BLM runs the Federal Helium Program out of Amarillo, Texas, if you didn't know.
J Tanner, post: 352081, member: 7358 wrote: Glad to see Native Americans looking for their piece of the pie as well. Wouldn't their claim supersede the Bundy's?
It might if there were any such thing as a NATIVE American.
ALL peoples on this continent and on South America are immigrants. Some just got here a few thousand years before the rest.
I read that Harney county is also dealing with the potential affects of the BLM's intention to withdraw 10,000,000 acres of public and national forest lands in order to protect the Sage Grouse.
Withdrawal is defined as follows;
Surface Entry Closure: This term means the surface estate is closed to disposition under the public land laws. Below are examples of actual language used in withdrawal orders; all three examples have the same meaning.
"Withdrawn from settlement, sale, location, or entry under the general land laws."
"Withdrawn from operation of the public land laws."
"Withdrawn from all forms of appropriation under the general land laws."
Closed to Mining: This term means the surface and subsurface estates are closed to disposition under the 1872 mining laws. Below are examples of actual language used in withdrawal orders; all three examples have the same meaning.
"Withdrawn from location and entry under the United States mining laws (30 U.S.C. Ch. 2)." (The current language used.)
"Withdrawn from operation of the mining laws."
"Withdrawn from appropriation under the mining laws."
Closed to Mineral Leasing: This term means the subsurface estate is closed to mineral leasing applications. Below are examples of actual language used in withdrawal orders; both examples have the same meaning.
"Withdrawn from applications and offers under the mineral leasing laws." (The current language used.)
"Withdrawn from operation of the mineral leasing laws."
This locks up a very vast expanse of minerals from ever being accessed. This also affects the ability to utilize the land for grazing. I am positive it will impact the ability to access the transportation system on public lands. That is A LOT of ground.
So to reducto
Stephen Johnson, post: 352167, member: 53 wrote: It might if there were any such thing as a NATIVE American.
ALL peoples on this continent and on South America are immigrants. Some just got here a few thousand years before the rest.
So your reductio ad absurdum argument is the only truly Native peoples on the planet resided in Olduvai Gorge?
J Tanner, post: 352163, member: 7358 wrote: BLM runs the Federal Helium Program out of Amarillo, Texas, if you didn't know.
I knew the Federal government had the Helium facility, I did not know it was the BLM.
I found this on their website. The Cross Bar is apparently the name of the ranch they bought in 1931.
"The Cross Bar is the only BLM-administered land in the state of Texas. It is a 12,000-acre tract originally purchased by the Federal government in 1931 as part of a program to establish a strategic helium reserve. Today the land is used for a variety of ecological and archeological research projects and for public recreation."
Interestingly, also on the front page is the details of a prescribed burn they have coming up soon.
James
BLM inherited the Helium responsibility when the Bureau of Mines was dissolved on March 30, 1996.
BLM also has other subsurface interests around the state, not that it matters much.
There are the things that seem most concerning to me when you look at it from the view that this could happen to anyone who is merely trying to manage their own land that abuts federal land. I have relatives in this situation (owning land next to federal land) and so it does put people on edge that any accident could be seen as an intentional act.
Steven Hammond and Dwight Hammond Jr. had served time for fires set on their ranch that spread to public land. The panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals then said it wasnÛªt enough. The panel vacated their sentences earlier this month and remanded them for resentencing.
In 1999, the Hammonds who lease land from the BLM were warned that they were not allowed to burn without approval from the agency. The warning came after a fire Steven Hammond started on their land escaped onto public land. In 2001, the Hammonds set a fire on their land that spread to public land, burning 139 acres. Controlled fires escape all the time across this nation onto adjacent lands.
Both fires were started on their own land, but escaped onto BLM land. Much of the media implies that they set fires on actual BLM land and use the word "arson". None of this seems intentionally done, so why the 5 year mandatory prison sentence?
The "slaughter" of deer seems to be irrelevant to the case of the fires, but was brought in as added "fuel to the fire".
In all of this, remember if you are on a Jury, you can also decide that you "Don't like that law" and say "Not Guilty" It's called Jury Nullification. It was used by folks during prohibition.
The "slaughter" of deer seems to be irrelevant to the case of the fires, but was brought in as added fuel to the fire.[/quote wrote:
I agree that the whole deer slaughter thing just had a smack of "I'll get you for ruining my hunt". Betting they weren't even residents 'cause they hired a guide. If those deer were snacking on the Hammonds winter feed then they had every right. But admit I don't know where it occurred - their land or the BLM's. Too much is not known.139 acre fire sends 2 men to prison for 5 years. This after they refused to sell their land. Does seem to hint at retaliation. We lose thousands of acres to 'natural' wild fires in CA all the time.
I'm not saying the Hammonds don't deserve some time in jail. They obviously made some poor choices. But sending a 70+ year old to prison for a minor fire outbreak just seems pretty excessive.
IMO.
J. Penry, post: 352289, member: 321 wrote: There are the things that seem most concerning to me when you look at it from the view that this could happen to anyone who is merely trying to manage their own land that abuts federal land. I have relatives in this situation (owning land next to federal land) and so it does put people on edge that any accident could be seen as an intentional act.
Steven Hammond and Dwight Hammond Jr. had served time for fires set on their ranch that spread to public land. The panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals then said it wasnÛªt enough. The panel vacated their sentences earlier this month and remanded them for resentencing.
In 1999, the Hammonds who lease land from the BLM were warned that they were not allowed to burn without approval from the agency. The warning came after a fire Steven Hammond started on their land escaped onto public land. In 2001, the Hammonds set a fire on their land that spread to public land, burning 139 acres. Controlled fires escape all the time across this nation onto adjacent lands.
Both fires were started on their own land, but escaped onto BLM land. Much of the media implies that they set fires on actual BLM land and use the word "arson". None of this seems intentionally done, so why the 5 year mandatory prison sentence?
The "slaughter" of deer seems to be irrelevant to the case of the fires, but was brought in as added "fuel to the fire".
I agree that the whole deer slaughter thing just had a smack of "I'll get you for ruining my hunt". Betting they weren't even residents 'cause they hired a guide. If those deer were snacking on the Hammonds winter feed then they had every right. But admit I don't know where it occurred - their land or the BLM's. Too much is not known.
139 acre fire sends 2 men to prison for 5 years. This after they refused to sell their land. Does seem to hint at retaliation. We lose thousands of acres to 'natural' wild fires in CA all the time.
I'm not saying the Hammonds don't deserve some time in jail. They obviously made some poor choices. But sending a 70+ year old to prison for a minor fire outbreak just seems pretty excessive.
IMO.
This is an interesting view:
Oregon Standoff Reveals There Is No Adult Supervision of Federal Agencies in the West
www.nationalreview.com/article/429266/oregon-rancher-protest-federal-agencies-out-control
Kind of makes me stop and think about what a social contract really means.
The interesting thing to think about is the fact that if the people, the sheriff, and the local gov. in Harney county supported the Bundy's demand to relinquish the management of federal lands to local control, they would have the power to enforce the demand and it would happen very quickly. It would be as easy as the occupation of the federal building.
Sounds like a wild idea, but there are many county commissioners and supervisors across the west that have discussed this very thing. Either turning the lands over to the states or even to the county. Trouble has been brewing for a long time.
The competition between embarrassment and interest on this one is tough. A few things stand out to me.
The abuse of administrative power is nothing new. It's also not universal. If the BLM were as incompetent and evil as many put forth, the northwest would be a 100% federally owned moonscape. Given the competing interests and ever changing mandates I think they do a pretty good job.
To bring that thought back around, I see a glaring truth that keeps being overlooked. The two ranchers were convicted by a jury. They accepted the convictions and conditions of the plea agreement to eliminate the risk of additional convictions. This was after being informed the minimum penalty was 5 years. Regardless of other facts this is true and unrefuted.
As for the 'occupy' folks, they are simply hijackers. The 'leader' said they would leave if asked. They were. It seems we have an integrity problem.
I've invested considerable time in policy here in the northwest. The over-riding theme is distrust of anything not understood or directly controlled. Science, common sense and at times basic reality are overcome by fear and anger. It would be entertaining to study the phenomenon if it weren't so dangerous and destructive.
Ramble mode off...
thebionicman, post: 352354, member: 8136 wrote: The over-riding theme is distrust of anything not understood or directly controlled.
thebionicman, post: 352354, member: 8136 wrote: ....The over-riding theme is distrust of anything not understood or directly controlled. Science, common sense and at times basic reality are overcome by fear and anger........
Amen, Halleluiah, pass the communion cup!
People are not dumber than the used to be. They just have more information than they are capable of processing.
Looks like they done pissed off the wrong crowd. :-@
Williwaw, post: 352369, member: 7066 wrote: Looks like they done pissed off the wrong crowd. :-@
That's awesome.
"If the BLM were as incompetent and evil as many put forth, the northwest would be a 100% federally owned moonscape."
I have not heard the word evil used in this discussion to describe how the federal government manages the public lands. They don't need to acquire any additional lands in my county, they already have 64% of it.
Here is a map produced by BLM demonstrating how much of the western land the federal government influences. Not nearly 100% of the west.
Kind of makes me wonder why they need to withdraw 15,000 square miles of public lands to protect the sage grouse.
The undeniable fact is that many traditional uses of public lands are slowly being criminalized in the name of environmental protection.
They are doing a very good job of preserving the wilderness, while granting token mitigations.
I appreciate your opinion and you are definitely not alone in your thinking.
Kind of makes me wonder why they need to withdraw 15,000 square miles of public lands to protect the sage grouse.
ÛÏThere is a delight in the hardy life of the open. There are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy and its charm. The nation behaves well if it treats the natural resources as assets which it must turn over to the next generation increased and not impaired in value. Conservation means development as much as it does protection.Û
- Theodore Roosevelt
President of the United States
- See more at: http://wilderness.org/article/famous-quotes#sthash.JVVszIPv.dpuf
Williwaw, post: 352369, member: 7066 wrote: Looks like they done pissed off the wrong crowd. :-@
I liked this part best...
Û?Û?.ÛÏsick to death of you welfare queens and cheats living off of BLM land, illegally gutting our wilderness and our wildlife.
[sarcasm]That is how I always envisioned the ranchers of Burns - Welfare queens and cheats.[/sarcasm]
They are probably the hardest working group of people in this country.
This guy actually sounds kind of unstable to me.
