Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

OIL FRACKING LEASES Reason For Bundy Ranch Fiasco in Nevada NOT 'Desert Tortoise!
The Survival Place Blog ^ | Aprol 11, 2014 | kackikat

Posted on 04/11/2014 8:34:41 AM PDT by Kackikat

"The Bureau of Land Management has just cashed in with $1.27 million in oil and gas leases in Nevada. This was just reported two weeks ago in ShaleReporter.com, which states:

U.S. Bureau of Land Management geologist Lorenzo Trimble tells the Las Vegas Review-Journal the Elko County oil and gas leases sold

Tuesday for $1.27 million to six different companies. The auction took place in Reno. The leases are near where Houston-based Noble Energy Inc. wants to drill for oil and natural gas on 40,000 acres of public and private land near the town of Wells. The Review-Journal reports the project would be the first in Nevada to use hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, to extract oil and gas from shale deposits.

The way this works, of course, is that BLM runs land theft operations by claiming they are “managing” the land and thereby kicking everyone else off it. "

(Excerpt) Read more at thesurvivalplaceblog.com ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; News/Current Events; US: Nevada
KEYWORDS: agenda21; bundy; bundyranch; civilianarmy; fracking; harryreid; neilkornze; nevada; nevadaranch; nwo; obamamafia; oilleases; testingtyranny; trialrun; un
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-260 next last
To: JRandomFreeper

I don’t. I have cows and understand the business. I have to pay my lease fees on the land I don’t own.


51 posted on 04/11/2014 9:13:06 AM PDT by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat
The person who wrote that article said fracking uses toxic chemicals in the well and fracking causes earthquakes.

I know carbon dioxide is put under pressure down the well that is also horizontal in two directions at the bottom of the well, where the carbon dioxide combusts and releases the oil/gas from the shale. I wouldn't call carbon dioxide a toxic chemical in a well as the author does. He should list the toxic chemicals if he says there are some.

There is also no proof fracking causes earthquakes. Underground geology is considered before a fracking well is drilled.

These drilling companies strive for safety as they don't want anything to happen to destroy the well they are drilling. They are investing millions of dollars to bring in that well and lose millions if the well is compromised. They also have to abide by OSHA safety rules while drilling these wells.

52 posted on 04/11/2014 9:13:15 AM PDT by Marcella (Prepping can save your life today. Going Galt is freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

You hit the nail on the head, and I see it in courthouse deeds or contracts all the time, and the democrat leftist control freaks have even gone so far as to hide those facts.


53 posted on 04/11/2014 9:13:41 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Paladin2

That sounds plausible.


54 posted on 04/11/2014 9:14:24 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: SolidRedState

We get the government we deserve, and we deserve what we tolerate. Bundy seems to be done tolerating what the rest of us have put up with.

I doubt he paid his lease after his permit was denied, due to the tortoise.

Interesting how the Feds voted themselves control of state lands. The states need to start evicting the blm, EPA, NSF, ect.


55 posted on 04/11/2014 9:14:41 AM PDT by Dead Dog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350
That $1.27 million doesn't include the millions in bribe money that was paid to obama and his cronies. The only thing this regime wants to drill is money for their own pockets. Well, that's beside all the drilling that goes on between Berry and Reggie.
56 posted on 04/11/2014 9:15:01 AM PDT by peeps36 (I'm Not A Racist, I Hate Douchebags of All Colors)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350

Government control and greed anyway, and the real fact being more lies from the BLM, to hide ‘whatever’.


57 posted on 04/11/2014 9:15:57 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat
OPen range photo: open range open-range.jpg `Some things gnaw at a man worse than dying.'
58 posted on 04/11/2014 9:17:09 AM PDT by tumblindice (Are all Democrats inveterate, habitual liars?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Marcella

I’m not saying ‘everything’ Mike Adams wrote is accurate, but in reviewing the Natural News and the Map, I’m considering the lying involved.... it was the best source available and the article I found this morning.

However, I think now that these solar damage issues and the oil leases are surfacing, we will find more facts that have been hidden under the guise of the ‘Desert Tortoise”. And exposure of a cover up to make money, when all the BLM had to do was take Bundy’s money he tried to pay for the leasing in prior years....instead this refusal and saying he did not pay shows premeditation to eventually do exactly what they are doing now.


59 posted on 04/11/2014 9:20:32 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: IMR 4350
Sounds like 6 companies got themselves a real good deal.

Only if they get production. Otherwise, no.

Early leases let in the Bakken play were going for from $0.25 to 0.50 an acre. Much of the area had been drilled conventionally (vertical wells) and the usual producing formations had little to no porosity development. Keep in mind it was all highly experimental, and at that point, considered pure risk for the oil companies involved.

Still, Oil drilling/production has never really interfered with grazing. The Blackburn field north of Eureka was discovered partly because of natural oil seeps in stock (water) tanks.

60 posted on 04/11/2014 9:20:43 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon

That would be the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, which was passed in response to overgrazing on public lands managed by the federal government. The reason the BLM has a grazing lease system in place is for the protection of the public lands by limiting erosion and degradation of these rangelands which can be caused by overgrazing.


61 posted on 04/11/2014 9:21:00 AM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: peeps36

I perceive you are quite understanding of the core problems.


62 posted on 04/11/2014 9:21:52 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat

Reid is on record as opposing oil leases on federal property. That is easily searched. Some of Bundy’s STATE water rights are from the Virgin River. Nevada water law says you have to use the water or loose it, reverts back to the State.

http://www.leg.state.nv.us/NRS/NRS-533.html

Las Vegas ahs already applied and won Federal approval for a pipeline that runs clean through the disputed area and involves the Virgin River water shed.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-02-12/las-vegas-water-pipeline-plan-challenged-in-u-s-court.html

Study the Owens Valley in Kalifornia, same mechanism.


63 posted on 04/11/2014 9:21:56 AM PDT by mad_as_he$$
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad
Most media people don't realize hydraulic fracturing is a production enhancement method and not a drilling method. Yes, it is that bad, and I have tried to correct them in other venues.

They even refer to rail transported Bakken oil as 'fracked' as if that made it more dangerous, not realizing it is the rock around the wellbore which gets fracked, not the oil.

64 posted on 04/11/2014 9:24:11 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: peeps36

Not likely.

Any other companies bidding for the lease that didn’t get the lease even though they had a higher bid, would have a record of what they bid and could blow the whole thing out of the water.

If that is all they paid for that amount of acreage, then it is a completely untested much less unproven area and other companies didn’t think it was worth the trouble.

The winners of the bid might end up making out like a bandit.


65 posted on 04/11/2014 9:25:50 AM PDT by IMR 4350
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Smokin' Joe

Oh, noes! Not “fracked” oil! “Fracked” oil is much, much worse than any other kind of oil! “Fracked” oil means we’re all gonna die! ;-)


66 posted on 04/11/2014 9:25:51 AM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

Thanks for those links. And this link is about the solar use damage in So Nevada, and the dry lake....?

http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/energy/renewable_references.Par.48679.File.dat/Regional%20Mitigation%20Strategy%20for%20the%20Dry%20Lake%20Solar%20Energy%20Zone,%20Technical%20Note%20444%20%28March%202014%29.pdf

You are starting to make a lot of sense, so keep it up.

The lies about the tortoise is what shows us that there is more to this than protecting a reptile the BLM was destroying a year ago, and it’s between oil leases, solar issue and dry lake, and now your links showing water as a goal or maybe all of it....bringing all this info together shows that BLM has a lot to hide from public.


67 posted on 04/11/2014 9:27:54 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative
I have a hard time believing that the BLM has been conspiring since the early 90's to set aside this land for oil and gas drilling technology that is just now taking off.

It sounds like this rancher's original beef (pun intended) was that he felt his grazing fees weren't being used to his benefit. His mistake was diverging from that legal argument and going down a path of challenging BLM's statutory authority to administer those lands. That is a losing argument.

The family has done a good job of framing the argument as the poor rancher trying to fight the evil government, but that will only last so long.

68 posted on 04/11/2014 9:29:16 AM PDT by USNBandit (sarcasm engaged at all times)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

One question, does that mean if Bundy loses the use of the public grazing rights on government land, that he may lose water rights on his ranch as well?


69 posted on 04/11/2014 9:30:06 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Cicero

On TV did I see BLM idiots pointing pistols at the pro-rancher crowd?


70 posted on 04/11/2014 9:31:49 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat

Bump...


71 posted on 04/11/2014 9:33:16 AM PDT by dcwusmc (A FREE People have no sovereign save Almighty GOD!!! III OK We are EVERYWHERE!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 54 | View Replies]

To: SolidRedState

“it could get really hairy down there.”

I don’t think anything would get him down there.


72 posted on 04/11/2014 9:33:22 AM PDT by Scrambler Bob (You can count my felonies by looking at my FR replies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit

Read Post #63, as it addresses some of the water rights that may be lost by Bundy Ranch...??

The conspiracy, in my view, is the government not taking Bundy’s payments years ago, as a plan to get him off the land completely.... eventually, and not about the oil leases. The state would not take the payments, so he did the maintenance the BLM would not do. The BLM waited until the lease money owed had accumulated to a large enough sum to warrant doing away with his grazing agreement.

Who knows what is in the mind of environmentalists, government control freaks, or BLM officials.


73 posted on 04/11/2014 9:35:50 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit

In other news>>>>>>>>

What the hell is the Federal Guv in far away Washington DC doing owning so much land in Nevada? The state of Nevada and various counties should be owning and administering this land. The huge Fed Guv percentage of ownership of Alaskan and Western states lands is thievery


74 posted on 04/11/2014 9:36:06 AM PDT by dennisw (The first principle is to find out who you are then you can achieve anything -- Buddhist monk)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad
The contention seemed to be that somehow 'fracked' oil was more volatile (I recall they used the term "explosive") than 'unfracked' oil.

The truth falls victim to hysterical silliness, but, unfortunately, combined with the 'Captain Planet' meme of eeeevil "Big Oil", people who don't think just lap it up.

Then begins the tedium of trying to educate the hysterical and clear up other misconceptions.

75 posted on 04/11/2014 9:38:07 AM PDT by Smokin' Joe (How often God must weep at humans' folly. Stand fast. God knows what He is doing.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 66 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

IMHO, I do not believe any government should own the land, because it promotes greed and manipulation.


76 posted on 04/11/2014 9:39:25 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat

Bundy family has grazing rights with the state. The state of Nevada has a governor that should be pushing back against the feds. Some congressional reps are getting behind Bundy.

Land was always open for hundreds of years and only recently came under federal ‘administration’. The state of Nevada has granted grazing rights to ranchers for much longer and has sovereignty.

My first impression when I heard about this was that the Bundy family were encroaching on federal land but that’s not the case.


77 posted on 04/11/2014 9:42:19 AM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Agamemnon
Bundy has had an opportunity for 20+ years to substantiate his claims. He has not provided any evidence that he held grandfathered grazing rights to public lands. His legal defense was as follows:

Bundy principally opposes the United States’ motion for summary judgment on the ground that this court lacks jurisdiction because the United States does not own the public lands in question. As this court previously ruled in United States v. Bundy, Case No. CV-S- 98-531-JBR (RJJ) (D. Nev. Nov. 4, 1998), “the public lands in Nevada are the property of the United States because the United States has held title to those public lands since 1848, when Mexico ceded the land to the United States.” CV-S-98-531 at 8 (citing United States v. Gardner, 107 F.3d 1314, 1318 (9th Cir. 1997)).

Moreover, Bundy is incorrect in claiming

While I think Bundy is legally in the wrong here, I think it abhorrent that the federal government thinks it's appropriate to mount a small-scale, armed invasion of BLM agents to remove cattle when it won't lift a finger to remove 12 million illegal aliens who are also trespassing and doing exponentially more damage to the land and the economy than grazing cattle.
78 posted on 04/11/2014 9:43:30 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat

“IMHO, I do not believe any government should own the land, because it promotes greed and manipulation.”

That’s right, we’ve been here before.
The Teapot Dome scandal was a bribery incident that took place in the United States from 1920 to 1923 during the administration of President Warren G. Harding. Secretary of the Interior Albert B. Fall leased Navy petroleum reserves at Teapot Dome in Wyoming and two other locations in California to private oil companies at low rates without competitive bidding. In 1922 and 1923, the leases became the subject of a sensational investigation by Senator Thomas J. Walsh. Fall was later convicted of accepting bribes from the oil companies.

As we’ve seen demonstrated time and again, corruption sticks to this `transparent’ administration like snot on a suede jacket.


79 posted on 04/11/2014 9:48:37 AM PDT by tumblindice (Are all Democrats inveterate, habitual liars?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat

Drilling and grazing happen together on public land all the time. One does not preclude the other. This story is BS, as anyone in oil country will know.


80 posted on 04/11/2014 9:49:16 AM PDT by 'smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: fabian
Public land? He is part of that public. It is public, not federal land...the government has no right to claim it.


What you obviously have not been following this. Thanks to the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo or the ‘Divine Right of Kings’ or God's grant of dominion over the earth; every square inch of the US belongs to the government to use and charge for at their pleasure, even if they sold the rights to said land ect. What are you some kind of Robin Hood?/sarc
81 posted on 04/11/2014 9:49:37 AM PDT by Idaho_Cowboy (Ride for the Brand. Joshua 24:15)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
My first impression when I heard about this was that the Bundy family were encroaching on federal land but that’s not the case.

It is the case. Nevada cannot grant grazing access to public land that it doesn't own. The U.S. owns that land and has since 1848, which was 16 years before Nevada became a state. Nevada disclaimed all right and title to that land when it became a state.

There is a valid argument to be made that Nevada's disclaim was unconstitutional, but that is a separate discussion. Under the supreme law of the land right now, Nevada doesn't own the land.

82 posted on 04/11/2014 9:51:54 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

“Go buy you some cows and see if you can graze on BLM land without paying.”

The larger issue here is just why does the Federal Government “own” 85% of Nevada? The land was basically “a bribe” taken by the Federal Government when most of the Western States “were allowed” to join the Union. With the mountain of debt the Fed’s have today, seems to me that they should be divesting themselves of most all of it, and disbanding the BLM.


83 posted on 04/11/2014 9:52:55 AM PDT by vette6387
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: dennisw

This control of massive swaths of land in the west by the feds is unconstitutional. Lands have to be sold by the states to the feds and are limited to usage such as post offices, postal roads, forts, dock yards etc.

As Article One, Section 8, Clause 17 states, Congress has the power:

To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings.

BLM has also refused to round up about 2,000 wild horses on this ground which by their grazing habits cause much more damage than cattle.

This is about control beginning with the land in the western states and unless its checked will continjue to spread like a cancer.

These county sheriffs and states need to man up here and begin kicking the BLM off state lands.


84 posted on 04/11/2014 9:54:19 AM PDT by bereanway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

I did read several places that Nevada Gov outspokenly opposed BLM attack on Bundy Ranch, stating ‘the Feds were over reaching and violating Constitutional rights’...


85 posted on 04/11/2014 9:54:29 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: SolidRedState

So true. Mr. Bundy is running 900 head of cattle on 600,000 acres. They hardly make an imprint.


86 posted on 04/11/2014 9:54:52 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: logic101.net; SolidRedState; Cicero; Louis Foxwell; Resolute Conservative; Logical me; IYAS9YAS; ...

The only way this administration would allow fracking on fed lands is if there was no oil or gas there.
..................
the amazing thing here is that the feds have even allowed any test drilling to happen given how biased the feds are against oil.

for years nevadans have talked about how the ground in those counties just stinks of oil.

A lot of wells were poked in the ground in previous decades before fracking but nothing much came up.

But for one exception.

One of the biggest producing wells in US history produced in volume for more than a decade back in the 1980’s in one of those counties in Nevada. Oil people talk about how there had to be a lot more oil locked in shale— feeding that oil pool from below.

Its very very possible imho that the size of the shale oil deposits in Nevada will rival those in the eagle ford and the baaken. In that case, being owners of the land — some serious revenues would accrue to federal accounts.

Agree with the note above that Las Vegas is trying to do a water grab for water under upstate counties similar to what Los Angeles did 100 years ago to Owens Valley. imho it would be wiser for 6 southwestern states to lobby the feds to pipe spring (March-June) flood Mississippi river water over the south pass in Wyoming. That would lower the Mississippi by 10 feet, prevent flooding and inundate the southwest with new water.

It doesn’t look like either water or oil have much to do with the Rancher issue. That just looks like the BLM being the BLM. That is, a bunch of knuckleheads. If the rationale for the whole deal is the tortoise—then the tortoise needs to go. Its just impossible that tortoises and cows can’t be friends or inhabit the same ground.


87 posted on 04/11/2014 9:55:44 AM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: USNBandit
The version of the story I've heard is that Bundy was paying his grazing fees, per his lease, to the BLM until 1993. In 1993, the BLM reduced his grazing allotment, i.e., the total amount of acreage he could use for grazing, as part of an effort to preserve habitat for this desert tortoise. So Bundy quits paying the BLM altogether because he figures he needs all the acreage he originally had to graze his herd.

Now, I don't think it's unreasonable for Bundy to be miffed because out in southern Nevada, it takes about 320 acres to sustain a single head of cattle. Less acreage for grazing means raising fewer cattle, unless you're feeding them at your own expense. But he still owed grazing fees on the acreage he was able to retain, and he didn't pay those to the BLM. Says he tried to pay the grazing fees to Clark County and the State of Nevada, but since he's leasing federal lands for his cattle, not state or county lands, he was paying his rental to the wrong agencies.

Why Bundy didn't reduce his herd back in 1993 or try to find rangeland that didn't have other wildlife issues is something that Bundy hasn't explained. If he had taken either action, he probably wouldn't have the BLM rounding up his cattle today.

I don't want to see this guy go out of business, but he *is* grazing his cattle on federal lands, after all, and if he is doing that, he's subjecting himself to federal rules. Gotta play by the rules. Like one poster stated above...if you don't pay your grazing fees, the owner of the land is likely to tell you to move your cattle somewhere else.
88 posted on 04/11/2014 9:56:25 AM PDT by Milton Miteybad (I am Jim Thompson. {Really.})
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 68 | View Replies]

To: Valpal1

He stopped paying the fees when the BLM stopped maintaining the land that was agreed upon. And he has kept up maintaining the property on his own dime. I wish more freepers would get the whole story. This is just like the kid who had his flag flying upside down and had the Marines take it. The freepers had no Idea what the protests were about, yet they were quick to judge. This is the same kind of thing. I can’t believe freepers are believing anything the Government is reporting. And why is his cattle being killed and buried? That is good ole fashion cattle rustling by the BLM. I AM CLIVE BUNDY.


89 posted on 04/11/2014 9:57:52 AM PDT by crazydad (Obamamohamed is a traitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: mad_as_he$$

I just remembered that the UN has been pushing to get control of USA water for the past ten years, and this bunch of government employees are all UN followers.
I’ll read the links you provided and see what I can glean from Nevada law and CA issue for this situation.


90 posted on 04/11/2014 9:58:11 AM PDT by Kackikat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

The question is:

“Shoul local public land currently being used and historically being used for the good of the local community be taken from the local community for the claimed benefit of the national community?”

I’m not asking this question legally, I’m asking morally.


91 posted on 04/11/2014 9:59:28 AM PDT by cizinec
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Alas Babylon!

Bingo and also the BLM stopped maintaining the land that was agreed upon. So Mr Bundy stopped paying. He has maintained the land out of his own pocket.


92 posted on 04/11/2014 9:59:37 AM PDT by crazydad (Obamamohamed is a traitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

The US govt is not supposed to be holding ownership of land in the states except for a very precise set of reasons. Grazing cattle isn’t one of them nor is oil and gas leasing. So Bundy has more of an argument than the govt


93 posted on 04/11/2014 10:01:43 AM PDT by Georgia Girl 2 (The only purpose o f a pistol is to fight your way back to the rifle you should never have dropped.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Resolute Conservative

I know in 2002 when I was camping on BLM land in Utah, out in the middle of nowhere, cattle were all around our site grazing.

I should have been a good citizen and got the Fed involved to stop this atrocity.


94 posted on 04/11/2014 10:03:17 AM PDT by roofgoat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: cizinec

precedent.....

Grand Staircase Escalante to stop coal mining


95 posted on 04/11/2014 10:03:39 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: BuckeyeTexan

The original agreement between Nevada (or any state) and the federal government bestows certain rights the state retains.

The federal government cannot ‘own’ land in a territory that is not a state. It can ‘administer’ and claim legal or territorial jurisdiction over a territory; but never ownership. When a state is incorporated the land jurisdiction is made a negotiated part of the agreement between the state and the federal government.

Your argument that the federal government ‘owned’ land in Nevada falls flat. The land was never bought from anyone and there was never any title to it.

The ranchers grazing on that land for generations were never encroaching on it. The federal land grabs came later and many of the grabs were driven by special interests.

We will see if the governor of Nevada decides to assert state rights and if he doesn’t, we will see what Congress does about it when the Nevada caucus gets revved up.


96 posted on 04/11/2014 10:03:43 AM PDT by Hostage (ARTICLE V)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 82 | View Replies]

To: Kackikat

https://www.reviewjournal.com/news/water-environment/collins-manages-insult-offend-utahns-comments-bundy-roundup
This just in threats against Americans for supporting the Bundys. Funny how ballsy these people get when Fedzilla is on their side.


97 posted on 04/11/2014 10:04:24 AM PDT by crazydad (Obamamohamed is a traitor)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Milton Miteybad

It seems that THIS admin BELIEVES that grazing cattle creates global
warming!!! Since the FEDS seem to OWN so much OPEN land around
ranchers WE as a nation are going to SEE ALOT MORE of this!!! MY
grocery bill is absolutely OUT OF CONTROL as it is right now!!! The
damage to this country is happening so QUICKLY somethings gotta give!!!
I have to tell you I HATE THIS SOB!!!


98 posted on 04/11/2014 10:05:43 AM PDT by Kit cat (OBummer must go)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 88 | View Replies]

To: Hostage

Actually, The USA won the war with Mexico and the treaty of guadelupe Hildago took the land including Nevada and paid Mexico $15 million for it. The government ownership of the land was the basis for the homestead policy where people were given land to occupy it.

The badlands were not homesteaded. I think the existing 150 acres actually owned night be land originally obtained by homesteading.


99 posted on 04/11/2014 10:13:38 AM PDT by bert ((K.E. N.P. N.C. +12 ..... History is a process, not an event)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]

To: Hostage
Your argument that the federal government ‘owned’ land in Nevada falls flat. The land was never bought from anyone and there was never any title to it.

You are incorrect. The U.S. purchased that land from Mexico for $15 million in 1848 under the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo. (See my post up-thread.) The U.S. owned the land before Nevada was a territory or a state.

100 posted on 04/11/2014 10:13:53 AM PDT by BuckeyeTexan (There are those that break and bend. I'm the other kind. ~Steve Earle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 96 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-5051-100101-150151-200 ... 251-260 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson