Cliven Bundy

[Tero]

Bundy has sons. Too bad there will be no ranch to inherit. He owes fines on the ranch, right?

[pErvinalia]

They'll all be shot full of shrapnel soon enough. There's going to be a gunfight eventually.

[Tero]

The Federal Government owns over 80% of the land in Nevada - why does it need Bundy's land?

Because Bundy is a traitor and a freeloader. The BLM wants to remove so he can be replaced with an honest patriot.

If you aren't using your back yard this weekend, do you mind if my cattle come over and eat the grass for free?

Jesus, they rent federal grazing land out at $1.35 per animal unit month, Private land averages over $5,00. How do you think the Koch brothers got rich? They have permits for federal grazing land and bribe Congress to keep the price low.

It isn't Bundy's land, it never was.

*If* we decide the Federal government should give up ownership of land in Nevada, it should go to the state, to the highest bidder, to whomever submits the best proposals for future use, or a combination of those. It should *NOT* be given to a thug who shows up with guns and says "I'm taking this land".

https://answers.yahoo.com/question/inde ... 455AAuUVPe

[piscator]

To be fair to Seth, US grasslands did evolve with grazing from bison, similar to cattle, unlike our kangaroo situation...

The first thing about bison is that their plant (solar) energy was retained in the environment, whereas cattle get shipped off to a feedlot in Greely, Colorado, thence to LA, Philadelphia, Tacoma, and and Marietta, Ga. as butchered meat, resulting in a large net environmental energy loss.

The second thing is that plains bison weren't fenced in and typuically moved constantly, diminishing impact and spreading the fertilizer over hundred of square miles/yr. Same principle as ranchers moving cows to let the grass grow back, only it may be 500 years between visits of big compacted herds of buffalo on a particular patch of aboriginal prairie.

[Seth]

To be fair to Seth, US grasslands did evolve with grazing from bison, similar to cattle, unlike our kangaroo situation...

The first thing about bison is that their plant (solar) energy was retained in the environment, whereas cattle get shipped off to a feedlot in Greely, Colorado, thence to LA, Philadelphia, Tacoma, and and Marietta, Ga. as butchered meat, resulting in a large net environmental energy loss.

The second thing is that plains bison weren't fenced in and typuically moved constantly, diminishing impact and spreading the fertilizer over hundred of square miles/yr. Same principle as ranchers moving cows to let the grass grow back, only it may be 500 years between visits of big compacted herds of buffalo on a particular patch of aboriginal prairie.

You still don't know what you're talking about.

[Tero]

Really? It's pretty obvious man has a hand in all overgrazing.

[piscator]

Thirdly, buffalo weren't ever really as prevalent in the arid US Inter-mountain West as further east on the Great Plains. Minnesota had a hellavalot more buffalo than Nevada ever did.
Nevada grew a shitpot full of deer and antelope and mountain lions which fed on them, coyotes and wolves and foxes, with some mountain sheep and bears in the highest country - none of which stomped the shit out of the desert crusts (entire ecosystems in themselves) and fouled water the way taxpayer-subsidized cows do now.

[Seth]

Really? It's pretty obvious man has a hand in all overgrazing.

Yes, really.

Prove that there's overgrazing going on.

Fact of the matter is that rangelands in Nevada (and just about everywhere else in America) that are in poor condition are those rangelands where grazing has been EXCLUDED for protracted periods.

You see, if generational cattle ranchers overgraze their allotments there isn't anything for their cows to eat and they go out of business. So, public lands rancher take very good care of the public lands, far better than the BLM does, ever did, or ever could, because their livelihoods rely on keeping the grass growing year after year, decade after decade, century after century.

What you'll find when you peruse the anti-cattle eco-zealot propaganda are pictures of extremely small, limited areas where the impacts of cattle herds are concentrated, such as around cattle tanks, watering holes and other constrained areas where cows may gather for a prolonged time. But the impacts seen are extremely limited as compared to the vast areas of forage where the cows spread out and graze. It's very typical for eco-zealots to deliberately and maliciously mischaracterize the nature and extent of cattle impacts as propaganda to try to outrage the public, and their lies are just that, lies.

[hadespussercats]

Really? It's pretty obvious man has a hand in all overgrazing.

Yes, really.

Prove that there's overgrazing going on.

Fact of the matter is that rangelands in Nevada (and just about everywhere else in America) that are in poor condition are those rangelands where grazing has been EXCLUDED for protracted periods.

You see, if generational cattle ranchers overgraze their allotments there isn't anything for their cows to eat and they go out of business. So, public lands rancher take very good care of the public lands, far better than the BLM does, ever did, or ever could, because their livelihoods rely on keeping the grass growing year after year, decade after decade, century after century.

What you'll find when you peruse the anti-cattle eco-zealot propaganda are pictures of extremely small, limited areas where the impacts of cattle herds are concentrated, such as around cattle tanks, watering holes and other constrained areas where cows may gather for a prolonged time. But the impacts seen are extremely limited as compared to the vast areas of forage where the cows spread out and graze. It's very typical for eco-zealots to deliberately and maliciously mischaracterize the nature and extent of cattle impacts as propaganda to try to outrage the public, and their lies are just that, lies.

Surprised to see you supporting someone whose family has subsisted on federal welfare for generations.

[pErvinalia]

Really? It's pretty obvious man has a hand in all overgrazing.

Yes, really.

Prove that there's overgrazing going on.

Fact of the matter is that rangelands in Nevada (and just about everywhere else in America) that are in poor condition are those rangelands where grazing has been EXCLUDED for protracted periods.

You see, if generational cattle ranchers overgraze their allotments there isn't anything for their cows to eat and they go out of business. So, public lands rancher take very good care of the public lands, far better than the BLM does, ever did, or ever could, because their livelihoods rely on keeping the grass growing year after year, decade after decade, century after century.

That doesn't reflect the reality of the history of grazing in this country or most countries for that matter. We probably have Marxist farmers or something. Or more likely, your silly libbo ideology would have you believe that private individuals and market forces are the best environmental managers. History shows that to be totally bullshit.

What you'll find when you peruse the anti-cattle eco-zealot propaganda are pictures of extremely small, limited areas where the impacts of cattle herds are concentrated, such as around cattle tanks, watering holes and other constrained areas where cows may gather for a prolonged time. But the impacts seen are extremely limited as compared to the vast areas of forage where the cows spread out and graze. It's very typical for eco-zealots to deliberately and maliciously mischaracterize the nature and extent of cattle impacts as propaganda to try to outrage the public, and their lies are just that, lies.

"eco-zealot propaganda"... is that the same as "marxist propaganda"?

[pErvinalia]

Really? It's pretty obvious man has a hand in all overgrazing.

Yes, really.

Prove that there's overgrazing going on.

Fact of the matter is that rangelands in Nevada (and just about everywhere else in America) that are in poor condition are those rangelands where grazing has been EXCLUDED for protracted periods.

You see, if generational cattle ranchers overgraze their allotments there isn't anything for their cows to eat and they go out of business. So, public lands rancher take very good care of the public lands, far better than the BLM does, ever did, or ever could, because their livelihoods rely on keeping the grass growing year after year, decade after decade, century after century.

What you'll find when you peruse the anti-cattle eco-zealot propaganda are pictures of extremely small, limited areas where the impacts of cattle herds are concentrated, such as around cattle tanks, watering holes and other constrained areas where cows may gather for a prolonged time. But the impacts seen are extremely limited as compared to the vast areas of forage where the cows spread out and graze. It's very typical for eco-zealots to deliberately and maliciously mischaracterize the nature and extent of cattle impacts as propaganda to try to outrage the public, and their lies are just that, lies.

Surprised to see you supporting someone whose family has subsisted on federal welfare for generations.

You get used to the contradictions of Seth after a while, H.

[FBM]

Sometimes grazing helps the environment, but not always. The only way to know for sure in this case would be to analyze how that area has fared since grazing was allowed there. It has probably been done. Apologies if this has already been address in this thread, but I ain't reading through all that to find out.

[JimC]

The grazing thing is one of the issues of the thread, but the other is all about breaking the law. If you knowingly break a law, you have to accept the consequences, not just wave your hands and say you don't recognise the authority of the government. If you think you have been dealt with incorrectly, you can take it to the courts. If you think it's a bad law, you can do some political agitation to get it changed. In the meantime, you don't whine like a mummy's boy, you pay the fine or do your time...

[pErvinalia]

No, Jim, you get your hick mates together and you overthrows teh gubbmint!!1

[Hermit]

Well, that turns out to be exciting, doesn't it, kids? While we await further developments, this is a good time to recap the story so far for those of you who have missed the start or are handicapped by a short attention span:

Nevada was a territory until 1864. One condition of becoming part of the US was to sign ownership of all unappropriated land over to the federal government. Nevada signed.

As long as Bundy paid rent for the use of federal land in the form of $1.35 per head of cattle per month the BLM had no problem with it being used by him for grazing his cattle. When he ceased paying that pittance he became a squatter and a thief. The government took him to court. For twenty years Bundy fought them there and lost every single case. Then he refused to attend court any further. That's when the BLM stepped in with arms, but decided to withdraw in order to prevent bloodshed when confronted by an armed bunch of sovereign citizen nutters from several Hicksvilles in the US.