I'm sure what you mean by this, Tiff.
I'm no expert on the history of Oregon, but know it to be relatively new as a state. Before becoming a state it was a federal territory, of course, but as such was formed by my understanding from land possessed by Native Americans who were breezily disregarded by the U.S. and Great Britain as they alternately disputed and resolved their claims over the land. The federal government, I believe, legally owned what is now Oregon until it began giving and selling its property to white settlers. It didn't sell all its land in Oregon, however. It retained land, including that which is now this wildlife refuge. Under a law which in 1908 authorized the president to designate federal lands as such a refuge, Teddy Roosevelt created Mulhear Wildlife Refuge by Executive Order, that year.
So, my understanding (which may be incorrect) is that no rancher ever owned this property. Whether they were "there" before the BLM I don't know; it's a fairly new federal agency. I don't know whether they were there before Oregon became a territory either, though I doubt it. If they were, however, their presence would make no difference as far as legal ownership of the property is concerned, no more than the presence of the Native Americans long before any white person settled on the land made any difference. It belongs to the federal government; only the federal government can lease the land, and it has every right to do so. What the ranchers may think about title to the land is not relevant. The federal government has no reason to recognize any ownership claim of the ranchers.
This dispute is about money, which is being manipulated for their benefit by people who want more money. — Ciceronianus the White
If the general point is that blacks have it tougher than whites in the US, where if you could pick your skin color, you'd be prudent to choose white, I suppose I could agree. Of course, that revelation is hardly provocative and exciting. If you're asking, though, whether this Oregon situation is proof of anything important, it's really not, other than showing that folks are at the ready to race bait at the drop of a hat. — Hanover
So according to Landru a third of the US population is a threat to democracy. :DIn contrast, conservatives defend the goons in the Bundy Militia and think their ideas are just peachy. The GOP presidential candidates have all lauded Cliven Bundy for his standoff with the BLM last year or so where he refused to pay his lease fees for use of federal land. Bundy threatened to shoot federal agents. Rand Paul visited him and heaped praise on him. So there's a vast difference. The loony ideas of the gun nuts basically afflict a third of our population that considers itself conservative. That's a threat to democracy ISIS isn't. — Landru Guide Us
Cripes, what kind of gay man are you? I suppose I shouldn't stereotype, but I always thought you folks were supposed to be snappy dressers. I know you live in the Midwest, so perhaps you still set the bar rather high compared to some of your neighbors...Far away from being ‘le snob” I am definitely ‘le slob’ when it comes to my wardrobe. Daily wear is low fashion Lee denim jeans, sweatshirts, and underwear from Marshalls discount store. — Bitter Crank
Cripes, what kind of gay man are you? I suppose I shouldn't stereotype, but I always thought you folks were supposed to be snappy dressers. I know you live in the Midwest, so perhaps you still set the bar rather high compared to some of your neighbors... — Arkady
I'm no expert on the history of Oregon, but know it to be relatively new as a state. — Ciceronianus the White
Later on, I found that the blue jeans costume fit well in working class anarchist / socialist circles too -- well, maybe not the chaps without blue jeans underneath. — Bitter Crank
Just a little background on these rightwing welfare queens and how they leech off taxpayers — Landru Guide Us
Is your objective simply to point out the hypocrisy of those who claim to be conservatives by showing that they receive the same sort of government subsidies they condemn when received by those on the left? — Hanover
(See Rawstory article here)(Rawstory) Tearful militant discovers friend drank away donation money: ‘It’s like finding out there is no such thing as Santa’
A heartbroken militiaman announced that one of his buddies had walked off the Oregon nature preserve they had overtaken and had holed up in a local motel to drink away donation money.
Joe Oshaugnessy, an Arizona militiaman, has been actively seeking volunteers through social media to join the occupation of Malheur National Wildlife Refuge.
But his friends tearfully announced that Oshaugnessy, who is known as “Capt. O,” had left the refuge Wednesday and was instead staying at a motel nearby — as some others associated with the militants have apparently been doing, according to sources.
Some of the militants have reportedly been spotted eating at area restaurants during the standoff, as well.
The militants have been allowed to come and go freely from the nature preserve in the absence of a law enforcement presence, but at least one of them, Brian “Booda” Cavalier, failed to return after a newspaper report revealed he had lied about serving in the U.S. Marines.
Oshaugnessy had apparently argued with some of the participants about the presence of women and children at the wildlife refuge, where militants apparently hoped to draw federal agents into a gun battle.
The Sagebrush Rebellion has roots that go back to the early 1900s, when the federal government first started reserving public lands and developing water for early settlements. It took off starting in the 1970s, when the environmental movement pushed Congress to pass The Endangered Species Act, National Environmental Policy Act, Clean Air and Water acts, and others. It appeared again during the Clinton Administration, as it took on public land grazing, mining, and logging, while creating new controversial monuments under The Antiquities Act. Finally, the election of President Barack Obama brought on the latest iteration, with renewed calls for public land transfers to the states and rising anti-federal sentiment, such as that exhibited by the Malheur occupation.
(RT) Feds vs. Ranchers
Much of the United States west of the Mississippi river is outright owned by the federal government, and administered by the Bureau of Land Management (BLM). Until the 1970s, the land was often open to farmers and especially ranchers, who counted on grazing rights to maintain large herds of cattle. Laws adopted in 1976 led to the government closing off much of the land, prompting a backlash in the states dubbed the “Sagebrush rebellion.” It fizzled after the election of President Ronald Reagan, however, as the new administration failed to revoke the laws but promised the BLM would be more sensitive to local concerns.
Since then, Washington has steadily cracked down on private use of public lands, with environmentalist groups pushing for designating much of the government-owned property as protected wilderness. This has led to many ranchers abandoning their family business. About half the workforce of Harney County, where Burns is located, is now employed with the government in some capacity. One of the few ranching families that have held on are the Hammonds, whose conflict with the BLM helped spark the latest conflagration.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.