doublegunshop.com - home Forums Militia Enroute to Bunkerville

Clive Bundy may think of himself as a folk hero, but he is merely the perfect example of the welfare recipient he holds in such contempt. The fees he is required to pay to graze BLM land are a small fraction of of the value received. Even if he had paid all along, his operation was being subsidized by all tax paying citizens of this country. His posture as a rugged, self- sufficient pioneer is a sorry myth. The publically owned land he treats as if it belongs to him alone is actually the glory of outdoor recreation throughout the West. Anyone who hikes or camps or fishes or hunts and who doesn't have access to his own private Idaho, knows the priceless heritage that BLM and USFS lands represent.

You said Bill and I could not agree more. Here is to continuing the tradition of public land access for future generations of hunters, hikers, etc !

This is correct,the NYT of course selectively edited his remarks-and your right he is not the most articulate,he also defends both Mexican and Blacks;

� and so what I�ve testified to ya�, I was in the WATTS riot, I seen the beginning fire and I seen the last fire. What I seen is civil disturbance. People are not happy, people is thinking they did not have their freedom; they didn�t have these things, and they didn�t have them.

We�ve progressed quite a bit from that day until now, and sure don�t want to go back; we sure don�t want the colored people to go back to that point; we sure don�t want the Mexican people to go back to that point; and we can make a difference right now by taking care of some of these bureaucracies, and do it in a peaceful way.

http://conservativebyte.com/2014/04/nyt-...5jY4GfAK8yAm.99

There's a long history of grazing rights, grandfathered an otherwise, that does not exclude public access. I noticed two points brought up that very likely would limit or eliminate public access. Some fabricated endangered species and dedicating land to an agenda, a 'green' project back door brokered with a foreign company.

I'd like to know where, in this C. Bundy story, I can find out about ensuring public hunting access for generations to come. I am very interested in public access for hunting, not just continuing but expanding. Wouldn't it have been easier and much more cost effective to just send Mr. Bundy a letter reminding him he can not obstruct lawful public access. Are we sure this all came about because he restricted access.

The public PR campaign seems to have worked to get some public opinion against the rancher. All they had to do was legitimately garnish what's supposed to be owed, and the fellow would have rounded up the cattle and sold them off himself. I'm not convinced I'll be able to take a grandson out hunting there. About an hour out of Las Vegas, it would be more interesting than the Hoover Dam tour.

Craig,
I think these are two separate issues in the same thread. My concern for continued access to to public hunting has little or nothing to do with Mr. Bundy. My comments related to Jim's post regarding Federal ownership of vast amounts of the West. Most BLM land can be hunted on even if grazing rights are held by private ranchers. My neighbor and myself took an antelope last winter off some BLM that had been leased for cattle grazing last fall here in CO. As to whether or not you can hunt were Mr. Bundy runs his cows, I do not know. Here is to hoping you can get that grandson of yours out on a good public land hunt.
Steve

Recreation on public land is as well established a right across the West as any other I can name. I don't think it is threatened by conservation efforts. To insure hunting access for future generations on pubic land, the most important action people can take is to elect local, state, and national leaders who value outdoor recreation and have a strong conservation ethic. Teddy Roosevelt is the role model we should keep in mind. The greatest threat to outdoor sport and recreation is habitat degradation.

Thanks guys for the follow up comments.

This thought sounds good, but granted permission to access is, in my mind, most definitely revocable and not a right.

I've noticed many confrontational threads with political components. You have not seemed to support politicians that value hunting rights and access. It's none of my business who you support, but if you believe your comment, I'd look harder at actions and track records.

Revoking recreational access to public lands is not a realistic worry in states whose economy depends on tourism. People come to Montana to hunt, fish, hike, and camp. Outfitting is a big industry here and in all the Rocky Mountain region. A common sore point throughout the West is user fees, charging the public for access to their own lands. User fees derive from federal under-funding of agencies like BLM and USFS. My reluctant conclusion is that whom we elect only matters any more at the local level. State and national elections nowadays are up for sale to the highest bidder. Those elected will favor the interests that bankrolled their campaigns.

There is a good deal more going on here,and elsewhere-like in Texas with the BM land grab, when the government uses this type of overreach-no one should be subjected to armed BLM and other Federal officers invading and shooting their livestock to "collect a debt".

Could it be a attempt to stop fracking by environmentalist groups ?

http://www.conservativeactionalerts.com/...bundy-showdown/

Nevada could soon join the ranks of the states that are experiencing an economic boom and job creation due to oil-and-gas development. And, that has got to have the environmental groups, which are hell-bent on stopping it, in panic mode. Until now, their efforts in Nevada have been focused on blocking big solar development.

A year ago, the BLM held an oil-and-gas lease sale in Reno. At the sale, 29 federal land leases, totaling about 56 square miles, were auctioned off, bringing in $1.27 million. One of the winning bidders is Houston-based Noble Energy, which plans to drill as many as 20 exploratory wells and could start drilling by the end of the year. Commenting on its acreage, Susan Cunningham, Noble senior vice president, said: �We�re thrilled with the possibilities of this under-explored petroleum system.�

The parcels made available in April 2013 will be developed using hydraulic fracturing, about which Coyner quipped: �If the Silver State�s first big shale play pays off, it could touch off a fracking rush in Nevada.� Despite the fact that fracking has been done safely and successfully for more than 65 years in America, the Center for Biological Diversity�s (CBD) Nevada-based senior scientist, Ron Mrowka, told the Las Vegas Review Journal: �Fracking is not a good thing. We don�t feel there is a safe way to do it.�

One year before the April 2013, sale, CBD filed a �60-day notice of intent to sue� the BLM for its failure to protect the desert tortoise in the Gold Butte area�where Bundy cattle have grazed for more than a century.

Because agencies like the BLM are often staffed by environmental sympathizers, it is possible that CBD was alerted to the pending potential oil-and-gas boom when the April 2013 parcels were nominated�triggering the notice of intent to sue in an attempt to lock up as much land as possible before the �fracking rush� could begin.

A March 25, 2014 CBD press release�which reportedly served as the impetus for the current showdown�states: �Tortoises suffer while BLM allows trespass cattle to eat for free in Nevada desert.� It points out that the Clark County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan purchased and then retired grazing leases to protect the endangered tortoise.

Energy development, whether it's coal or shale oil, will most certainly destroy enormous areas of public lands. It has already done so in North Dakota, northeastern Montana, and Wyoming. It does produce huge income for the lessees and short-term jobs for miners and other laborers. The energy boom in the West is a sad repetition of the region's history, an extractive exploitation that leaves behind abandoned communities and a devastated landscape. The future of fossil fuel consumption is a dead end. There's not much point in worrying about recreational access if we're willing to cede dominion of public lands to the coal and oil industries.