masterrig

Oops! Chuck

I won't disagree with any of what you've said. From talking with land owners, I'll put it this way, they've been known to use 'questionable' methods in their acquiring land. Chuck

I'm pretty certain it was the second. The BLM can't just take your land without compensating you for it (it's in the Constitution!). On the other hand most Western ranchers (except for Texas, I think) do not own the vast majority of the land they use; they own the part with buildings and such, and pay for grazing rights on vast acreages of public land. It wouldn't really be practical to have to own the land, as most of it is so poor that it takes several acres to support one cow. Because BLM land is publicly owned, it is supposed to be "multi-use". That means the rancher is not supposed to be able to deny access to hikers, rockhounds, etc as long as they don't bother the livestock. For that reason, as one example, roads could have gates (to keep cattle in) but those gates were not supposed to be locked. However, when I lived in Arizona in the 90's there was a movement amongst many ranchers to treat the land as their private property and deny access to everyone. Local sheriffs were very reluctant to get involved in access disputes, so generally there was no practical way to fight this land grab. Southern Arizona has a myriad of small mountain ranges, often called "sky islands" because the higher elevations are much cooler and so are forested, unlike the lowland desert between the ranges. Ranchers could in effect claim entire mountain ranges as their private fiefdom just by leasing grazing rights to the surrounding desert and denying everyone else access. Don You are correct... the BLM is not in Texas. Instead, we have The Nature's Conservancy. Chuck

Thanks for posting that!! That shines a different light on this mess. Sound right in line with how the BLM operates. I believe, I'll take her word over the BLM's. They're trying to make Bundy look like a land grabber and a thief when it's the BLM who is wrong. They've got their 'goon squad' there for intimidation and force. I sure don't want to see any blood-shed over this. Chuck

I can't find anything in regard to 'ownership' of that particular piece of land. I would tend to think that the Bundy's 'free-grazed' and continued to do so after the BLM was formed in 1946. There was probably a handshake agreement. That's probably what he means by 'in the family'. Much like anything else the media covers, we're not getting the 'whole' story, I feel. Just seems funny, Mr. Bundy is 67 yrs. old and so is the BLM. Chuck

Okay, so wait until he drives into town to buy a gallon of milk, and catch him then. That would be less dangerous than surrounding his home with law officers and facing a horde of angry citizens. Have we learned nothing since Waco and Ruby Ridge? I just wonder if all this blood lust from the liberals here would still apply if it was instead a liberal home owner standing up against the government, rather than a conservative. Here's a little more on the subject... http://home.myhughesnet.com/tv/3/player/vendor/CNN/player/cnn/asset/cnn-pilots_friend_something_went_wrong-cnn/source/auto I watched this a couple times and I swear, it says the BLM didn't start charging Bundy a fee for grazing his cattle until 1993. In a previous story, it said Bundy owed the fee since 1993. That makes it sound like Bundy had been paying then just quit paying. A little confusing! The land has been in the Bundy family for over a hundred years and now, all of a sudden, the BLM is raising hell over it. I'm beginning to get a different view of this matter. I think the BLM is pulling a fast one and using gestapo tactics to get their way. Chuck

Ranchers in other states who graze cattle on BLM land pay a fee and so should Bundy. He's been to federal court twice on this and turned-down by the courts both times. Bundy seems to think he is entitled to graze his cattle because his ancestors did. That was before the BLM took ownership of the land. Besides, in that country, it takes 100 acres to graze one cow. I wouldn't be fighting to graze that land. Clark County really, has no say in this matter. It's government land that happens to be in Clark County. Kinda like an Air Force Base in a county. Chuck Most of the land just to the north of him is USAF ranges and that frequently gets the shit blown out of it. I wonder if they got waivers for the torti there. Not no but hell no! Besides... the Air Force has bigger weapons. Chuck

My 1993 Javelin came 'Cypres ready'. I 'd say the 1994 Javelin would be too. Chuck

Hey, just had a brilliant idea: Let's put a bunch of those turtles on the border with Mexico, and then the Feds will rush all their law enforcement assets to the border region to protect the turtles by finally stopping the illegal immigration. Do it for the turtles! I like your thinking! Chuck

Who put the guy in charge of the BLM? They both need to be put behind bars. Chuck

I heard that this morning on the Ag. report. That's how the BLM works... they want a piece of land... they take it. They tie-up the owner in the courts till he's broke and 'bingo' the land is theirs. As I've said before, we are losing farm and ranch land to urban sprawl on a daily basis. Without grazing land and farm land, farmers and ranchers will go out of business. Where do the 'thugs' at the BLM think they are going to get their food? I am all for conservation and taking care of the land but taking land from rightful owners by intimidation and thuggery is just against all that is right. Chuck

Ranchers in other states who graze cattle on BLM land pay a fee and so should Bundy. He's been to federal court twice on this and turned-down by the courts both times. Bundy seems to think he is entitled to graze his cattle because his ancestors did. That was before the BLM took ownership of the land. Besides, in that country, it takes 100 acres to graze one cow. I wouldn't be fighting to graze that land. Clark County really, has no say in this matter. It's government land that happens to be in Clark County. Kinda like an Air Force Base in a county. Chuck

Are you sure? Yes, that's what it says in some reports, but I seriously doubt that's all there is to it. The BLM is owed grazing fees by Bundy since 1993. That is the bottom line. The tortoise thing is from some special interest group. Chuck

From what I've read on this matter, a special interest group wants the cattle off of BLM land so as to protect some turtle that shares that land. To me, those cows and turtles have been co-existing for a long time. Why now, all the fuss. Cows don't eat turtles! Also, a very small number of ranchers graze their cattle on BLM land. Of that number, some are 'hobby ranchers'. They lease or pay fees to graze BLM land. This rancher has been turned-down by two federal courts. I am very much in support of honest ranchers who work hard to make a living but in this case, this 'rancher' sounds like he feels he is 'entitled' to graze his cattle in that area. It pains me to say this but the BLM appears to be in the right. Ranchers in Western Montana have leased grazing land from the BLM with no problem. Grazing land is being bought-up to amount to millions of acres each year for urban sprawl. BLM lands are a last resort for grazing. Chuck

I've got 8.1 and I'll put it this way... I much prefer the XP! Chuck

You too? A 3116 is the first machine I owned. Paid $175.00, machine and table. I cleaned the machine in a tub with kerosene, dried it off real good and went to oiling it. The table top is maple, took some re-finisher, cleaned off the old finish an put 3 coats of polyurethane as a finish. I've done more patches, repaired more jumpsuits and even replaced mid-flaps with it. That machine just won't give-up. Chuck

I was about 9, when my dad spotted a tornado headed our way. We had no basement and the only place we had to go to was a deep ditch across the road from the house. It worked! Chuck

I am seriously tired of 'high fives'. Somebody takes a dump and it' a high five! This one is funny as all git-out! Chuck

You got that right! Even with the penalty kills, they pulled-off a win against the best in the League. The 'Griffin Kids' have done what they were hoped to do. I can see some of them not going back to Grand Rapids. Those older players with 1-yr. deals are going to be gone and some whose contracts run out at the end of the season are in jeopardy. Babcock has done a fantastic job. I can see why he's up for Coach of the Year. With what he's had to deal with this season and to get the Wings into the play-offs is more than remarkable. IF the Wings do make it to the play-offs, I'd like to see those young boys from Grand Rapids there. They earned a place in the play-offs. That coach in Grand Rapids must be pretty darned good. Amazing season. Chuck

You should do a little research. The rain forests in South America are being clear cut at alarming rates. There are very real impacts to mass deforestation, even if you think global warming is a hoax. I am very aware of the de-forestation of the rain forests. What I was saying was, the 'save the rain forests' was used to get people involved in a 'cause' and to get people's attention. The 'plan' moved on from that to 'global warming'. All this was presented by a story on 60-Minutes. Chuck

I still, firmly believe all this 'global warming' stuff and to keep things going , it's now 'climate change' is nothing more than a huge scam. It all started with 'save the rain forests' to get people interested. One man, now living in China started it all with 'save the rain forests' and got people like Al Gore and big corporation 'General Electric' to make billions. Chuck

Mick is to get EVERYTHING in his late girlfriend's will, too! Her will is very specific. Like, he really needs it. Chuck

or Stone - ed Alone. Chuck

It would be better just to use those for getting a little tied up. Stabilize and restrain the feet. Rope-a-dope? Chuck

Maybe she ask ole Mick to help her out and he said no, and thus pushed her over the edge. Then too, she might have been afraid to ask ol' Mick. We don't know. Chuck