Militia takes over Malheur National Wildlife Refuge headquarters

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

I prefer to pay my taxes and support the Federal employees who protect this public land from criminals who deliberately destroy it. I prefer to pay my taxes and support the prosecution of arsonists who endanger lives and poachers who upset the balance of nature.

These are things the government does quite well in service to all Americans.
The land needs no protection. The federal employees are an unwarranted parasite.
 
The land needs no protection. The federal employees are an unwarranted parasite.

Oh, you are a bad man Denny! But I would agree that we would all be much better off if the BLM land and much of the National Forest lands were privately held with the owners being required to practice good stewardship as defined in law.

I think such a change could pay off the National debit.
 
imrs.php
 
We should conscript these militia ranchers into the border patrol and relocate them to texas
 
They may be sneaking into mexican deserts and canadian tundra land without anyone catching on
Sure.

You made me look.

Railroads were granted 130M of 2.3B acres in the US.

The railroads sold much of the land to raise money to pay the workers.



http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/eib-economic-information-bulletin/eib14.aspx


The United States has a total land area of nearly 2.3 billion acres. Major uses in 2002 were forest-use land, 651 million acres (28.8 percent); grassland pasture and range land, 587 million acres (25.9 percent); cropland, 442 million acres (19.5 percent); special uses (primarily parks and wildlife areas), 297 million acres (13.1 percent); miscellaneous other uses, 228 million acres (10.1 percent); and urban land, 60 million acres (2.6 percent).
 
Oh, you are a bad man Denny! But I would agree that we would all be much better off if the BLM land and much of the National Forest lands were privately held with the owners being required to practice good stewardship as defined in law.

I think such a change could pay off the National debit.
Are you serious??? Who is going to oversee those stewardship requirements ??? That is correct. Federal employees. The ranchers certainly haven't shown any real good faith effort in policing themselves. The Bundys refuse to even pay rent they had agreed to pay for use of the land. You yourself have noted how these folks have destroyed riparian areas and damaged creeks and streams. These private parties you and Denny are so enamored with not only refuse to obey our country's laws, they revel in their refusal. They put themselves above the law and above their fellow citizens. And the general public is supposed to trust these outlaws to do the right thing??? They certainly haven't done it in the past and they certainly aren't doing it now. That's why the Hammonds are in prison. You guys need to quit drinking so early in the day. It skews your ability to reason.....I agree that the government needs to be restrained to a point, but basically giving land away to scofflaws and loose cannons is not and never will be in the public interest.
 
Sell the land. Let the private parties come to a suitable deal, or fight it out in civil court.

Stewardship is just another name for patronage.
 
Sell the land. Let the private parties come to a suitable deal, or fight it out in civil court.

Stewardship is just another name for patronage.

The owners of the land, more than 300 million Real American Citizens, overwhelmingly do not want to sell their land at any price.

The Bundy corporation and the Hammond corporation can purchase more land from a huge selection of private land owners if their empires feel too small to them. They bought super-cheap land that was unsuitable for their business plans and want to rob Americans to make their business thrive. There is no shortage of suitable grazing land with it's own water in private hands for sale in Oregon.
 
giving land away

Nope! Never said a word about give anything away. Sell!!!! Raise big bucks!!! Nothing like private ownership to instill good stewardship with sound guidance coded in law making legal requirement.
It won't be the dudes scratching an existence from the public lands that purchase the land.

We sure as hell don't need three agency's overseeing that sound stewardship is practiced, right now we have the BLM, USDA, and US Forest Service, sometimes all three are involved with one ranch, and they are not always in sync.
 
There is no shortage of suitable grazing land with it's own water in private hands for sale in Oregon.
I think that is absolutely true. And at the same time, the current public land that are being grazed , perhaps should not be. There might be better uses for the land, perhaps a private owner would figure it out.
 
Sell!!!! Raise big bucks!!! Nothing like private ownership to instill good stewardship with sound guidance coded in law making legal requirement.

Oh, yes! That's why there are no superfund sites anywhere that need to be cleaned up, because of that wonderful stewardship of private ownership.

barfo
 
Oh, yes! That's why there are no superfund sites anywhere that need to be cleaned up, because of that wonderful stewardship of private ownership.

barfo

Sigh! Man, go checkout the Grande Ronde river then get back to me and tell me why it is green with algae in Augusts. Hint: full of cow shit. A couple of farms where the owners need their ass booted and fined. Then there are many many grazing operations screwing up every creek (cow shit) that runs into the river. The current management of this public resource is appalling. So don't sit there in Uban USA and post otherwise.
 
Sigh! Man, go checkout the Grande Ronde river then get back to me and tell me why it is green with algae in Augusts. Hint: full of cow shit. A couple of farms where the owners need their ass booted and fined. Then there are many many grazing operations screwing up every creek (cow shit) that runs into the river. The current management of this public resource is appalling. So don't sit there in Uban USA and post otherwise.

Huh? I didn't suggest that letting cows run "a-muck" on public land was a good thing. It's not and I don't support it.

That doesn't mean that the only other alternative is selling the land to the highest bidder.

barfo
 
That doesn't mean that the only other alternative is selling the land to the highest bidder

Well we have had this management for a couple hundred years now. You city boys are not changing a thing and you have the votes.
 
The owners of the land, more than 300 million Real American Citizens, overwhelmingly do not want to sell their land at any price.

The Bundy corporation and the Hammond corporation can purchase more land from a huge selection of private land owners if their empires feel too small to them. They bought super-cheap land that was unsuitable for their business plans and want to rob Americans to make their business thrive. There is no shortage of suitable grazing land with it's own water in private hands for sale in Oregon.

Laughable nonsense.

Tell that to the people in Utah and 12 other western states who are suing the feds to get their land back.
 
I think it does a disservice to their own agenda when liberals laughingly paint these guys as "terrorists" or "thugs" or whatever, in order to equate them with the rights portrayal of black lives matter/ greenpeace/ muslims/ etc in a similar vein. It shifts the argument to "you are bad too!" instead of "neither are bad".

At the end of the day, both sides of the coin have much more in common than either realize.
 
Laughable nonsense.

Tell that to the people in Utah and 12 other western states who are suing the feds to get their land back.

Back? The states never had that land in the first place.

And, just because someone files a lawsuit, that doesn't make them right.

barfo
 
Well we have had this management for a couple hundred years now. You city boys are not changing a thing and you have the votes.

It's absolutely true and I do accept responsibility.

barfo
 
Back? The states never had that land in the first place.

And, just because someone files a lawsuit, that doesn't make them right.

barfo

It makes them not of the 300M that supposedly support this federal lunacy.

You're rarely on the right (correct) side of arguments.

http://www.heraldextra.com/news/opi...cle_acbe93ee-c907-59a1-a1c7-a6b3e55776a5.html

The voracious federal land animal, hungry for state lands, has found its newest feed lot. Mid-December, the federal government announced it is stealing a million acres from Wyoming. Land issues with the feds are huge for Utah. After the 1996 Grand Staircase-Escalante land grab, we can empathize.

The Constitution provides for limited federal lands within each state, originally assumed to be about 1 to 2%, to be purchased for post roads, forts, arsenals, etc. How is it, then, that the federal government owns 62% of Alaska and 47% of 11 border-sharing Western states, including Utah? (Just a hint: vast oil and mineral reserves exactly underlie confiscated lands.) Federal land theft is a polished art, with federal ownership at 635 million acres, or 28% of available US land, most of it in the West, according to the Congressional Research Service.
 
It makes no sense that vast areas of the west are held and mismanaged by the Federal Government with no future plan in sight. The homestead act(several) was discontinued in 1976 in the lower 48 states. A person could not meet the requirements to homestead 640 acres on any of the land that remains due to prior abuses of the act. And the state of Oregon also enacted law that would prohibit a person from complying with the Homestead requirements. The land use law of the state of Oregon won't grant a permit to built a home on rural land unless you can show it makes x dollars from the land operations. The home is required to comply with the homestead law.

As potential productivity of the land available to homestead, declined as land was parceled out, the homestead size was increased, starting at 160 acres, 320, 640 and there it stopped, leaving vast areas of the western states to be mostly unproductive but surely mismanaged. Selling graze rights on this land to users with no vested interest can't be the best management of this land possible.
I don't know today, but not that long ago, Pacific Power and Light was the largest user of this grazing practice, running more than 50,000 cow/calf pairs on BLM, USFS lands in Oregon.
It is my humble opinion that this is vile use of the lands managed by the Federal Government. And it can't be good for any rancher/farmer anywhere to have a corporation like PPL or any other having essential free use of the land to run vast herds of beef that shit in the creeks and eat seedling trees, over graze the grass and more abuse.

Perhaps we don't want to see homesteading of 1080 or 2000 acres but there has to be a better plan that what we have today for this land, something that puts it on the tax roles for the counties and off the Federal budget to manage it.
 
Last edited:
Laughable nonsense.

Tell that to the people in Utah and 12 other western states who are suing the feds to get their land back.

It's not their land, never was their land, never will be their land.

It is our land.

They don't support America at all. They are not Real Americans. They are narcissistic, greedy opportunists attempting to steal from Americans, dissolve the union and re-fight the civil war.

In other words, sore losers and traitors.
 
The bottom line is without Federal control of these lands America would soon be the most polluted, environmentally devasted country in the world, eclipsing hellholes like India and China in a few decades, completely destroying our ecosystems and leaving us without basic life support such as drinkable water and uncontaminated food.
 
It's not their land, never was their land, never will be their land.

It is our land.

They don't support America at all. They are not Real Americans. They are narcissistic, greedy opportunists attempting to steal from Americans, dissolve the union and re-fight the civil war.

In other words, sore losers and traitors.

They pay taxes, they own it.

Laughable that they should be denied the rights to use it.

You own it too, and you have no problem using it.

Where's the beef?
 
The bottom line is without Federal control of these lands America would soon be the most polluted, environmentally devasted country in the world, eclipsing hellholes like India and China in a few decades, completely destroying our ecosystems and leaving us without basic life support such as drinkable water and uncontaminated food.

Laughable.

The government doesn't own much land east of Nebraska and it's not the most polluted, environmentally devastated area in the nation, let alone the world.
 
It's not their land, never was their land, never will be their land.

It is our land.

They don't support America at all. They are not Real Americans. They are narcissistic, greedy opportunists attempting to steal from Americans, dissolve the union and re-fight the civil war.

In other words, sore losers and traitors.

I don't consider it my land when I'm not even allowed to drive on it.
 
Laughable.

The government doesn't own much land east of Nebraska and it's not the most polluted, environmentally devastated area in the nation, let alone the world.

I take it you've never been to New Jersey.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top