 04/25/14) But this event is scary that there are those among us that would sacrifice their lives and especially lives of their wives and children to make a point over a cattleman not paying his rent (grazing fees).

Who said anything about sacrificing John? Since it's my post you're referencing, lets deal with reality, and the fact I was talking about a lot more than this one particular case.

The reality is that if you put all the hairy chested he men on the front line in this fight, then what the news reports is that domestic terrorists are trying to steal from the gov't. You allow the elderly, the women and kids to stand at the front, like every other special interest group does, then the news reports that a group of women and kids and old people are fighting gov't abuse. To take it further, if the hairy chested he men get's tazed, knocked down, roughed up a little and arrested it's reported exactly as it was- anti-gov't protestor gets arrested. If a BLM LEO steps on an old womans toe or tazes a young mom holding a baby....what do you think gets reported?

Like I said John, I don't like it, but that's life in 2014. You either win by overwhelming public opinion or through massive amounts of cash. You have another answer? Other than just capitulating to whatever Big Brother wants?
 
(quoted from post at 22:17:48 04/26/14) The States can do whatever they like. If the
citizens of a state say they want their government
to own land, that"s their business. The Founders
encouraged diversity among the states, thus the
"laboratories" thing. States can watch each other,
see what works well and what doesn"t, and adopt the
ideas that work.

State parks are fine with me. National parks
aren"t.

Very well said. Most people don't understand the difference between Federal and States rights. That little blurb about all powers not enumerated to the Federal gov't belong to the states seems to ahve been forgotten. That's what this and a lot of other so called "anti-gov't" protest is about.
 
Can you say Ruby Ridge or Waco?
A civian that dares to thumb his nose at an egotistical burocrat is going to get swatted hard.
 
He ain"t. He has the same sentiments as millions of other Americans. Why do you think there is so much effort to discredit him? Telling the truth and having others believe it could turn the NWO on it"s elite head.
 

We sell tractor parts! We have the parts you need to repair your tractor - the right parts. Our low prices and years of research make us your best choice when you need parts. Shop Online Today.

Back
Top