Nevada

Andyva

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 24, 2004
Messages
332
City & State/Province
VA
Anybody heard about the stuff going down in Nevada? Seems like they have federales rounding up a guys cows cause he quit paying for permits to graze land that his family had been grazing for generations. Mainly quit paying because they wouldn't issue permits on that land any more because of a turtle. Maybe some of you guys that have more experience out there could tell me, would the place not be better for turtles with somebody keeping wells and basins working and managing the grass to be able to feed cows, or would it be better for the turtles to just abandon it and let the wild horses take over?
 
I think it really comes down to the wild horse and burro
Its not cut and dry and goes back several generations to when Nevada became a part of the USA
The prior agreements with Nevada and before blm existed and etc
But it's all in effort to remove him and cattle for the horse and burro
 
For generations, ranchers kept the seeps and springs clear in the Coso Range west of death valley because they ranged cattle there. The indigenous Desrt Big Horn Sheep and desrt Mule Deer herds stayed in good shape. Then the removal of wild horses burros was enacted and the sheep herds started to decline. The final straw was when it was included as part of death valley (thank you fienstein) and hunting (deer and coyotes) was banned and the ranchers had to remove all of their cattle. It didn;t take but a couple of years and the sheep were decimated, burros will take up residency around a water spot and drive off anything else that trys to water there, the burros and horses contaminate the water sources also. Without the ranchers to maintaine the water spots, springs/seeps the last time I was through there, about 15 years ago, there was hardly any wildlife to see, just feral horses and burros in fairly large herds.
 
having just gotten off of a state level agency conference call I probably should not comment.....

but I will anyway....

individual people can err once in a while but to really screw things up requires government intervention.....
 
Im sorry I dont agree with Mr Bundy's stance. This is not open range land, dont think we even have anymore of that. He choose not to pay, for his grazing rights on my land, your land, and everyone that is a US citizen. He chose to be a thief. What gives him the right to run his cattle and not let others have the same right.

We have had similar problems in SE Texas on timber land. Private companies, have owned large tracts of land that for generations allowed the locals to hunt and fish on. When these companies decided to start leasing this land out to hunters, the locals were furious. Even to the point, that they would set the woods on fire to try to keep the hunters, that of course werent locals, out.

We have a real problem in our country. We are supposed to be a nation of laws for everyone, with us all being equal under the law. We are edging closer to anarchy each day that passes.
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
The Bundy's owned the grazing rights. If they didn't why did the BLM try and buy them out. They have a thread over on Ranchers about this. Couple of folks that are close to this deal are posting on it.
 
It's not about nonpayment from what I can tell
Even if he paid the BLM they were trying to have his cattle removed
He began to quit paying when they began to try and force him out
He offered to pay the state of Nevada which some believe the government agreement when Nevada became a state and gave 85% of the land was to be return to the state but the government has kept it
They claim the BlM was formed to manage the grazing, water, fencing and etc to help the ranchers and see that the land wasn't overgrazed and abused, but over the years has become more in favor of the environmentalist and wild horse and burro crowd and etc
Bundy claims his family purchased the grazing rights and was paying a management fee to thr BLM
Once they quit working in his favor and against him he quit paying them
He wasnt going to help support them while they were trying to have him removed
But it's never been about nonpayment, even if he paid they would still try to have him removed
They've tried several ways to remove him including the endangered species act
It's all about the wild horse and burro folks IMO
 
What am I missing Red Bull, BLM hAs had this land since 1946. 87 percent of Nevada is owned by Uncle Sam , so I would think that most cattlemen in that state are having to work with Uncle Sam . The Nevada Cattlemens Association says they don't have a dog in this fight, the head ranking senator Reid says he doesn't have an interest as well. Guess I'm dense cause so far I don't get it.
 
houstoncutter":ltqupq3n said:
What am I missing Red Bull, BLM hAs had this land since 1946. 87 percent of Nevada is owned by Uncle Sam , so I would think that most cattlemen in that state are having to work with Uncle Sam . The Nevada Cattlemens Association says they don't have a dog in this fight, the head ranking senator Reid says he doesn't have an interest as well. Guess I'm dense cause so far I don't get it.

That's the million dollar question
Does the Bundy family own the grazing rights or merely leasing them
Either way can they force him off via the endangered desert tortoise
But is it ok for the wild horse and burro to graze there but not cattle
 
From my understanding the Bundy's own the water rights on the land and have paid the local county grazing fees but refuse to pay the feds.
 
Bundy claims the state of Nevada owns the land. Bundy family claims to have bought the grazing rights in 1877 long before there was a BLM. The BLM like the NPS has been overrun by environmental nuts, that are the worse land managers that you could ever see.
 
Andyva":1mp1pbbd said:
Anybody heard about the stuff going down in Nevada? Seems like they have federales rounding up a guys cows cause he quit paying for permits to graze land that his family had been grazing for generations. Mainly quit paying because they wouldn't issue permits on that land any more because of a turtle. Maybe some of you guys that have more experience out there could tell me, would the place not be better for turtles with somebody keeping wells and basins working and managing the grass to be able to feed cows, or would it be better for the turtles to just abandon it and let the wild horses take over?

Been going on a long time - you need to do a bit more research - this is not cut and dried "Bad Guy Rancher" - more to it

Feds killed off a bunch of those turtles not long ago because it was "too expensive" to keep them - so turtles is the excuse but what is the true reason?

Yet another ADMINISTRATIVE branch of the government armed to the teeth and including snipers with Barretts

Be afraid

Bez__
 
You are so right Bez. Just what does the BLM need with snipers. Whats with the 1st amendment area's? I didn't have a clue you had to be in certain area to express your 1st amendment rights in America.
 
I always figured my first amendment area was about the same acreage as my second amendment area. They want the cows off so they can lease it to energy companies.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top