Legally, I think Mr. Bundy is wrong....sounds like this thing has been through the court system and he has lost....
Yes, but do keep in mind that the BLM has a rich history of railroading people through the courts. For one, the BLM is essentially a group of bullies, and two, the BLM, like most federal agencies, are governed by federal laws and regulations, not common sense, so when the cogs in the machine start turning they just keep on mindlessly chugging along doing their thing, never stopping to think about what they are actually doing. Combine that mental idiocy with being a bully, and you have the BLM at its finest.
However, that's not really the case here.
He's lost twice in court, but he also represented himself both times, which was probably his biggest mistake. His second mistake was trying to argue right and wrong and common sense with a federal agency. His third mistake, and it's a whopper, was saying,
“I believe this is a sovereign state of Nevada. I abide by all of Nevada state laws. But, I don’t recognize the United States Government as even existing. It gets back to the ownership of this. Who owns this land? Does the sovereign State of Nevada own this land within their borders? Or does the United States own this land with their borders? If United States owns this land then I guess I’m wrong. But what if this is a sovereign State of Nevada and Clark County, Nevada owns this land? The People of Clark County, Nevada owns this land.” If you look at how the lands out west were accumulated by the federal government, there is no question the land is owned by the federal government. So he's wrong on that one.
The BLM actually turned loose the cattle they had rounded up, which is kind of a surprise, but they aren't done yet by any means. They'll go back to court. But in the meantime, we now have governors and congressional representatives and senators involved, which should get a common sense resolution out of this, likely with some special consideration legislation out of Congress, or perhaps even a petition to the court to vacate the previous decisions, or at least parts of them.
The problem really goes back to how it all started, back in 1993 with the listing of a native tortoise incorporated under the Endangered Species Act. As a result, the U.S. Department of Interior’s Bureau of Land Management (BLM) informed grazing permit holders like Bundy that cattle counts would need to be reduced to 150 head (in Bundy's case, from 200). That same year, the Bundy permit was eligible for renewal but was not renewed by Bundy, probably out of protest or something in having to reduce his cattle. The permit was later revoked in 1994 by the BLM for nonpayment on the renewal, according to federal court records.
Instead of reducing his cattle, he increased it, and stopped paying the grazing fees. After asking him repeatedly to remove the cattle, 4 years later in 1998 the BLM went to court to have him remove the cattle. The judge so ordered them to be removed, and gave him 6 months to do it, otherwise be fined $200 per day per head. He appealed to the 9th Circuit and lost in 1999.
Between 2000 and 2011 the BLM performed surveillance and tracked Bundy's cattle, and noted a sizable increase in Bundy's herd count not only on the land Bundy used to lease, but also on adjacent land that had never been permitted to anyone, including land in the Lake Meade National Recreation Area.
In June 2011, BLM sent a fresh cease and desist order with another threat to impound stray cattle in July 2011. Later in November, the NPS sent a separate letter regarding alleged trespass on the two new tracts of land within the Lake Meade area with a 45 day impound threat. In January 2012, the Bundy family told NPS they would work to round up stray cattle ahead of the deadline. The Bundy family rounded up zero cattle.
Then, according to court records, the BLM surveyed 790 head of cattle in an area designated as the "New Trespass Lands" (a separate nature preserve in the Overton Arm and Gold Butte areas of the Lake Mead National Recreation Area) in March 2012, areas in which Bundy's cattle, nor anyone else, had ever been. All the cattle either bore Bundy's brand, or were admitted by Bundy to be his.
In April 2012, court records indicate that one last administrative effort was made on the part of the BLM to resolve the issue. Federal agents attempted to broker a deal involving the Clark County Sherriff that would allow cattle to be rounded up and transported to a sales market of the Bundy family’s choosing and allow the family to keep all proceeds. Court filings referenced Cliven Bundy’s assertion that any such action to round up cattle could lead to a “range war.”
The U.S. Government then filed a new civil lawsuit against the family for specific alleged trespass on the New Trespass Lands and the Lake Mead recreational area in May 2012. Court records reference Bundy’s confirmation in deposition that the cattle, branded or not, were indeed his on the tracts. Further, court records detailed the family’s ranching improvements to the off-limits New Trespass Lands to include corrals, water troughs, hay and grazing supplements, all of which were explicitly prohibited for any party under any grazing lease. When asked in deposition what reaction the Bundy family would have should an impoundment occur, Cliven said he’d do “whatever it takes” to include physical force to stop such action.
The Bundy family continually defended its actions using similar defense theories from prior litigation despite the federal court’s rejection of them. The family argued that the United States did not in fact maintain jurisdiction or ownership of the federal lands in question, citing a specific
Nevada code NRS 321.596 Legislative Findings. Bundy also challenged the inclusion of the tortoise as an endangered species. He lost on all counts.
In July 2013, the federal court granted the DOJ’s motion for summary judgment in favor of the U.S. Government. The court reiterated its position that “the public lands of Nevada are the property of the United States because the United States has held title to those public lands since 1848, when Mexico ceded the land to the United States.”
The Nevada federal district court flatly stated: “In sum, this most recent effort to oppose the United States’ legal process, Bundy has produced no valid law or specific facts raising a genuine issue of fact regarding federal ownership or management of the public lands of Nevada, or that his cattle have not trespassed on the New Trespass Lands.”
In February 2014, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals again rejected Bundy’s claims.
And this is where we are now, where some people think Obama needs to pick up a pen or a phone and order a resolution to this nonsense.
