No.
The land has belonged to the federal government since 1848, when it was acquired under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo.
From 1848 until passage of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, the federal government allowed free grazing on federal open range. The Taylor Grazing Act provided for grazing permits within the grazing districts established under the act. The permits required the payment of grazing fees.
The Taylor Grazing Act was subsequently pre-empted by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, which continued to provide for grazing fees.
The grazing contracts have a ten-year term.
Nevada open-range law specifically recognizes federal grazing contract provisions as Nevada law.
From 1934 to 1993, the Bundy family had a grazing contract with the federal government and paid the grazing fee.
In 1993, Clive Bundy refused to sign a new grazing agreement with the BLM because the new agreement limited the number of cattle on the allotment (due to the presence of an endangered species of tortoise) and increased the grazing fee.
Bundy has not paid the grazing fee required by both federal and state law since 1993.
Bundy has lost every court case regarding his claimed right to use the BLM property to graze his cattle. He was first ordered by a federal court to remove his cattle in 1998.
The BLM is removing his cattle as 'trespassing cattle' pursuant to a third federal court order.
As we've now come to expect, the federal government has over-reacted in its display of force.
I’m curious about something, and you seem to be up to speed on these matters.
Where I grew up (Missouri), state law required landowners to maintain 50% of common fence lines. Although you were liable for your own livestock, you were not liable for damage if they crossed through the 50% of fence that wasn’t your responsibility, IF the condition of the fencing was deemed inadequate.
What are the rules out west? Do the Feds have any responsibility to fence their property or is it entirely on the owner of the livestock to restrict them?
Yep. BLM under Obozo, Booger Eating Bureaucraps.
569.450. Trespass on cultivated land: No award of damages unless land enclosed by legal fence. No person is entitled to collect damages, and no court in this state may award damages, for any trespass of livestock on cultivated land in this state if the land, at the time of the trespass was not enclosed by a legal fence.
How can the BLM claim damages on unfenced land?