Transfer of Public Lands

[AKaviator]

Pretty much spot-on as I see it too, Bitterroot. We have friends and family near that area and they like the Hammonds well enough but no one, even the Hammonds wanted the other guys there.
It's a shame that the fellow was shot but that was the scenario that he set up. The tactical stop by L.E. looked well thought out, too bad he pushed the fight to that point. But, that's exactly what he said he'd do.

 

[Musket Man]

I just got home from Burns. I was there for the whole rally Monday. I saw the whole thing with my own eyes and I cant find 1 news report that even comes close to reporting about it accurately. They are reporting everything like that as well. I talked to locals and they all say the guys at the refuge, militia, protesters have not been a problem at all and the only problem has been the FBI. They also say alot of ppl against it are not even from Harney county and most of the rest work for blm. There is testimony from 2 women that were in the truck with LaVoy and I talked to others that knew him well. it all backs up everything I have posted and then some. I learned alot in the 2 days I was there.

 

[AKaviator]

Okay. So what's your suggestion for a fix? Should law enforcement just go away and allow civil disobedience and cede our public land over to some ranchers? Do the BLM personnel have have right to their jobs at the refuge? Who gets the refuge vehicles and buildings? Does Bundy get the land and have the right to keep me from hunting there?
I'm not there, so I have lots of questions.

We in Alaska had a guy have a negative dealing with the Park Service. John Sturgeon has taken it through the court system and has recently had his case heard by the Supreme Court. No one was hurt. No one got arrested. He's doing it right, in my opinion.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

I just got home from Burns. I was there for the whole rally Monday. I saw the whole thing with my own eyes and I cant find 1 news report that even comes close to reporting about it accurately. They are reporting everything like that as well. I talked to locals and they all say the guys at the refuge, militia, protesters have not been a problem at all and the only problem has been the FBI. They also say alot of ppl against it are not even from Harney county and most of the rest work for blm. There is testimony from 2 women that were in the truck with LaVoy and I talked to others that knew him well. it all backs up everything I have posted and then some. I learned alot in the 2 days I was there.

First,

I am glad you did something peaceful to support your cause, rather than threaten violence. That is commendable.

However, just because some locals support the occupiers and don't support the FBI doesn't prove anything in regards to land transfer or what happened at the shooting. It is easy to talk to people that agree with you when they assemble for that purpose.

As I am sure you saw at the rally there were a lot of people that do not support the occupiers, and do support the actions of law enforcement. Many of these people are from Harney County, and I am sure many are not.

The idea that only people from Harney County should decided what happens of public lands there, or if they get sold, is ludicrous. It is land that belongs to all of us and management decisions should be made with a balanced approach to competing interests. The Federal system allows for this, and although the system is certainly imperfect and unfortunate management decisions have been made, we could work together to improve that management, rather than risk our public lands through the "transfer" scam.

 

[go_deep]

I will put this scenario in front of you like I did others. You come home one day, a group has taken over your house and are armed, the cops have it surrounded. You can no longer can go into your house, get your things, or use your property. Do you want the cops to just leave and let them have it, because their being peaceful? or do you want the cops to kick their a$$ out of your house, and haul them to jail? If one of the people inside said, I'll die before going to jail, when he finally came out, do you want the cops to be ever so polite to him?
It sucks that someone died in Burns, and my prayers truly go out to his family, and hope that if they continue with there fight they do it in a away that won't get anyone else hurt. But this refuge was just that your land, mine land, everyone's land and they took it over by force. Simple you bring guns and take over a building that doesn't belong to you, law enforcement shows up, and they will bring their guns too.

 

[Tim McCoy]

No doubt in my mind we have way too much power vested in unaccountable govt. bureaucrats. But there are productive ways to address it. Here is an example.

http://www.northernag.net/AGNews/AgNewsStories/TabId/657/ArtMID/2927/ArticleID/5871/Stockgrowers-Question-Federal-Fire-Double-Standards.aspx

I do believe ownership of the Federal lands should stay Federal, but it needs to have a mechanism to keep local interests involved and current uses of that land from being squashed by outside interests, usually funded and supported by urban interests. No open season for mining/ranching etc., but preference to traditional uses that are currently ongoing. New uses or expansion of current uses should have rigorous permitting vetting processes in my view. Setting the Bundys aside, what happened to the Hammonds should be of concern. They are good folks, not perfect, made a mistake, but have been bullied by a govt. Agency that wants their land and incarcerated by use of a statute designed to fight terrorist. The rural urban divide is a real threat to rural communities and families in the West.

 

[Gr8bawana]

I just got home from Burns. I was there for the whole rally Monday. I saw the whole thing with my own eyes and I cant find 1 news report that even comes close to reporting about it accurately. They are reporting everything like that as well. I talked to locals and they all say the guys at the refuge, militia, protesters have not been a problem at all and the only problem has been the FBI. They also say alot of ppl against it are not even from Harney county and most of the rest work for blm. There is testimony from 2 women that were in the truck with LaVoy and I talked to others that knew him well. it all backs up everything I have posted and then some. I learned alot in the 2 days I was there.

A rally in support of those idiots. Of course they are going to keep spreading those BS lies to make themselves look like victims. You see and hear what you want to hear, your eyes and ears are closed to the facts because we can tell you are also anti-government.
This is no longer the lawless wild west where outlaws with guns get to do as the please.

 

[Bitterroot Bulls]

I hope nobody else has to die for this false cause. I wish nobody had died.

 

[BuzzH]

No doubt in my mind we have way too much power vested in unaccountable govt. bureaucrats. But there are productive ways to address it. Here is an example.

http://www.northernag.net/AGNews/AgNewsStories/TabId/657/ArtMID/2927/ArticleID/5871/Stockgrowers-Question-Federal-Fire-Double-Standards.aspx

I do believe ownership of the Federal lands should stay Federal, but it needs to have a mechanism to keep local interests involved and current uses of that land from being squashed by outside interests, usually funded and supported by urban interests. No open season for mining/ranching etc., but preference to traditional uses that are currently ongoing. New uses or expansion of current uses should have rigorous permitting vetting processes in my view. Setting the Bundys aside, what happened to the Hammonds should be of concern. They are good folks, not perfect, made a mistake, but have been bullied by a govt. Agency that wants their land and incarcerated by use of a statute designed to fight terrorist. The rural urban divide is a real threat to rural communities and families in the West.

I disagree with a majority of this post.

First off, the "local interests" already have a bigger seat at the table when dealing with any issue regarding public lands in their back yards. That's just a simple fact of "locals" being able to have access to the people on the ground at the local offices that are, typically the decision makers. In my experience of having been on various committee's, working groups, involving all kinds of local interests in public lands management, wildlife management, etc. the locals get their voice heard.

There is a general lack of understanding, by locals, as well as those far removed, that all the decisions regarding land management are made by someone in D.C. That's convenient and all, but not based in reality. The people that work at local land management offices, they live in the very same communities where many/most of those decisions are made. They are our neighbors, friends, and even family that work and live in these communities where public land issues are so important.

I am personally tired of the finger pointing, name calling, and rhetoric that surrounds the fringe on the public lands/government over-reach BS.

In my experience, the very people that complain and whine about the decisions made by land managers are the very same people I see complaining after the fact. They don't meet with the Land Management officials, they don't get involved, they are not part of the solution. I also typically see those complaining don't live anywhere near the areas they complain about the "government over-reach".

The reason for that is simple...its much easier to stand on your soap box and complain, than to do the hard work of finding collaborative solutions regarding public lands. Its not easy...and people like the Bundy's have no interest in being part of the solution. They're dead beats, liars, cheats, and a liability to the majority that really are interested in finding workable solutions to many of these problems.

Also, as far as the urban VS rural "threat"...much of that is over-stated as well. Its not my concern, when a business venture that relies on a publically held asset, has to adjust their business model when those (the US Citizens) that hold that asset decide they want to make changes in regard to how that asset is administered, sold, bought, managed, etc. etc. etc.

Its totally illogical to believe that the publically held assets are going to be managed the same way into perpetuity...it makes no sense to assume that. Further if your business model has no plan B...it will fail.

But, to say that there is no "mechanism" in place, or that local interests don't have a voice is disingenuous...they absolutely have a bigger voice.

The whining your hear, is that one side or the other, didn't get everything they wanted...well too bad. Welcome to the real world of working together, getting something for giving something, collaboration, compromise, and how adults deal with complex issues.

People like the Bundy's have nothing to offer. They should be marginalized by all groups and individuals that spend many, many, many hours trying to find solutions to land management decisions and problems. Illegal behavior, taking over Federal Property, and all the other BS they pull needs to be squashed.

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

I disagree with a majority of this post.

First off, the "local interests" already have a bigger seat at the table when dealing with any issue regarding public lands in their back yards. That's just a simple fact of "locals" being able to have access to the people on the ground at the local offices that are, typically the decision makers. In my experience of having been on various committee's, working groups, involving all kinds of local interests in public lands management, wildlife management, etc. the locals get their voice heard.

There is a general lack of understanding, by locals, as well as those far removed, that all the decisions regarding land management are made by someone in D.C. That's convenient and all, but not based in reality. The people that work at local land management offices, they live in the very same communities where many/most of those decisions are made. They are our neighbors, friends, and even family that work and live in these communities where public land issues are so important.

I am personally tired of the finger pointing, name calling, and rhetoric that surrounds the fringe on the public lands/government over-reach BS.

In my experience, the very people that complain and whine about the decisions made by land managers are the very same people I see complaining after the fact. They don't meet with the Land Management officials, they don't get involved, they are not part of the solution. I also typically see those complaining don't live anywhere near the areas they complain about the "government over-reach".

The reason for that is simple...its much easier to stand on your soap box and complain, than to do the hard work of finding collaborative solutions regarding public lands. Its not easy...and people like the Bundy's have no interest in being part of the solution. They're dead beats, liars, cheats, and a liability to the majority that really are interested in finding workable solutions to many of these problems.

Also, as far as the urban VS rural "threat"...much of that is over-stated as well. Its not my concern, when a business venture that relies on a publically held asset, has to adjust their business model when those (the US Citizens) that hold that asset decide they want to make changes in regard to how that asset is administered, sold, bought, managed, etc. etc. etc.

Its totally illogical to believe that the publically held assets are going to be managed the same way into perpetuity...it makes no sense to assume that. Further if your business model has no plan B...it will fail.

But, to say that there is no "mechanism" in place, or that local interests don't have a voice is disingenuous...they absolutely have a bigger voice.

The whining your hear, is that one side or the other, didn't get everything they wanted...well too bad. Welcome to the real world of working together, getting something for giving something, collaboration, compromise, and how adults deal with complex issues.

People like the Bundy's have nothing to offer. They should be marginalized by all groups and individuals that spend many, many, many hours trying to find solutions to land management decisions and problems. Illegal behavior, taking over Federal Property, and all the other BS they pull needs to be squashed.

I agree with a lot of your post, but not all situations are equal. I belong to several groups who attend meetings, write letters and voice our opinion on land use in our local NF & BLM lands. I also speak and write letters on my own to govmnt officials in these areas. They hear from both sides of the issues. A lot of times they only pay lip service to a lot of the public input and have their minds made up in advance of decisions they make. They blame a lot of decisions on mandates from Washington DC. Our County Commissioners have had a difficult time with how these lands are managed too. It has only gotten worse in the past few years.

I don't believe in local or state control as IMHO they would even do a worse job.

 

[BuzzH]

CC,

I agree with you, not all situations are equal and I've experienced many of the frustrations that everyone else has in dealing with land management agencies, wildlife management agencies, etc.

But, the difference is, I don't have unrealistic expectations on what is, and is not, in the purview of said agencies. I also don't hold a NWR hostage, violate all kinds of laws, etc. in an attempt to get my unrealistic goals met.

Like it or not, there are limits on what the agencies can and can not do...and yes, many are mandated via regulation, acts, and law.

The person and groups that make a difference, realize what they can and can not change and act accordingly. They take the time to understand the process, rules, laws, regulations, and how to navigate all of that while getting their concerns heard.

Is it always going to work out the way you want? No, absolutely not.

It comes as no surprise to me at all that your County Commissioners have difficulty as well...some of them are no better informed than the Bundy's and their sympathizers. Its also unrealistic for a County Commissioner to believe that they are immune to having to follow Federal policy, land management policy, etc. They, just like the public, have to be willing to understand the issues, understand the law, and understand they aren't always going to get their way.

If they don't, well, they are in for a lot of frustration and wheel spinning.

 

[Tim McCoy]

CC, you are spot on with your observation that often lip service is paid to input. Especially true when the decider has their mind made up. No perfect solutions. Sometimes it works well, sometimes not.

Out here right now we have a group trying to hold sway over 2.5mm acres in Malhuer County. It is full of roads, ranches, 4x4 trails, grazing leases etc. One stroke of Obamas pen and it will be ugly for most residents in that area, many traditional uses could be banned. Many of these interests will not be happy until only their vision for the land is in place, ergo my desire to see traditional uses, not abuses, preserved.

BuzzH, the rural urban divide is real and often referred to. Many examples from spotted owls to recent attempts with prarie dogs and sage grouse, that have a devastating impact on rural communities and people. The divide itself is more of a social phenomon, it's impacts are what threatens rural communities. If that was not made clear in my comments earlier, hope it is now.

BuzzH, to call my opinion disingenuous is really not conducive to civil dialogue. Intelligent people can disagree. We disagree. Happens all the time. A disagreement does not make either opinion a falsehood. There are a number of examples here in OR, recently, where local input was largely ignored. The process was a farce, it is no better than the folks involved.

As we become more urbanized, the urban rural divide grows, which is why I am for some mechanism to protect traditional uses, especially in roaded areas. I recall some almost laughable abuses a few years back in the Sisters area by a Forest Service employee, by fiat, it happens way too often, happened to me in WY last year. Simply because someone is placed in a Forest Service job for a few years does not automatically make them a local, some are locals, some never will be.

 

[Musket Man]

I did not just talk to ppl at the rally. I went and asked ppl that work at businesses there, gas stations, ect. I figured they see alot of ppl and would have a good idea of what locals thought about the situation. I did that before the rally. This is not a false cause. The Hammonds should not be in prison. The federal government has harassed them for years to try to force them off their land. I am not anti-government. I am anti some things the current government is doing. Since when does anyone thats anti-government fly the stars and stripes and support the constitution? If that makes you anti-government then there is something wrong with the government.

 

[Musket Man]

Out here right now we have a group trying to hold sway over 2.5mm acres in Malhuer County. It is full of roads, ranches, 4x4 trails, grazing leases etc. One stroke of Obamas pen and it will be ugly for most residents in that area, many traditional uses could be banned. Many of these interests will not be happy until only their vision for the land is in place, ergo my desire to see traditional uses, not abuses, preserved.

This could happen any day and it would all be another national monument. They wont even say if they are planning to do it or not. Clinton declared a bunch of national monuments on his way out of office and looks like obama could do the same.

 

[Tim McCoy]

This could happen any day and it would all be another national monument. They wont even say if they are planning to do it or not. Clinton declared a bunch of national monuments on his way out of office and looks like obama could do the same.

It appears the risk of this happening is there, it would be a shame. Rep. Walden is trying to get answers. Another group is trying to close off a large block of the Ochoco's to multi use too. Oregon is a perfect target for these groups, 70% of the population is in the Willamette Valley in NW OR, from very looney Portland south to Eugene, all green and wet. For the most part, they have zero idea and less appreciation for the residents of the dry side who's lives they can ruin. It is the rural urban divide in action, the tyranny of the majority over other people's individual liberty.

 

[Musket Man]

It appears the risk of this happening is there, it would be a shame. Rep. Walden is trying to get answers. Another group is trying to close off a large block of the Ochoco's to multi use too. Oregon is a perfect target for these groups, 70% of the population is in the Willamette Valley in NW OR, from very looney Portland south to Eugene, all green and wet. For the most part, they have zero idea and less appreciation for the residents of the dry side who's lives they can ruin. It is the rural urban divide in action, the tyranny of the majority over other people's individual liberty.

I believe it is happening and they just want to keep it quiet until its done and then they will say its already done and nothing we can do. This is why we need more local control. If this was up to Harney county it would not be happening. People in DC or Portland that will not be effected should not be making these decisions.

 

[Tim McCoy]

I believe it is happening and they just want to keep it quiet until its done and then they will say its already done and nothing we can do. This is why we need more local control. If this was up to Harney county it would not be happening. People in DC or Portland that will not be effected should not be making these decisions.

I agree. Sad state of affairs.

 

[ceby7]

Since when does anyone thats anti-government fly the stars and stripes and support the constitution?

Umm, ever heard of the Tea-Baggers?

 

[Colorado Cowboy]

This thread has taken on a life of it's own. The potential for situations like the one in Oregon could happen anywhere in the country, particularly in the west. For over 100 years we have had private grazing on public land. Early on it was virtually unregulated. The people got used to having this access, some even considered the land theirs. Lots of overgrazing occurred and the land use started to have more and more regulation by the federal gov't. In my opinion the real problem is that the feds are caught between the users and the preservationists. The users are almost all of us and the preservationists are some of us too, but mostly the Sierra Club, Earth First and the types of groups who want to limit or block most public use to a very limited scope. They are well organized and have lots of money and lawyers. Anytime any government entity (federal, state, local) try to do something they disagree with, they go to court. The quagmire we see everywhere is the result.

The users (all of us) are not organized and do not have the resources to counter these situations. The situation in Oregon is an example of how some feel is an answer. I don't have an answer, but know this type of anti government demonstration surely is not it.

When this thread started it was about the local and state governments role in land ownership. Some would like all the federal land in the west turned over to the states to manage and lots of us wouldn't want any part of that. The fear is that when a state gets pressured to sell off land for financial gain, we could lose our access and use forever. For me, I think the method and reasons for the Oregon protest got way out of hand.

 

[highplainsdrifter]

I believe it is happening and they just want to keep it quiet until its done and then they will say its already done and nothing we can do. This is why we need more local control. If this was up to Harney county it would not be happening. People in DC or Portland that will not be effected should not be making these decisions.

More local control? Local control to the occupiers of the refuge means that all federal land should be turned over to state and local government...or privatized. They want to give priority use to grazing and logging. If that happened, recreational opportunities would be greatly diminished.

The Antiquities Act allows presidents to declare national monuments. While I agree this authority has been abused and I don't want to see a lot of national monuments because of all the restricted uses, I would rather see an area declared a national monument then turned over to the likes of the Bundys.

There has to be a middle ground. I think that middle ground is to keep it close to what it is now.