The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 10 of 24 FirstFirst ... 8910111220 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 100 of 236

Thread: Another Ruby Ridge in waiting

  1. #91
    Senior Member JDogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    MRGV New Mexico
    Posts
    3,313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Buzz View Post
    Nope. I know enough about history to go looking for a source. I sure as hell am not going to try and tell the story myself.

    So, go ahead and criticize me for having half the brain necessary to find out what is a the root of the feds owning so much land there. It's been that way since they became a state during Lincoln's Administration!

    I put a link in my post for you to follow. It comes from the State of Nevada, link repeated here:

    http://lands.nv.gov/forms/chapter1.pdf

    As to hunting on BLM land? I hunt on federal land in South Dakota for free, with proper license in my pocket.

    Hunting is not a commercial endeavor. Why should the guy feed his cattle and make a living on OUR land for free?

    He is a freeloader, pure and simple. I thought you guys didn't like freeloaders?

    To further expound, that's what's wrong with sites like Infowars and Faux News, and the rest of the right wing bloggoshpere. You won't get the complete story from them. They take so much oxygen out of the room with their ranting, that you can barely find the information with google, because when you do any search on Nevada, you get pages and pages of right wing nuttery.
    Thanks for the link, Buzz. I was looking for something like that this morning before taking the dogs out to some public land. Access is by permit and I have to pay an annual fee. The land in question is both sides of the Rio Grande from north of Albuquerque (with some municipal areas also managed by city and town Open Areas rules) and south for 150 miles managed by the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District, before it reaches the upper end of Elephant Butte lake where it is managed by USFWS, the Bureau of Reclamation, and NM State Parks. Some areas are closed to hunting and others require a permit fee.
    All hunting in NM is regulated by the NMG&F and you must have a valid license, and for hunting on BLM and State Land you must purchase a permit (Habitat Stamp) to do so. Indian lands vary but all require a permit, and the reservations whether in the Central Flyway or the Pacific, are required to enforce Federal harvest limits and seasons, if not State limits and dates. The residents of those reservations are also expected to follow the law.

    I see your problem with Google. It takes an intense search to get through the 'nuttery' as you call it. Don't be surprised to see RTF PP make the first few pages soon.

    BTW, for all you States Rights advocates...What don't you understand about The United States? It's what the Constitution was about.


    Living alongside the the irrigation canal formaly known as the Rio Grande. JD
    Last edited by JDogger; 04-12-2014 at 07:40 PM.
    One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

  2. #92
    Senior Member Cowtown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by JDogger View Post
    Thanks for the link, Buzz. I was looking for something like that this morning before taking the dogs out to some public land. Access is by permit and I have to pay an annual fee. The land in question is both sides of the Rio Grande from north of Albuquerque (with some municipal areas also managed by city and town Open Areas rules) and south for 150 miles managed by the Middle Rio Grande Conservancy District, before it reaches the upper end of Elephant Butte lake where it is managed by USFWS, the Bureau of Reclamation, and NM State Parks. Some areas are closed to hunting and others require a permit fee.
    All hunting in NM is regulated by the NMG&F and you must have a valid license, and for hunting on BLM and State Land you must purchase a permit (Habitat Stamp) to do so. Indian lands vary but all require a permit, and the reservations whether in the Central Flyway or the Pacific, are required to enforce Federal harvest limits and seasons, if not State limits and dates. The residents of those reservations are also expected to follow the law.

    I see your problem with Google. It takes an intense search to get through the 'nuttery' as you call it. Don't be surprised to see RTF PP make the first few pages soon.

    BTW, for all you States Rights advocates...What don't you understand about The United States? It's what the Constitution was about.


    Living alongside the the irrigation canal formaly known as the Rio Grande. JD
    Yes, the Unites States, not The Monarchy or the Dictatorship. What is the 10th Amendment?

    So you'd be ok with the government taking you home for a new water line, a new road or for new offices for themselves?
    Last edited by Cowtown; 04-12-2014 at 07:54 PM.

  3. #93
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cowtown View Post
    The government slapped down a law in 93 on this man at their whim. Land his ancestors have been using for the same purpose for 160 years. Long before the BLM was a gleam in some socialists eye.
    If the Bundy's owned the land since the 1860's, why did they pay the government grazing fees until 1993? In fact they never owned the land but rather had simply always grazed their cattle on it. If they owned the land, especially in light of the legal battles, they could've produced some document that showed ownership, some deed or land patent or even a scrap of buffalo hide with words to the effect that the Bundy family owns this land. They haven't done so.

    Just because the land has been used by the Bundy's for 150 years does not mean they own it. Just because the land has been used by the Bundy's under certain terms does not mean the owner (the gov't) doesn't have the right to change the terms of the Bundys use. Apparently that's what happened in 1993 and the Bundy's decided to act like spoiled children rather than to pay the bill.

    Eminent domain has nothing to do with this discussion.
    Eric

    WRC HR Lennoxlove's Run with Wolves JH, WCX ("Cheyenne") ... still so fondly remembered
    HRCh Struan's Devil's in De Tails SH, WCX ("Lucy")
    SR CH Struan's Flight of Fancy JH ("Muse")
    Struan's Master of the Hunt JH, WC ("Charlie")
    Struan's Just Plain Perfect ("Jane")
    Struan's Driving Us Crazy ("Daisy") ... the baby in charge

  4. #94
    Senior Member Cowtown's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Fort Worth, TX
    Posts
    881

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    If the Bundy's owned the land since the 1860's, why did they pay the government grazing fees until 1993? In fact they never owned the land but rather had simply always grazed their cattle on it. If they owned the land, especially in light of the legal battles, they could've produced some document that showed ownership, some deed or land patent or even a scrap of buffalo hide with words to the effect that the Bundy family owns this land. They haven't done so.

    Just because the land has been used by the Bundy's for 150 years does not mean they own it. Just because the land has been used by the Bundy's under certain terms does not mean the owner (the gov't) doesn't have the right to change the terms of the Bundys use. Apparently that's what happened in 1993 and the Bundy's decided to act like spoiled children rather than to pay the bill.

    Eminent domain has nothing to do with this discussion.
    No one said the Bundy's ever owned the land. Bundy asserts his right to use public land like every other citizen has the right.

    Eminent domain has everything to do with it. The example is the government can change the rules at any time at their discretion and you are simply SOL. I'm not saying that's what happened in this case but it's simply another example of the government taking rights from citizens, even real property and a homestead! You seem to be ok with the government retroactively changing laws or creating laws at their whim, the hell with citizens rights or hundreds of years of precedent.

    Are hundreds of nuclear bombs the Feds have set off in the Nevada desert more destructive than grazing cattle?

    Why did the Governor and Senator of Nevada publicly condemn the BLM if it's all no big deal.
    Last edited by Cowtown; 04-12-2014 at 08:06 PM.

  5. #95
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Wetumpka, AL
    Posts
    2,889

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    2 years ago Reuters reported Harry Reids Son made a deal with the chineese to put a solar plant at these sites along with a solar farm.

    You can't make this stuff up. This land grab has nothing to do with turtles.
    Pete
    If this dispute is part and parcel of the Chinese solar farm started 2 years ago, why does the Bundy v BLM dispute go back 20 years?
    Eric

    WRC HR Lennoxlove's Run with Wolves JH, WCX ("Cheyenne") ... still so fondly remembered
    HRCh Struan's Devil's in De Tails SH, WCX ("Lucy")
    SR CH Struan's Flight of Fancy JH ("Muse")
    Struan's Master of the Hunt JH, WC ("Charlie")
    Struan's Just Plain Perfect ("Jane")
    Struan's Driving Us Crazy ("Daisy") ... the baby in charge

  6. #96
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    SW Minnesota
    Posts
    2,047

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by freezeland View Post
    Yes, shoot a cow who has no idea its trespassing. Real good dude. Whats next, shoot our dogs if they get out of bounds too.
    But the freeloader owner knows they are trespassing, put them down and be done with the problem, better have cows die than these liberal protestors.

  7. #97
    Senior Member roseberry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    North Alabama
    Posts
    1,966

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    If the Bundy's owned the land since the 1860's, why did they pay the government grazing fees until 1993? In fact they never owned the land but rather had simply always grazed their cattle on it. If they owned the land, especially in light of the legal battles, they could've produced some document that showed ownership, some deed or land patent or even a scrap of buffalo hide with words to the effect that the Bundy family owns this land. They haven't done so.Just because the land has been used by the Bundy's for 150 years does not mean they own it. Just because the land has been used by the Bundy's under certain terms does not mean the owner (the gov't) doesn't have the right to change the terms of the Bundys use. Apparently that's what happened in 1993 and the Bundy's decided to act like spoiled children rather than to pay the bill.

    Eminent domain has nothing to do with this discussion.
    let me get this straight, you nummies think you and your families "own" land? here in alabama our proerty taxes are due october 1 each year. december 31 is the last day to pay without penalty. if taxes go unpaid they have an auction at the end of march at the courthouse square where your land is sold to the highest bidder.

    it sounds to me like: 1. we are renting. 2. our titles are nothing more than lease agreements. 3. if we don't pay our rent(taxes) we are evicted and a new tenant takes our place. 4. our lease is cancellable by our landlords with a little notice and some consideration(eminent domain).

    if you think you own your land........test it by not paying taxes next year and i think you will see who really owns it!

    btw, i have had turtle soup.....i prefer grass fed ribeye!
    john mccallie

  8. #98
    Senior Member JDogger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2003
    Location
    MRGV New Mexico
    Posts
    3,313

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Cowtown View Post
    Yes, the Unites States, not The Monarchy or the Dictatorship. What is the 10th Amendment?

    So you'd be ok with the government taking you home for a new water line, a new road or for new offices for themselves?
    Yeah, but the State of Nevada has ruled against Cliven Bundy, as well as the Fed. Why do you want for anyone to continue to be a taker??? I stated in an earlier post that in the past I was allowed to hunt game on my property without restriction. When restrictions came some decades ago, I respected them. and I adjusted. Things change. They will continue to change...

    It is not the 50's or 60's or even the 70's

    In a couple of years you will be able to vote in the new era. Good luck. It will be yours. Who will you blame then?
    One cannot reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. - Jonathan Swift

  9. #99
    Senior Member Buzz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    Brookings, South Dakota
    Posts
    6,780

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Pete View Post
    2 years ago Reuters reported Harry Reids Son made a deal with the chineese to put a solar plant at these sites along with a solar farm.

    You can't make this stuff up. This land grab has nothing to do with turtles.
    Pete
    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Johnson View Post
    If this dispute is part and parcel of the Chinese solar farm started 2 years ago, why does the Bundy v BLM dispute go back 20 years?

    The funny thing is that Solar Plant was supposed to be built near a town South of Las Vegas named Laughlin. See the county news release about the project and land purchase agreement with Clark County below.

    http://www.clarkcountynv.gov/news/pa...arProject.aspx

    The town Cliven Bundy is near is named Bunkerville, it's north of Las Vegas. Now, I did a yahoo maps directions from Laughlin to Bunkerville. The two towns are 175 miles and 2 1/2 hours drive from each other. Isn't that curious, this whole thing is part and parcel of the Chinese Solar farm? Some of the right wing blogs I've read refer specifically to Laughlin, and they can't take a second to see where the two towns are located? See the map below...

    Commissioners Clear the Way for New Jobs, Solar Project

    The Clark County Commission unanimously approved a critical land deal today, clearing the way for a massive solar power project that would bring more than 1,000 new jobs and $1 billion in new spending to Southern Nevada.
    Under the terms of the agreement approved today, ENN Mojave Energy committed to creating more than 500 construction jobs, plus more than 500 permanent jobs, and investing more than $1 billion in the solar power generation and manufacturing, research and development facilities that would be built on 9,000 acres in southern Clark County. Company estimates say the project could create about 2,900 construction jobs, plus more than 2,200 permanent jobs.
    “Today we cleared the way to bring $1 billion and thousands of new jobs to Clark County,” said Commission Vice-Chair Steve Sisolak, whose Commission District A includes the site for this project. “We also took a giant step forward in our efforts to diversify our local economy and be a leader in the solar energy industry.”
    The commissioners voted unanimously to sell ENN the exclusive rights to purchase the 9,000 acres needed for the project. With the land secured, ENN is now able to try to acquire a power purchase agreement, or agreements, from various utilities. The power purchase agreement is the next crucial piece needed for the project to move forward.
    ENN’s agreement with the County allows the company to purchase, in phases, about 9,000 acres near Laughlin so long as the company complies with a list of terms, including:

    • The creation of at least 512 construction jobs, plus the creation of at least 500 permanent jobs.
    • A minimum investment from ENN into the project of more than $100 million by the end of 2014; $350 million by the end of 2016; and $1 billion by the end of 2018.
    • The construction of a solar facility that generates a minimum of 150 megawatts by Oct. 2016; 300 megawatts by Oct. 2017; and 500 megawatts by Oct. 2018.

    If ENN fails to meet the job creation, investment and other terms of the land deal, the undeveloped land would revert back to the County.


    Last edited by Buzz; 04-12-2014 at 09:23 PM.
    "For everyone to whom much is given, of him shall much be required." -- Luke 12:48

    Raven - Moneybird's Black Magic Marker***
    (Esprit's Power Play x Trumarc's Lean Cuisine)
    Mick - Moneybird's Jumpin' Jack Flash***
    (Clubmead's Road Warrior x Oakdale Whitewater Devil Dog)
    Peerless - Moneybird's Sole Survivor
    (Two River's Lucky Willie x Moneybird's Black Magic Marker)

  10. #100
    Senior Member Gerry Clinchy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    6,839

    Default

    http://americanthinker.com/2014/04/b...ing_point.html
    This piece says it's really about the water, not the turtle. And that is believable. And that would have been a factor 20 years ago, too. Water which could be sold to Las Vegas and also to So CA. Follow the money?

    Interestingly, the director of BLM is a former Reid staffer ...
    what is more obvious is that some in the media have overlooked the small detail that the head of the Bureau of Land Management, a division of the Department of Interior, is Neil Kornze, who was also the former senior policy advisor to Senator Reid from 2003 to 2011. Mr. Kornze has served as the BLM principal deputy director for a little over a year, until the U.S. Senate confirmed him as the director of the BLM a few days ago.
    G.Clinchy@gmail.com
    "Know in your heart that all things are possible. We couldn't conceive of a miracle if none ever happened." -Libby Fudim

    ​I don't use the PM feature, so just email me direct at the address shown above.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •