Who Is Trigger-happy Now?

Demonstrators rallied to the Bunkerville, Nev., area Monday in response to an effort by the Bureau of Land Management to confiscate trespassing cattle belonging to longtime rancher Cliven Bundy. (Jesselyn Bickley / The Spectrum & Daily News)

EDITORIAL
Moapa Valley Progress

It has become abundantly clear that the federal action to round up cattle in our region is much more than it appears. It isn’t about whether Cliven Bundy’s cows are in trespass on federal land; or whether Bundy should have paid his grazing fees; or whether the cattle harm the endangered desert tortoise habitat; or whether the land ought to be under state, not federal, jurisdiction as Bundy claims. While all of these elements have contributed to the story, none of them are at the core of the issue for northeast Clark County residents.

To us here on the ground, the real issue has been the over-reaching display of excessive federal power. It is really about the disturbing police action which has restricted all of us from accessing hundreds of thousands of acres of public land; all over a trivial matter of one rancher and his 500-some-odd head of cattle.

There is no longer any point to arguing who is right and who is wrong in the matter of Cliven Bundy. That has been done to death without resolution. Admittedly it is hard to defend Mr. Bundy in his long-standing refusal to accept jurisdiction and pay the appropriate grazing fees. But that is no longer the chief concern.

The fact is that the BLM is acting under the authority of two federal court orders which grant authority to “seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass”. The documents also order that “Bundy shall not physically interfere with any seizure or impoundment operation”. That’s simple enough. Five hundred head of cattle ought to be a fairly manageable task for a group of seasoned “cowboys” being paid an exorbitant amount.

But nowhere in these court orders does it give authority to throw the general law-abiding public off this huge tract of land, much of which has absolutely nothing to do with the roundup. Federal officials have insisted that they are sensitive to the needs of the public and are only closing off smaller areas directly affected by the action. But 300,000 acres is not small! And it would be a stretch to argue that the east bench of Moapa Valley and much of the western side of the Mormon Mesa has any relevance whatsoever to this project. The fact is, in all of these closures, the federal agencies have far overrun the federal court documents, and have far exceeded what is needful for a safe and successful roundup operation.

In addition, nowhere do the court orders give these agencies power to intimidate the general public with an army of heavily armed federal officers itching for an opportunity to draw and shoot at a moment’s notice. If anything has ratcheted up the tension in Clark County it would be that unwarranted threat of force.

It has reached a point here where the general law-abiding citizenry of rural northeastern Clark County actually fear to venture into their own backyards. This is due to the very real worry of being arrested and/or shot because they may have accidentally stumbled out onto a restricted landscape. The vast open hills and mesas around us, which are usually bustling with recreational activities of all kinds, are now nearly silent. And so are many of the area businesses that usually thrive on tourism at this time of the year. Again, in this intimidation of the public, the federal agencies have far overreached the mandate of the federal court documents.

Finally, nowhere do the court orders give the feds power to marginalize, micromanage and restrict the free speech rights of the public to two small fenced-off areas on the margins of the federal action. Indeed, nowhere do the court orders give federal agents power to arrest and detain people without probable cause or without clearly stating the charges. For example, there are no special powers given to arrest an otherwise law-abiding citizen who is, casually and without threat, exercising his first amendment rights in an unrestricted space outside of these specified free speech areas. This is exactly what happened to Davie Bundy on Sunday afternoon. This example of thuggery is perhaps the most outrageous example of these agencies operating far outside of the legal mandates of their court orders.

Of course, the feds will claim that all of this is merely done for the protection of the public; to keep us safe. But we would ask: What public? Who is in danger? Where is the threat to the public safety really coming from?

Thus far it has certainly not been from Bundy or from his 500 head of cattle. Federal authorities blame Bundy for their excessive display of force. They cite Bundy’s inflammatory rhetoric regarding his willingness to take a last stand in defense of his rights. These threats, they say, are what has necessitated this superior show of force.

But who is the trigger happy party here, really? The escalation of tensions that have taken place out there on the range, and in the hearts and minds of the general public, has been directly due to the petty, vindictive, excessive and unjustifiable behavior of the federal agencies in this matter. That is what is truly driving the emotions and the conflict at this point.

As a public safety risk, these unwarranted federal actions pose a far greater threat than anything that Bundy, his family, his cattle, or the general public has done.

And now the jittery actions of a pack of trigger-happy federal agents is liable to get someone hurt or killed out there in the very near future. What possible justification is there for escalating this rather trivial matter of a few head of cattle to the level that it antagonizes, criminalizes and enrages the general population of the entire region?

With that in mind, we ask again as we have asked before: Who is standing for the rights of the law abiding citizens in our communities? Where are our federal Congressional delegates in all of this. Where are our elected representatives that are supposed to work on our behalf to bring some reason into this increasingly volatile situation?

Perhaps it is too much to expect for Senator Harry Reid or Congressman Steven Horsford to pull for their constituents when our interests are at odds with that of the Obama administration and the enviro-lobby that leads it around by the nose.
But where in the world is Senator Dean Heller in all of this? Where is Governor Brian Sandoval? Why are we receiving no representation in this outrageous federal over-reach?

As we have said before, this whole operation has nothing to do with cows, nor tortoises, nor ranching allotments, nor unpaid grazing fees. Plain and simple it has to do with federal control. It is all about public access to public lands; and who controls that access.

If the members of the general public want to strip away all the rhetoric and get down to the real truth of what a Gold Butte National Conservation Area (NCA) would look like, they need look no further than what has been going on out there in the past couple of weeks.

Yes, we have heard the repeated assurances from environmentalist NCA proponents that their plans would ensure that all current public access be retained. They have promised, with crossed heart, that no roads would be closed. But the fact is, there will always be urgent reasons for federal agencies to unilaterally restrict the area. Those reasons can be manufactured on a whim, and made to order. And let’s face it, those reasons will be at least as compelling, and as urgent, as Bundy and his 500 cows are now. Rest assured, we will see this all again. Just witness how easy it has been to close the whole area down. Make no mistake, the past two weeks is merely a practice run for things to come.

But never fear! We, the general public, can rest assured that our input will be allowed and supported. No doubt then, as now, there will be a small, controlled, fenced-in area; miles away from the action; set aside for the closely managed exercise of our free speech rights.

Nevada Governor Calls Federal Cattle Roundup ‘Intimidation’

Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval

CBS Las Vegas/AP

LAS VEGAS — Nevada’s governor is criticizing a federal cattle roundup and what he calls “intimidation” in a dispute with a rancher who claims longstanding grazing rights on open range outside Las Vegas.

Federal Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service officials didn’t immediately respond Wednesday to Republican Gov. Brian Sandoval’s call for the BLM to “reconsider its approach.”

Sandoval says he’s most offended that federal officials have tried to corral people protesting the roundup into a “First Amendment area.”

Federal officials say 277 cows have been rounded up since Saturday from a 1,200-square-mile area that it has closed to the public for the operation about 80 miles northeast of Las Vegas.

The BLM says Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy has allowed his cattle to trespass and graze for decades in the area.

Bundy, a descendant of Mormons who settled in Bunkerville more than 140 years ago, claims an inherent right to graze the area and casts the conflict as a states’ rights issue. He said he doesn’t recognize federal authority on land that he insists belongs to Nevada.

His dispute with the government dates to 1993, when land managers cited concern for the federally protected desert tortoise and capped Bundy’s herd at 150 animals on his 158,666-acre Bunkerville allotment of rangeland.

Bundy protested by withholding his monthly grazing fees and kept using the range. The BLM canceled his grazing permit in 1994. A federal court in 1998 ordered him to remove the animals, and federal authorities in 1999 officially closed the Bunkerville allotment to cattle.

Conservationists say the cows eat scarce forage needed by wildlife including the tortoise and horses.

Federal officials tried to round up Bundy’s livestock two years ago, but he refused to budge.

Since then, he has lost two federal court rulings — and a judge last October prohibited him from physically interfering with any seizure or roundup operation.

“Wake up America,” Bailey Bundy Logue told KSL-TV. “Look what our ancestors fought for and we need to stand up for that. We need to realize what’s happening. They are taking everything away from us. This isn’t only about one family. This is about everyone’s family. This is martial law and it’s in America and so what are you going to do to have it stay out of America?”

In a statement called what the Bundys have been doing “unfair.”

“Cattle have been in trespass on public lands in Southern Nevada for more than two decades. This is unfair to the thousands of other ranchers who graze livestock in compliance with federal laws and regulations throughout the west,” the statement reads. “The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the National Park Service (NPS) have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter administratively and judicially.”

Armed Fed Agents and Snipers? Nevada Rancher Is Taking on the Gov’t in a Battle That’s Reaching a Breaking Point

Cliven Bundy, right, and Clance Cox, left, stand at the Bundy ranch near Bunkerville, Nev., Saturday, April 5, 2014. The U.S. Bureau of Land Management started taking cattle on Saturday from rancher Bundy, who it says has been trespassing on U.S. land without required grazing permits for over 25 years. Bundy doesn’t recognize federal authority on land he insists belongs to Nevada. (AP)

Becket Adams
The Blaze

Armed federal agents deployed last week to northeast Clark County, Nev., for what can only be described as a major escalation in a decades-long standoff between a local cattle rancher and the U.S. government.

Cliven Bundy, the last remaining rancher in the southern Nevada county, stands in defiance of a 2013 court order demanding that he remove his cattle from public land managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Land Management.

The 67-year-old veteran rancher, who has compared the situation to similar confrontations with government officials in Ruby Ridge and Waco, Texas, told TheBlaze that his family has used land in the 600,000-acre Gold Butte area since the late 1800s.

“I have raised cattle on that land, which is public land for the people of Clark County, all my life. Why I raise cattle there and why I can raise cattle there is because I have preemptive rights,” he said, explaining that among them is the right to forage.

“Who is the trespasser here? Who is the trespasser on this land? Is the United States trespassing on Clark County, Nevada, land? Or is it Cliven Bundy who is trespassing on Clark County, Nevada, land? Who’s the trespasser?”

Claiming that all other options have been exhausted, the Bureau of Land Management and the U.S. National Park Service responded to Bundy’s inflexibility on the issue by calling on federal agents and contract cowboys to restrict access to the public land and to confiscate Bundy’s “trespass cattle.”

“Cattle have been in trespass on public lands in southern Nevada for more than two decades. This is unfair to the thousands of other ranchers who graze livestock in compliance with federal laws and regulations throughout the West,” the Bureau of Land Management stated on its website about the case.

“The Bureau of Land Management and the National Park Service have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter administratively and judicially. An impoundment of cattle illegally grazing on public lands is now being conducted as a last resort,” it added.

Federal employees and contractors have so far impounded approximately 234 of Bundy’s estimated 900 “trespass cattle.”

The restrictions on the land are expected to stay in place until May 12. Earlier news reports stated that federal officials were considering auctioning the cattle to buyers in nearby counties in Utah. However, a Bureau of Land Management spokeswoman told The Blaze Monday that the agency has no plans to ship impounded cattle for auction “in the near future.”

The government’s move to assert itself in the Gold Butte area shouldn’t come as too much of a surprise considering the fact that it’s a move years in the making. In fact, the tense relationship between Bundy and federal government dates back to well before the 2013 court order.

The fight began when Bundy stopped paying the Bureau of Land Management’s grazing fees in 1993, arguing in court filings that he had no obligation to pay the agency because his Mormon ancestors had worked the land decades before the agency was formed.

Bundy claims he owes roughly $300,000 in back fees, but the federal government says it’s more than that.

“That number, the $300,000, that was a number estimated through Sept. 11, 2011,” Bureau of Land Management spokeswoman Kirsten Cannon said in a phone call with reporters Monday. “Since then, the estimated amount owed by him – so including the $300,000 – totals $1.1 million.”

In addition, the cost of removing the rancher’s cattle from the public land will cost taxpayers roughly $3 million, according to initial estimates.

The land was finally declared off-limits for cattle in 1998 and became a designated habitat for the federally protected desert tortoise. That same year, a judge ordered Bundy to remove his cattle. He refused to comply.

All throughout his decades-long struggle with the federal government, the veteran rancher has maintained that Washington has no right to order him from the land.

The Bureau of Land Management has “overstepped its boundaries by not letting me access my rights, not recognizing state’s sovereignty, and having over 200 armed officers watching our every move and stealing our cattle,” Bundy said.

The rancher’s wife, Carol, said there now appear to be snipers stationed around the family’s 150-acre ranch.

Asked about the Bundys’ sniper claim, Cannon would neither confirm nor deny the allegation.

“There are law enforcement and other personnel in place as needed to ensure that the BLM and National Park Services employees and contractors are able to conduct the operation safely,” Cannon said. “Specific operations information regarding this impoundment will not be released.”

But the presence of what appear to be heavily armed agents isn’t the only thing that has the Bundys on edge: Their son, Dave, was arrested and allegedly roughed up Sunday for filming federal agents while outside an area designated for First Amendment activity on the restricted property. He was held overnight.

The 37-year-old Bundy was arrested “following failure to comply with multiple requests by BLM law enforcement to leave the temporary closure area on public lands,” Cannon said. She declined to comment on the claim that he was brutally treated.

Dave Bundy was released from custody Monday and cited for refusing to disperse and resisting issuance of a citation or arrest, she added. Cannon could not explain why Dave was held overnight.

The rancher said that he hopes Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie intervenes soon and ends the face-off once and for all.

“The federal government has no authority here,” Bundy said. “The sheriff has the authority. All he has to say is, ‘no’ and that’ll get the federal government out of here. I think he has that much power.”

It seems unlikely at this point, however, that the sheriff will intervene, as he has opted to let federal agents handle the situation. The sheriff has in the past advised Bundy on seeking legal counsel while the sheriff has extended federal deadlines.

The sheriff’s office referred media inquiries to the Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, which confirmed to TheBlaze Monday that federal officials are handling the Bundy operation.

“That incident is being handled by another agency,” a Las Vegas police spokeswoman said. “It’s something we’re referring people to the BLM.”

Asked about Bundy’s claim that the sheriff’s office has ignored him, the spokeswoman added: “There’s nothing further that’s coming from this department about that incident, this operation. We’re just referring everything over to BLM. It’s not our operation. There’s no statement that has been issued about it.”

But with or without the sheriff, Bundy remains defiant.

“It’s a freedom issue. It’s not about cows. It’s a state rights issue. I really hope that we can learn and defend our liberties here and keep on fighting until the end,” he said. “I don’t when the end is going to be, but I believe that America is the greatest land in the world and it needs to be protected.”

“Our rights and liberties need to be protected and we’re going to stand for that,” he added.

'Wake up America,' says family involved in BLM cattle dispute

200 armed agents from the BLM and FBI are stationed around a cattle ranching family's home in southern Nevada, about 75 miles outside of Las Vegas. Helicopters circle the premises, and the airspace and nearby roads remain blocked. (Bailey Bundy Logue)

By Faith Heaton Jolley and Dave Cawley
KSL.com

CLARK COUNTY, Nevada — A man has been released after being arrested Sunday during an ongoing dispute over grazing rights between the Bureau of Land Management and a family in southern Nevada, and the family is calling for action.

A federal judge in Las Vegas first ordered Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy to remove his trespassing cattle in 1998, according to reports from the Associated Press. Similar orders were issued in July 2013, and again in October.

Saturday, the BLM began taking some of the 908 cattle from Bundy. The BLM says Bundy's cattle have been trespassing on U.S. land without required grazing permits for over 25 years. However, Bundy said he doesn't recognize federal authority on land that he says belongs to the state of Nevada.

The BLM released a statement on its website saying, "Cattle have been in trespass on public lands in Southern Nevada for more than two decades. This is unfair to the thousands of other ranchers who graze livestock in compliance with federal laws and regulations throughout the west. The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the National Park Service (NPS) have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter administratively and judicially."

The situation escalated Saturday after Cliven Bundy's son, Dave Bundy, 37, was arrested. Members of the Bundy family had gathered to film and take pictures of the removal of their cattle in an effort to document the event, according to Cliven Bundy's daughter, Bailey Bundy Logue.

The family members had parked on the side of Nevada state Route 170, but the highway was included in the temporary closure of public lands, according to BLM representative Kirsten Cannon. Dave Bundy was arrested and cited with a criminal charge of refusing to disperse and resisting officers. Cannon said all public lands are closed within the designated closure area during the removal of the trespassing cattle.

Wake up America. Look what our ancestors fought for and we need to stand up for that. We need to realize what's happening. They are taking everything away from us. This isn't only about one family. This is about everyone's family.

–Bailey Bundy Logue

Logue said Dave Bundy was taking pictures and recording on his iPad when he was asked by federal employees what he was doing. Logue said that Dave Bundy told the BLM workers that he was "exercising (his) First Amendment rights."

"He did not resist arrest, but they continued to beat him," Logue told KSL. "They put him on the ground and were standing on his head and had a dozen officers on top of him and dogs."

The Bundy family was asked to leave the premises after Dave Bundy's arrest. Logue said that there were snipers and uniformed men on the scene during the cattle impoundment.

"That's scary," Logue said. "I was angry, but there was nothing I can do. We were so outnumbered. With nothing but weapons of our cameras, we did our best at taking pictures. But when you're in that situation your mind is not thinking very straight."

Dave Bundy was released Monday afternoon. However, the Bundy family said they feel that their First Amendment rights were violated and that they were entitled to meet on state Route 170 to take pictures.

“That is against our First Amendment right," Logue said. "They say it’s a First Amendment area, but we have rights everywhere. Since when have we had First Amendment areas? That’s not what it says in the Constitution.”

The Bundy family said they organized a rally for people to meet to support their First Amendment rights and their rights to public land. The rally was held near state Route 170 and I-15 on private land and around 100 people held a peaceful protest, Cannon said.

"We have got together hundreds of people from all over the world and they are here, not because this is about cattle," Logue said. "We are asking people to come and stand up for their rights. We have lost all state sovereignty. I mean (it's like) martial law in our home town, in America."

Cannon said 134 cattle had been impounded by federal employees as of Monday afternoon, but the location will not be released during the ongoing operation. The cattle roundup was estimated to take between 21 to 30 days with further temporary closures during the operation.

“Wake up America," Logue said. "Look what our ancestors fought for and we need to stand up for that. We need to realize what’s happening. They are taking everything away from us. This isn’t only about one family. This is about everyone’s family. This is martial law and it’s in America and so what are you going to do to have it stay out of America?”

Cliven Bundy reportedly owes the BLM and U.S. government $1 million in back grazing fees, according to Cannon.

Feds move in on Nevada rancher's herd over illegal grazing

Contractors for the Bureau of Land Management round up cattle belonging to Cliven Bundy with a helicopter near Bunkerville, Nev., Monday, April 7, 2014. (AP)

By Robert Gearty
FoxNews.com

For 20 years, a tough-as-leather Nevada rancher and the federal government have been locked in a bitter range war over cattle grazing rights.

This weekend the confrontation got worse, when the feds hired contract cowboys to start seizing Cliven Bundy's cattle, which have been grazing on public land managed by the Bureau of Land Management. The government officials brought a show of force that included dozens of armed agents in SUVs and helicopters.

Bundy, 67, who has been a rancher all his life, accuses BLM of stampeding over on his rights.

“This is a lot bigger deal than just my cows,” Bundy told FoxNews.com. “It’s a statement for freedom and liberty and the Constitution.”

The fight involves a 600,000-acre area under BLM control called Gold Butte, near the Utah border. The vast and rugged land is the habitat of the protected desert tortoise, and the land has been off-limits for cattle since 1998. Five years before that, when grazing was legal, Bundy stopped paying federal fees for the right.

“For more than two decades, cattle have been grazed illegally on public lands in northeast Clark County,” the BLM said in a statement. “BLM and (the National Park Service) have made repeated attempts to resolve this matter administratively and judicially. Impoundment of cattle illegally grazing on public lands is an option of last resort.”

But Bundy said he has grazed cattle on the land for decades, and his father and father's father did long before his 1,000 cattle roamed the area. He has long defied orders from bureaucrats he says are bent on running him out of business.

Just before the round-up began this weekend, Bundy said federal agents surrounded his 150-acre ranch. His son was arrested on Sunday in an incident involving the agents.

“They’ve been bringing men in and equipment and setting up a compound,” Bundy told FoxNews.com Monday. “They got helicopters flying low. They got snipers around the ranch. Our access to public lands has been blocked.”

“We’re not pointing guns at anyone but we’re sure getting a lot of guns pointed at us.”

- Carol Bundy, wife of Nevada rancher

Bundy said he is worried BLM might try to turn the situation into another Waco or Ruby Ridge.

“Yeah, there’s a little fear in me,” Bundy said. “They’re definitely set up to do that.”

Federal officials said BLM enforcement agents were dispatched in response to statements Bundy made that the agency perceived as threats.

“When threats are made that could jeopardize the safety of the American people, the contractors and our personnel; we have the responsibility to provide law enforcement to account for their safety,” National Park Service spokeswoman Christie Vanover told reporters Sunday.

Bundy, who does not have an attorney, spoke to FoxNews.com from Las Vegas, where he had gone early Monday morning to ask Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie for help. Last week, Gillespie told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that neither Bundy nor the BLM should resort to violence.

“No drop of human blood is worth spilling over any cow,” Gillespie said.

Back at the ranch, Bundy's wife Carol said she and her husband were not looking for trouble.

“We’re not pointing guns at anyone, but we’re sure getting a lot of guns pointed at us,” she said.

The trouble started when Bundy stopped paying grazing fees in 1993. He said he didn't have to because his Mormon ancestors worked the land since the 1880s, giving him rights to the land.

“We own this land,” he said, not the feds. He said he is willing to pay grazing fees but only to Clark County, not BLM.

“Years ago, I used to have 52 neighboring ranchers,” he said. “I’m the last man standing. How come? Because BLM regulated these people off the land and out of business.”

He said he won’t let the feds do that to him.

“I said, ‘No.’ Then, ‘Hell, no,’” he said.

BLM said in a statement two judges ordered Bundy to remove his cattle from Gold Butte. The Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group, said the federal action was long overdue.

“Despite having no legal right to do so, cattle from Bundy’s ranch have continued to graze throughout the Gold Butte area, competing with tortoises for food, hindering the ability of plants to recover from extensive wildfires, trampling rare plants, damaging ancient American Indian cultural sites and threatening the safety of recreationists,” Rob Mrowka, a spokesman for the group, said in a statement.

Rancher stands up; feds should back off

Cliven Bundy

EDITORIAL
Las Vegas Review-Journal

A rancher needs big brass ones to stand up to Washington. Not only is the federal government the country’s largest and least competent landowner, it’s also the country’s largest police force and largest law firm, wrapped with red tape into one unflinching leviathan.

Cliven Bundy has big brass ones, all right. And the belt buckle and hat to go with them. But Clark County’s last cattle rancher knew his defiance would one day come to this. After more than 20 years of being dared to use their heavy hands, Bureau of Land Management officials and federal authorities say they’re finally going to seize and auction Mr. Bundy’s livestock.

Starting Thursday, Washington restricted access to almost 600,000 acres of land — nearly 1,000 square miles, or roughly the area of Rhode Island — with pockets of closures so agents and contract cowboys can round up several hundred “trespass cattle” owned by Mr. Bundy. The restrictions will be in place through May 12. Public land, indeed.

Although Mr. Bundy stopped paying grazing fees to the BLM in 1993, the desert tortoise is driving this confiscation. The BLM closed large areas of land northeast of Las Vegas to grazing in 1999 in another misguided attempt to protect the reptile and its habitat. Never mind that grazing has long benefited tortoise populations by churning seeds into soils, keeping predators at a distance and limiting the vegetation overgrowth that feeds wildfires. Never mind the long record of federal busybodies killing off tortoises by trying to save them.

The environmentalist toadies at the Center for Biological Diversity don’t like ranching and grazing. They believe a few hundred cattle will destroy hundreds of thousands of acres of desert. They want the BLM use force to remove Mr. Bundy’s cattle. The roundup will disturb plenty of tortoise habitat, at great public expense, but no matter. BLM officials have spent years in the courts making sure Mr. Bundy has no legal recourse to stop them this time.

Mr. Bundy, 67, doesn’t care what judges say about the unforgiving land his family has lived on for nearly 140 years. “Tell them Bundy’s ready,” he told the Review-Journal’s Henry Brean this week. “Whenever they’ve got the guts to try it, tell them to come.”

This action could reignite the Sagebrush Rebellion — Mr. Bundy has allies across the West. There is great potential for violence. It shouldn’t come to that. We hope it doesn’t.

The most obvious solution, releasing federal land to local control, won’t happen overnight. So we offer a final chance at compromise: Have Washington stand down and send the zealots of the Center for Biological Diversity to collect the cattle, instead.

Range war heats up again between defiant Nevada rancher and BLM

A federal court has ordered rancher Cliven Bundy to remove his cattle from land managed by the Bureau of Land Management in central Nevada. He refuses to do so. (Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times / August 20, 2013)

By John M. Glionna
Los Angeles Times

LAS VEGAS -- From the cab of his old pickup, Cliven Bundy watched the trucks congregate on the horizon near his ranch some 80 miles north of here. His ongoing range war with the federal government, Bundy said, has heated up yet again.

Officials say Bundy is illegally running cattle in the 600,000-acre Gold Butte area, a habitat of the protected desert tortoise. Last year, a U.S. District Court judge ruled that if the 68-year-old veteran rancher did not remove his cattle, they could be seized by the Bureau of Land Management.

On Thursday, federal authorities began closing off Gold Butte area and rounding up what they call “trespass cattle” there. Many of them belong to Bundy.


“I see where they’re set up,” Bundy told the Los Angeles Times by telephone Thursday. “There’s trailers and communications vans. I haven't seen them take any of my cattle yet, but they're getting ready to.”

For two decades, Bundy has waged a one-man range war with federal officials over his cattle's grazing on 150 square miles of scrub desert overseen by the BLM. Since 1993, he's refused to pay BLM grazing fees, arguing in court filings that his Mormon ancestors worked the land long before the BLM was formed, giving him rights that predate federal involvement.

Bundy also likes to say he "fired the BLM," vowing not to give one dime to an agency that he says is plotting his demise. The back fees exceed $300,000, he said.

The father of 14 insists that generations of his family have ranched and worked this unforgiving landscape along the Virgin River since the 1880s. He says government overregulation has already driven scores of fellow ranchers out of business in sprawling Clark County, leaving him as the last man standing.

For years the rancher has insisted that his cattle aren't going anywhere. He acknowledges that he keeps firearms at his ranch and has vowed to do "whatever it takes" to defend his animals from seizure.

"I've got to protect my property," he told The Times last year. "If people come to monkey with what's mine, I'll call the county sheriff. If that don't work, I'll gather my friends and kids and we'll try to stop it. I abide by all state laws. But I abide by almost zero federal laws."

In 1998, a federal judge issued a permanent injunction against the white-haired rancher, ordering his cattle off the land and setting off a long series of legal filings.

Kirsten Cannon, spokeswoman for the Nevada BLM office in Reno, said the federal government means business this time.

“His cattle have been illegally trespassing on federal land for two decades and it’s just unfair for those who ranch in compliance,” she said. “We made repeated attempts to resolve this. The courts have ordered him to move his cattle. Now we’ve reached the last resort, which is impoundment.”

Environmentalists say it’s time for Bundy to get his cattle off federal land because they are endangering the habitat of creatures who have been there forever.

"Despite having no legal right to do so, cattle from Bundy’s ranch have continued to graze throughout the Gold Butte area, competing with tortoises for food, hindering the ability of plants to recover from extensive wildfires, trampling rare plants, damaging ancient American Indian cultural sites and threatening the safety of recreationists,” the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity said in a statement earlier this week.

The group added, “Surveys by the BLM have found well over 1,000 cattle — many in easily damaged freshwater springs and riparian areas on public lands managed by the National Park Service and state of Nevada as well as the BLM.”

Despite the court order, he refused to pull one head of cattle off BLM land. "At first I said, 'No,'" he told the Times last year, "then I said, 'Hell, no.'"

In a telephone interview Thursday, Bundy's wife, Carol, said the family remains as resolved as ever. “It just shows that we’re not a sovereign state,” she said of the government's action Thursday. “It just shows that the federal government thinks they have power over us. My county and my state is allowing this to happen. But you know what? They haven’t taken our cattle yet. We’re still hanging on.”

Carol Bundy told The Times that Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie has not responded to their requests to intervene. “We want him to step in and tell these federal characters that ‘This is Clark County, Nev., land and you have go through me to get these cattle.’ But we have not heard a word.”

Gillsepie told the Las Vegas Review-Journal that neither Bundy nor the BLM should resort to violence. “No drop of human blood is worth spilling over any cow,” he told the newspaper.

So the Bundy family waits. The rancher said he’ll be patrolling the land near his ranch, waiting for any sign the federal government is taking his cattle.

Bunkerville Rancher Prepares To Battle Feds Again For Land

Cliven Bundy at his Bunkerville Ranch. (Mike Donahue / Desert Valley Times)

By VERNON ROBISON
Moapa Valley Progress

The arid desert range southwest of Mesquite is heating up in anticipation of an Old West-style showdown. In recent weeks, Bunkerville rancher Cliven Bundy has been preparing for what may be a last stand in his decades-old struggle with the federal Bureau of Land Management (BLM) over what he believes are his ancestral rights to graze cattle on the land.

In an interview last week with the Progess, Bundy said that he had spoken recently to Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie. In that conversation, Gillespie reportedly informed Bundy that the BLM is getting close to enforcing a federal court order, issued last fall, to seize his cattle if he doesn’t remove them from the vast range south and west of Bunkerville.

“He sounded pretty certain that it was going to happen,” Bundy said. “The only uncertainty was just the matter of when.”

Earlier this week, BLM officials were still unwilling to give a date on when the roundup might occur. BLM spokeswoman Kirsten Cannon said that federal court rulings handed down in July and October gave Bundy 45 days to comply. That period is now long past, Cannon said.

“The BLM is continuing in its ongoing efforts to work with state, local and federal agencies to comply with the court order,” Cannon said. “There are a lot of details that are being worked out so we are still working on a timeline.”

Whenever it happens, Bundy says he has no intention of just giving in and moving his cattle off the land.

“I have pre-emptive rights on that land, adjudicated back in the 1930s under the Taylor Grazing Act,” Bundy said. “I’ll do whatever it takes to protect my life, liberty and property; and along with them, the rights of the other citizens of Clark County to have access to the land.”

This is not the first time that Bundy’s cattle have been in the crosshairs of the BLM. The legal actions have been flying back and forth since the early 1990s. That’s when environmentalist worries about the effects of ranching on the endangered desert tortoise habitat began to take hold. By the end of the 1990s, the government had bought out all of the existing grazing permits from Clark County ranchers; all, that is except for Cliven Bundy’s. Bundy refused to sell his rights. But the entire allotment of rights, including Bundy’s, was retired anyway at that time by the BLM.
For his part, Bundy disputes the very claim that the tortoise is truly an endangered species. Even if it is, he disputes that the existence of his cattle on the range are a danger to tortoise habitat.

But Bundy also insists that the current dispute is not really about the tortoise nor his cattle. Rather it is a dispute over ownership of the land and over the right of the public to access it.
Bundy has insisted all along that this issue is not under the jurisdiction of the federal government because he claims the land, by rights, actually belongs to the state of Nevada.

“According to the 10th Amendment, the state of Nevada is a sovereign authority within the United States to make rules and regulate itself and its lands,” Bundy said. “I believe that it is the people of Nevada and of Clark County who own this land that I graze my cattle on. I have no contract with the federal government so this whole thing shouldn’t be controlled by a federal court. It is the state courts that should assert authority in this matter.”

But the federal courts have disagreed with this assertion over the years. In 2008, the federal government took Bundy to court for trespass on federal land and prevailed. The decision found Bundy in trespass and levied a heavy fine of $200 per day per cow.

Bundy expected an appeal to the Supreme Court by the state of Nevada who, he said, should have proclaimed its sovereignty in the matter. But nothing was ever done about it. He was never assessed the fines, and Bundy just kept on ranching the land as he always had done.

That went on for 14 years. Then in the spring of 2012, the BLM made some specific plans for hiring contract cowboys to round up and impound hundreds of Bundy’s cattle.

In response, Bundy, along with his family and supporters quickly sprang into action. They sent notices to the contract cowboys, the Clark County Sheriff, the Clark County Commissioners and other state elected officials; promising to hold each of them liable for any loss of cattle or equipment in the raid.

The BLM officials backed down at that time stating that they would return back to the courts to strengthen their position.

Then last fall, the U.S. District Court released two orders that did just that. The orders permanently enjoined Bundy from trespassing on land that he has always considered his pre-emptive ranching allotment. The court orders also found that Bundy’s cattle had been allowed to wander far beyond his traditional allotment onto what the document calls “New Trespass lands”. So the orders also permanently enjoined Bundy from trespassing on that land and ordered him to remove all cattle from those lands as well.

The order also quickly dismissed Bundy’s claim that the land is, or should be, under state jurisdiction.

“The court finds that Bundy’s objections to the United States’ Motion are without merit,” the Order reads. “The court has stated unequivocally on numerous occasions that it has jurisdiction to hear this case and that the (former Bundy) allotment is owned by the United States. Bundy’s repeated suggestions to the contrary are entirely unavailing.”

Finally, the documents specifically entitled the federal government to “seize and remove to impound any of Bundy’s cattle that remain in trespass after 45 days of the date hereof”.

These documents claimed to have lined up all the legal technicalities needed for the BLM to move forward with the roundup. So now the BLM’s plan was to again hire a contractor to round up the animals and confiscate them.

This process requires that each animal be checked over by a state brand inspector. Even this technicality is claimed to be covered in the legal paperwork from the federal court being presented by the BLM.

“The Sheriff told me that they were going to come out and that the Nevada brand inspectors would be there to inspect the cattle,” Bundy said. “So it seems like both of their legs are wobbling a little bit on this thing.”

Nevertheless, Bundy says that he will continue on in the fight, following all of the legal avenues that he can. This includes pushing for a legal recognition that an order would be needed from a Nevada court in order to proceed with the brand inspections.

“Without a Nevada court order, the brand inspector is not required to come out,” Bundy said. “They work for me as a citizen of Nevada not for the feds. But they seem to be just going along with this. All the State Brand Inspector has to do is say ‘no’ and this whole thing would be shut down.”

Bundy said that he also plans to make a continued appeal to the Sheriff to uphold his grazing rights.

“All the Sheriff has to do is say ‘no’ to this,” Bundy said. “Is he going to step in and protect my rights or is he going to stand on the fence and allow this to go on?”

If the federal roundup of his cattle takes place, Bundy also promises to bring legal action against the contract cowboys hired to carry it out; as well as state and local officials who, he feels, ought to be standing up for him.

“I’m going to hold these people liable and legally accountable for their actions with any lawsuits that I need to do,” he said.

And what if all that fails? If so, Bundy said he will circle the wagons and continue to “make as much noise” as he can.

“I’ll bring my friends, relatives and supporters together to protest against this whole thing,” he said. “And then we will do whatever we have to do after that.”

Bundy emphasized that this was not just his own battle; but it was a battle for the people as well.

“This is not just about trying to eliminate Cliven Bundy in the ranching business,” Bundy said. “Because once I am off the land, they’ll want you off the land too. Then the federal government will have full policing power and rule as though we were just a territory and not a sovereign state. So I’m not just fighting for my rights. I’m fighting for freedom, liberty, agency and access to their lands for all citizens in Clark County. Yes it is my rights on the line; but it is yours also.”

We must stop collaborating with environmentalists

READER'S VIEW LANDS BILL

BY LENORE BARRETT
Idaho Statesman

Land ownership was the compelling force that brought people to America in the first place, and the first purpose of the founding fathers was to protect the "unalienable rights" of an individual to own and control the use of private property.

The 1873 Timber Culture Act and the 1877 Desert Land Law both provided for free transfer of government land to private ownership. For the first 150 years, the objective of American land policy clearly was to get government land into private ownership. However, the distribution of government land to private ownership ended with the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act. Subsequently, radical environmentalists were the driving force behind the 1964 Wilderness Act. In 1976, The Federal Land Policy and Management Act officially set "public domain" lands in concrete. Since the '70s, federal land policy has shifted 180 degrees, making free enterprise and private property rights an obstacle to be overcome rather than a value to be protected.

Enter the massive 2009 omnibus public lands bill just passed by Congress. The Owyhee Canyonlands portion designates a whopping 517,000 acres of new Idaho wilderness and releases a paltry 199,000 acres of wilderness study areas. It also places 316 miles of Idaho rivers under federal control in a state already 63 percent federally owned. Why not just give Idaho back to the federal government and get it over with?

Idaho is a natural resource state, not a tourist mecca or a federal preserve. Idaho's congressionals should concentrate their efforts on restoring Idaho's natural resource industries, and stop "collaborating" with the environmental pantheists who destroyed Idaho's rural economy.

While the Idaho delegation, the environmentalists and the media are exchanging high fives over their latest wilderness victory, attention needs to be drawn to federal legislation known as the Clean Water Restoration Act, which in all likelihood will resurface in the new congressional session.

It will give the United States "all water subject to the ebb and flow of the tide, the territorial seas, and all interstate and intrastate waters and their tributaries, including lakes, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams) mud flats, sand flats, wetlands, sloughs, prairie potholes, wet meadows, playa lakes, natural ponds ..." and the rainwater your grandma used to save in a wooden barrel.

Who knows? If this legislation moves forward, at least grandma's rain barrel might survive the takeover with a little collaboration, consensus and compromise!

Lenore Hardy Barrett, a Challis Republican, is an Idaho House member.