Oregon: 9 ranchers in 2 states have now renounced their BLM grazing contracts

[phantom power]

BURNS – The protesters holding the wildlife refuge had nine ranchers in two states Saturday renounce their grazing privileges and they promise more will do so in the coming week, a symbolic step toward their avowed goal of shaking federal control of ranchland.

...

Meantime, the real effect is hard to tell. The ranchers say they'll keep using the federal land for their cattle. They say they may pay into escrow the modest fees -- $1.69 a month for a cow-calf pair – paid for using public land.

The ranchers' acts endorsed the view of Ammon Bundy and his armed militants at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge that federal land managers were violating the U.S. Constitution.

http://www.opb.org/news/series/burns-oregon-standoff-bundy-militia-news-updates/

[RKP5637]

1. And the fed's response is:

[phantom power]

2. I guess they'd rather wait until they have 100 scoff-laws to contend with. Or 1000...

[RKP5637]

4. It's a total WTF! n/t

[Downwinder]

3. Need a list of brands and an interactive map.

[Lars39]

5. Alrighty then, immmediate cattle removal or confiscation.

[SammyWinstonJack]

10. I wouldn't hold my breath on that. It's a free for all, now.

OWS protesters must be shaking their heads over the non reaction from local, state and the Feds. compared to the violence unleashed upon them.

[Lars39]

12. Oh, I'm not.

Unless the FBI are playing a very long game, it's pretty obvious in whose favor the game is rigged.

[hollowdweller]

19. NRA was right.

Nobody listens to you unless you are armed.

This is where we on the left are off base.

The Vietnam war might still be going if there were no Weathermen.

MLK might have not been listened to if there had been no Malcom X or Black Panthers.

Most certainly without guns and intimidation of scabs the union movement would have never been successful.

Lets compare the crazies on Oregon. They only represent a small sector of society but they will probably wind up getting at least SOMETHING. Where the underpaid public employees in Wisconsin got screwed. OWS got some of their ideas out there but they were ultimately unsuccessful.

The gov't is honorable for trying to settle this peacefully. I also understand they really did screw up Waco and Ruby Ridge.

However I honestly believe they have given it a try and it's emboldened the crazies and only going delaying what is going to happen.

They need to surprise these people. Block off the roads and go in and take the cattle. If somebody comes out with a gun they need to shoot them.

On the Oregon crew they need to shut off both ends of the road. Set up snipers around the place. Then they need to jam all communications. They should send in a large contingent of big guys, unarmed to take them into custody. Then if anybody on their sides starts shooting tear gas the place and take out anybody who comes out of the place armed.

I place the blame squarely on the NRA for this stuff. They have been pushing these military weapons and gear because the gov't is coming for your guns. The gov't has never come for the guns so now you have all these people who want to play soldier. If you kill the 10% who want to kill then the 90% who just want to act out a fantasy will give it up.

Also Obama could use this as an obvious example of why civilians do not need weapons of war.

[beevul]

33. I love that one.

... civilians do not need weapons of war.

Of course, there are no actual weapons of war at issue here. True weapons of war have been tightly regulated since 1934, and there is a distinct significant functional difference between them, and civilian legal firearms.

At best, what you refer to, is firearms that LOOK like weapons of war.

They have been pushing these military weapons and gear...

Repeatedly read the above until it sinks in.

The gov't has never come for the guns...

SKS owners in CA, victims of Katrina, and others would strongly disagree with you. And lets not forget Georgia HB 731:

To amend Article 4 of Chapter 11 of Title 16 of the Official Code of Georgia Annotated, relating to dangerous instrumentalities and practices, so as to prohibit the possession, sale, transport, distribution, or use of certain assault weapons, large capacity magazines, armor-piercing bullets, and incendiary .50 caliber bullets; to provide for crimes involving the possession, sale, transport, distribution, or use of certain assault weapons, large capacity magazines, armor-piercing bullets, and incendiary .50 caliber bullets; to provide for criminal penalties; to designate certain weaponry and ammunition as contraband and to require seizure of such by the Georgia Bureau of Investigation; to provide for enhanced penalties for the possession and use of machine guns; to provide for definitions; to provide for exemptions; to provide for related matters; to repeal conflicting laws; and for other purposes.

http://www.legis.ga.gov/Legislation/en-US/display/20152016/HB/731

That bill, and the many other similar bills that came before it at both the state and the federal level, are not the fault of the nra. And, people can not be blamed for taking anti-gun people and orgs at their word, that they want guns gone.

[hollowdweller]

37. I think you are wrong.

[beevul]

40. Think I'm wrong all you like.

Your thinking that I'm wrong doesn't alter the facts what so ever.

Of course, there are no actual weapons of war at issue here. True weapons of war have been tightly regulated since 1934, and there is a distinct significant functional difference between them, and civilian legal firearms.

At best, what you refer to, is firearms that LOOK like weapons of war.

The above is factually and empirically true. As in can't be debated. The only question at this point, is whether you're too invested in your beliefs for facts to hold any sway over you, and Only you can answer that.

Likewise, attempts to outlaw and confiscate guns speak for themselves.

They happened, and denying that doesn't alter history.

[Odin2005]

41. Political power comes out of the barrel of a gun.

Pacifism is just putting a "kick me" sign on your back.

[Odin2005]

42. OWS folks should have come armed with AR-15s.

[thereismore]

6. I don't understand how the Feds can tolerate a break-in and let these assholes use the facilities.

At what point do they want to intervene? Arrest them for insurrection.

[3catwoman3]

7. Can I renounce my contract with...

...American Express and stop paying my bill?

[phantom power]

8. Technically, yes, but in your case there would be consequences.

Maybe if you start carrying an AR15 on your shoulder, a copy of the constitution, and make loud obnoxious speeches with words like "constitution," "sovereign citizen," etc, you will have a shot...

[Recursion]

9. Depends. Did AmEx raise your interest rate after you took on debt?

If so, I'd say "yes"

[DetlefK]

14. Did you learn nothing from the Shrikeli-case?

Rip off ordinary people with ridiculous prices for medicine, potentially bankrupting or killing them? Fine and dandy.

Rip off share-holders? YOU'RE GOING TO JAIL, MOTHERFUCKER!

[underpants]

26. You can renounce a contract but it only means you give up the rights&benefits of it

These dumbasses are just giving up their right to use the land. At a discounted rate that they aren't gong to get anywhere else.

I know you were just joking and it was funny

[Schema Thing]

11. Does that mean local hunters can now bring home their cattle?

[phantom power]

15. who the hell knows? How long will it take for them to start rustling each others' cattle?

I mean, picture a bunch of 'sovereign citizen' ranchers, who clearly believe in taking whatever the fuck they want, because "reasons!" In an environment where existing law enforcement has effectively abdicated its authorities and responsibilities, how long before they start eyeing each other's cattle, and then going all "2nd-amendment" on each other?

[Odin2005]

43. What these idiots are doing is a recipe for state collapse and warlordism.

[Lizzie Poppet]

29. I want a list of cattle brands of the people doing this.

I don't hunt...but I am a long-range rifle competitor. It ain't like beef cattle in wide-open range country would be hard to "hunt." Someone would undoubtedly like to make use of the meat (I don't eat beef).

[geek tragedy]

13. the DOJ's pathetic, cowardly approach is bearing the predictable fruit. nt

[packman]

16. Don't Fence me in -

Love it - "They say they MAY pay into escrow the modest fees" So take that you whimpy, pencil - pushing government geeks.

?t=91

[PufPuf23]

17. Let the idiot ranchers lose their right to range on federal land.

Cattle ranged on federal land is a romantic slice from history as cattle raised on pasture, feedlot, private range, and mixed use agriculture far exceed the amount of cattle raised on federal range (which is negligible in composite).

The fees paid the Feds for grazing permits far exceed the costs of administration, management and regulation.

Range cattle tend to concentrate on and over graze ecologically sensitive parts of the rangelands (water where water is scarce, better soils with past human occupancy or favored by wildlife, and so on) without human effort.

The Feds have had "stewardship contracts" in the Burns area for over 20 years now that favors local employment and coordinated management with locals. Probably they could be expanded. Here is an example:

http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/burns/files/BU-StewardshipAwarding2012.pdf

[geek tragedy]

20. They'll lose the right but not the ability to range on federal land.

The federal government has abandoned its attempts to enforce federal law when it's armed ranchers who are violating it.

They should have just wiped out the Bundy thugs with an Apache helicopter back in 2014 and ended this insurgency right there and then.

[PufPuf23]

23. I would never support such reactionary and obscene violence.

The militant ranchers are tools that want to privatize Federal assets.

I do not like how the situation is escalating or being played in the media.

I think one can assume (or hope) that more is going on at the Federal level that is not being telegraphed.

I do not understand why a wide perimeter has not been established around the trespassed area and why there appears to be free in and out access.

It is troubling that children have been brought into the trespassed area and that a sheriff from an adjoining county treats the militants as valid.

Any political traction for the legally and practically baseless "cause" is bad.

Fortunately even the albeit mostly redneck locals reject the asshat trespassers.

It will really suck if there are copycats elsewhere.

The longer this goes on and the more entrenched the worse the outcome is likely to be.

The trespassers should be jailed.

I am impatient too.

[Initech]

18. Ranchers gone wild!

[hollowdweller]

21. read

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whiskey_Rebellion

[Downtown Hound]

22. Gee, that whole ignore them and they will go away thing has been working really, really well.

[sinkingfeeling]

24. Good now get their cattle off our land

[Takket]

25. someone should shoot all their cattle

If that land belongs to us as much as anyone else, I say we kill all the cattle. its my land. what right do they have to stop me?

Kill every single head.

[exboyfil]

27. The deck is stacked against land owners

who have wandering cattle. You cannot kill them and you cannot hurt them getting them off your property. You are supposed to call the sheriff to remove them. If you are responsible for maintaining a fence then it is your responsibility for the cattle that wonder through a break in that fence.

When my dad was trying to maintain a garden on some farmland he owned, he would have cattle breaking through. He drove them with a pellet rifle (I ran along with him) as we chased them. The cattle ended up disturbing an yellow jacket nest which we promptly ran into. My dad's hand was so swelled form trying to remove the yellow jackets from my neck as he carried me away (I was about five or six at the time).

[Shrike47]

28. I want to lease the land if they don't. For bird watching. And protect my rights with a gun.

[Jerry442]

30. My guess is that Obama...

...is giving the message to the FBI et. al. to avoid the use of force because he doesn't want his last year in office to be sullied by a Waco-style conflagration. I'm sure the next POTUS will be just delighted to find this cow flop floating in the punchbowl.

[phantom power]

31. if that's the strategy, we'd all better pray the next president isn't Republican.

[Jerry442]

32. Foot to the floor there already. NT

[Bluenorthwest]

34. Ranchers from Arizona and New Mexico including ex-con, renounce grazing permits while illegally

holding land in Oregon. These are not Oregon ranchers. Not that facts matter.

[phantom power]

35. True - they are responding to Bundy's call (from Oregon) for ranchers to tear up their contracts

[Bigmack]

36. I'll take bets that they have been overgrazing our land....

... it's a safe bet, too.

http://www.publiclandsranching.org/htmlres/wr_history_politics.htm

[Johonny]

38. Honestly wouldn't you? If one man is getting a free ride then why would you pay the added expense?

The Feds failed to enforce the law and now they've sent a clear message that those Ranchers that play by the rules are at a disadvantage to those that simply refuse to pay. The blow back to this is court fines that don't need to be paid.

[phantom power]

39. Unless they figure out how to start imposing some real consequences quickly...

I predict we'll see more and more ranchers deciding to jump on this bandwagon.