Behold! Cliven Bundy and "the Negro"

who want to shoot U.S. citizens to protect tortoises in a desert.

Do they eat grass, by the way? Originally Posted by CJ7

like I said, crazy ass rightwingers[/QUOTE]

Actually, they do eat grass along with wildflowers and cactus.

How about I graze cattle on your land and pay somebody else the grazing fee.

Does that make sense to you?

You folks are sounding like you're one rental truck away from being Tim McViegh.


Originally Posted by WTF

What you seem to be missing here, or denying, is the argument that the Federal Government does not have a right to claim that land. It is part of a state. Forcing a state, by the Federal Government, to do or not do something with that land is denying that state's sovereignty.

What you seem to be missing here, or denying, is the argument that the Federal Government does not have a right to claim that land. It is part of a state. Forcing a state, by the Federal Government, to do or not do something with that land is denying that state's sovereignty. Originally Posted by boardman

Again, the State may "hold" the land in trust for the public .. aka public land.

like I said, crazy ass rightwingers Originally Posted by boardman

Actually, they do eat grass along with wildflowers and cactus.[/QUOTE]

So did the "buffalo" ... millions of them .... and just about every four legged creature waltzing through the golden waves of the west ...

.. this is another "save a tortoise" campaign that plays well with "the base"!

like I said, crazy ass rightwingers Originally Posted by boardman

Actually, they do eat grass along with wildflowers and cactus.[/QUOTE]
You would think they would eat whatever vegetation was available, but according to this women in this video the Desert Tortoise eats shit, literally.

Jim



http://youtu.be/j6WHrAUtTI4

you're married to Bundy? Originally Posted by CJ7

You own 57 too many firearms.

You own 57 too many firearms. Originally Posted by LexusLover

not any more, after recent circumstances beyond my control and in light of what will be, my daughter is now in charge of the majority of the collection ... actual count turned out to be 59

but I can still make your ass famous

http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/grazing.html Originally Posted by LexusLover

"Livestock grazing can result in impacts on public land resources, but well-managed grazing provides numerous environmental benefits as well. For example, while livestock grazing can lead to increases in some invasive species, well-managed grazing can be used to manage vegetation. Intensively managed “targeted” grazing can control some invasive plant species or reduce the fuels that contribute to severe wildfires. Besides providing such traditional products as meat and fiber, well-managed rangelands and other private ranch lands support healthy watersheds, carbon sequestration, recreational opportunities, and wildlife habitat. Livestock grazing on public lands helps maintain the private ranches that, in turn, preserve the open spaces that have helped write the West’s history and will continue to shape this region’s character in the years to come.

"BLM Response to PEER Press Release of May 14, 2012

"A May 14, 2012, press release issued by PEER (Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility) – titled “Livestock’s Heavy Hooves Impair One-Third of BLM Rangelands” – contains numerous erroneous assertions based on a misunderstanding of the footnotes in the BLM’s 2011 Rangeland Inventory, Monitoring, and Evaluation (RIME) report.

"What is most important to note is that numbers in the RIME report reflect the number of allotments not meeting land health standards, with the total number of acres in those allotments, not the actual number of acres not meeting land health standards in those allotments. For example, if a portion of a 3,000-acre allotment is determined not to be meeting standards, then the entire 3,000-acre allotment is counted and reported as not meeting standards, even though a significant amount of acreage in that allotment may in reality be meeting standards. The BLM has developed and will soon be implementing a mapping process and database that will document the actual number of acres not meeting land health standards.

"Other points worth noting:

"Twelve percent, not nearly 40 percent (as PEER asserted), of grazing allotments were found not to be meeting land health standards because of livestock grazing management at the time of the assessment.
PEER’s claim that the BLM uses “ambiguous” categories – such as the term “making significant progress” – ignores the fact that these categories are identified in BLM regulations (Title 43 Code of Federal Regulations 4180.2).

"15,665 grazing allotments – that is, 73 percent of all BLM allotments – had been evaluated for land health at the end of Fiscal Year 2011, and 79 percent of those evaluated were meeting or making significant progress toward meeting all land health standards under current management.
The BLM has taken action to correct grazing management on 86 percent of the 1,925 allotments where livestock grazing was determined to be the cause for not meeting land health standards."
______________________________ ____________________________
End of quoted material.

well ExNYer, these idiots will NEVER get it regardless how in depth the explanation ...


that's why they're IDIOTS

What you seem to be missing here, or denying, is the argument that the Federal Government does not have a right to claim that land. It is part of a state. Forcing a state, by the Federal Government, to do or not do something with that land is denying that state's sovereignty. Originally Posted by boardman

And the South shall rise again. In more ways than one it seems.

but I can still make your ass famous Originally Posted by CJ7

Must you be obsessed with my ass? I like girls.

...according to this women in this video the Desert Tortoise eats shit, literally.... Originally Posted by Mr MojoRisin

There you go!

Bundy is "saving the Desert Tortoises" with cow patties!

Let's see ... fresh laid cow chip goes for about 1.2 cents a pound....

(value: http://nmsp.cals.cornell.edu/project...lueLecture.pdf )

and

http://feedcattle.com/cattle-manure/

One cow produces about 10 tons of cow shit a year .. so that is about $240

He had about 300 cows ... so that's about $72,000 a year for his cow shit ...

since 1993 ... equals about $1,450,000 .......

............... with no interest, penalties, or late fees!!!!

He deserves an offset on his back-charges for the last 20 years of cow shit.

Plus interest and late penalties ... at the customary IRS rates.

not any more, after recent circumstances beyond my control and in light of what will be, my daughter is now in charge of the majority of the collection ... actual count turned out to be 59 Originally Posted by CJ7

Dodging a judgement or bankruptcy?

like I said, crazy ass rightwingers Originally Posted by boardman

Actually, they do eat grass along with wildflowers and cactus.[/QUOTE]


actually, the diet of the tortoise has no bearing on the mentality of rightwingers like LL

What you seem to be missing here, or denying, is the argument that the Federal Government does not have a right to claim that land. It is part of a state. Forcing a state, by the Federal Government, to do or not do something with that land is denying that state's sovereignty. Originally Posted by boardman

I'm not missing that silly argument.

I have stated earlier that picking between the two is like you trying to convince me it is better to be eaten by a Lion than a Tiger.

If you are advocating another Civil War....I'm not sure I'm on board with that. Why you might ask? Because no matter who wins, you still will be doing wtf some form of government tells you to do.

All you are doing with that state rights crap is trying to shove your way of thinking down another's throat. Same as the other side is doing. I'll give ya that. I just wish you Johnny Reb's would realize you're no different than the other side. A Hobson Choice if you will.