Post by: bigtex on April 09, 2014, 10:38:45 AM
By Associated Press Published: Apr 9, 2014 at 10:25 AM PDT
OLYMPIA, Wash. (AP) - The Fish and Wildlife Service announced plans Tuesday to list four subspecies of Mazama pocket gophers as threatened under the Endangered Species Act.
The Olympia, Roy Prairie, Tenino and Yelm pocket gophers are found only in Pierce and Thurston counties.
The Olympian reports the decision follows more than a decade of debate, environmental studies and lawsuits.
Fish and Wildlife officials also have also designated 1,600 acres in Thurston County as critical habitat for the pocket gophers. A special rule will allow farming and ranching to continue.
The critical habitat proposed for the Roy Prairie pocket gopher is on Joint Base Lewis-McChord, which has promised to preserve its prairie land.
A threatened species is likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future if steps aren't taken to protect it.
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/W-Wash-gopher-going-on-endangered-species-list-254573411.html (http://www.komonews.com/news/local/W-Wash-gopher-going-on-endangered-species-list-254573411.html)
Post by: pianoman9701 on April 09, 2014, 11:49:06 AM
Post by: Southpole on April 09, 2014, 11:59:34 AM
Are we going to see homes being condemned? Is this the first step for government to steal people's land in the name of a supposed "endangered" animal?
Post by: pianoman9701 on April 09, 2014, 12:02:34 PM
Post by: jackmaster on April 09, 2014, 12:13:20 PM
Post by: WSU on April 09, 2014, 12:17:08 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on April 09, 2014, 12:20:19 PM
Post by: Easy-E on April 09, 2014, 12:25:25 PM
:devil:
All gophers on my property must die. :mgun:
Post by: WSU on April 09, 2014, 12:29:25 PM
I'm fairly confident it won't get better.
That's a very safe assumption.
Post by: Broken Arrow on April 09, 2014, 12:36:43 PM
WDFW combined with Gophers Forever and the Eastern European Crabgrass Foundation has posted a $10,000 reward for information leading to Sept. 7th, 2016 poaching incident of a juvenile collared pocket gopher.
Post by: Ebell on April 09, 2014, 12:49:34 PM
Post by: baldopepper on April 09, 2014, 12:50:50 PM
Post by: Jonathan_S on April 09, 2014, 12:51:09 PM
Pocket gophers have been creating a lot of problems developing land for a long time here in Thurston County. I'm curious how much worse it will make.
:yeah: Pierce too, around Yelm / Roy / McKenna particularly
It's amazing how they're endangered supposedly when everywhere they are has a healthy population.
Post by: Curly on April 09, 2014, 12:55:51 PM
Post by: Curly on April 09, 2014, 01:12:29 PM
Quote
Construction of the proposed highway endangers habitat for 19 state and federal listed bird species and 4 prairie dependent species. The rare wildlife at risk by the highway are streaked horned lark, Taylor’s checkerspot butterfly, Mazama pocket gopher, western gray squirrel, and water howellia.
http://www.conservationnw.org/what-we-do/wildlife-habitat/cross-base (http://www.conservationnw.org/what-we-do/wildlife-habitat/cross-base)
Post by: bigtex on April 09, 2014, 06:13:51 PM
WDFW combined with Gophers Forever and the Eastern European Crabgrass Foundation has posted a $10,000 reward for information leading to Sept. 7th, 2016 poaching incident of a juvenile collared pocket gopher.Wouldn't be WDFW, it would be US Fish and Wildlife. Once an animal is on the ESA the feds take the law enforcement lead.
Post by: ICEMAN on April 09, 2014, 06:41:51 PM
Post by: bigtex on April 09, 2014, 06:53:31 PM
Biftex, how many federal officers are around in the Thurston county area who have time to dedicate to this issue?Well it's not like your going to have a contingency of officers going out looking for gopher poachers. However, if a poaching occurs, or illegal damage to habitat is done then the USFWS would essentially have the first grab at the case, and if for some reason they don't want it they can pass it off to WDFW.
The supervisory patrol officer for USFWS patrol officers in western WA is actually stationed at the Nisqually Refuge in Thurston County so he could respond to any gopher issues. However, typically off-USFWS lands violations typically go to USFWS Special Agents and not the officers. The officers typically stick to federal lands, for the most part. USFWS has a Special Agent office in Redmond.
So to answer your question, more then you actually think. Also, remember that WDFW Officers are "deputized" USFWS and NOAA/NMFS federal officers. Will any LEOs be dedicated to gophers? Of course not.
Post by: ICEMAN on April 09, 2014, 07:11:16 PM
Post by: pianoman9701 on April 10, 2014, 06:08:39 AM
WDFW combined with Gophers Forever and the Eastern European Crabgrass Foundation has posted a $10,000 reward for information leading to Sept. 7th, 2016 poaching incident of a juvenile collared pocket gopher.Wouldn't be WDFW, it would be US Fish and Wildlife. Once an animal is on the ESA the feds take the law enforcement lead.
Correct me if I'm wrong, BT, but the DFW will pursue animals killed which are receiving ESA protection. Just because it's a federal protection doesn't mean the DFW LE is going to wash their hands of it.
Post by: bigtex on April 10, 2014, 08:54:27 AM
Well these gophers are and have been protected as "threatened" under state law. So WDFW have and can still make a case on it. However, just under basic operating agreements with states and the feds, when a federally listed ESA species gets poached the feds get notified.Correct me if I'm wrong, BT, but the DFW will pursue animals killed which are receiving ESA protection. Just because it's a federal protection doesn't mean the DFW LE is going to wash their hands of it.WDFW combined with Gophers Forever and the Eastern European Crabgrass Foundation has posted a $10,000 reward for information leading to Sept. 7th, 2016 poaching incident of a juvenile collared pocket gopher.Wouldn't be WDFW, it would be US Fish and Wildlife. Once an animal is on the ESA the feds take the law enforcement lead.
Now on the NMFS side (salmon, steelhead, etc) they typically let the state pursue the case unless it's a larger case; the guy taking one endangered Chinook isn't going to face criminal ESA charges. The guy netting endangered Chinook will most likely face federal charges. However, NMFS can pursue civil ESA charges in addition to WDFW criminal charges and it's not double jeopardy and this is typical in the case where one guy keeps an endangered Chinook.
On the USFWS side they typically will pursue the individual who killed one animal listed under ESA. An example of this is the wolf, any wolf taken in WA that is still federally protected will be investigated and the case handled by USFWS, WDFW will certainly assist, but the actual prosecution will be by the feds.
Now if your asking if WDFW simply won't respond if USFWS has the jurisdiction, then that's not correct. All federally protected ESA species are also protected under state law, and since WDFW Officers are also deputized NMFS/USFWS they also can act as a federal officer when responding/dealing with these crimes.
But when it comes to the ESA; on the USFWS side the feds typically seek prosecution first, on the NMFS side for a non-egregious violation WDFW typically seeks criminal prosecution and NMFS can also seek civil prosecution.
Post by: huntrights on April 10, 2014, 05:24:43 PM
Watch these videos for a sample of what may be in our future:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=7iCHh5TRMw0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcwNOb9sYfE&feature=related
Here is a related thread from a few years ago.
http://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,88195.msg1109068/
Post by: timberfaller on April 12, 2014, 12:48:38 PM
ESA has become that "stick" AGAIN it only about "Control" NOT about protecting a "species"
How's that salmon dinner tasting!!
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 13, 2014, 07:33:08 AM
Post by: Special T on April 13, 2014, 08:24:03 AM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 13, 2014, 07:54:11 PM
Post by: buckfvr on April 13, 2014, 08:17:34 PM
Post by: huntrights on April 13, 2014, 10:53:46 PM
1600 acres of critical habitat.... Big deal. You guys are making a mountain out of a molehill. Literally.
The big issue will be how these listings affect private property rights, local economies, and the ability to use our natural resources. The videos illustrate the hardship placed on individuals due to the presence of the Mazama Pocket gopher. This type of activity is happening all around the country.
"VITTER: Endangered Species Act’s hidden costs - Respect for private property at risk"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/8/endangered-species-acts-hidden-costs/
"The Radical Abuse of the ESA Threatens the US Economy"
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/02/18/the-radical-abuse-of-the-esa-threatens-the-us-economy/
"Lawsuit challenges feds over 'sue and settle' tactics on endangered species"
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/18/lawsuit-challenges-feds-over-sue-and-settle-tactics-on-endangered-species/
"Abuse of Endangered Species Act threatens American's private property rights"
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/28/abuse-endangered-species-act-threatens-american-private-property-rights/
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 14, 2014, 07:12:33 AM
So are you saying we still have caribou ????????????? Verified ??????????yes. There is a small herd up here on the border with ID and BC. They spend some time in each area.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 14, 2014, 07:26:08 AM
1600 acres of critical habitat.... Big deal. You guys are making a mountain out of a molehill. Literally.
The big issue will be how these listings affect private property rights, local economies, and the ability to use our natural resources. The videos illustrate the hardship placed on individuals due to the presence of the Mazama Pocket gopher. This type of activity is happening all around the country.
"VITTER: Endangered Species Act’s hidden costs - Respect for private property at risk"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/8/endangered-species-acts-hidden-costs/
"The Radical Abuse of the ESA Threatens the US Economy"
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/02/18/the-radical-abuse-of-the-esa-threatens-the-us-economy/
"Lawsuit challenges feds over 'sue and settle' tactics on endangered species"
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/18/lawsuit-challenges-feds-over-sue-and-settle-tactics-on-endangered-species/
"Abuse of Endangered Species Act threatens American's private property rights"
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/28/abuse-endangered-species-act-threatens-american-private-property-rights/
These articles all detail INDUSTRY... it doesn't mention a farmer or small landowner wanting to build a house, or a little old lady that is not allowed to put in her garden.
Why are HUNTERS (We are hunters here right???) in favor of our big pieces of federal land being developed by industry????? Seriously...why?
How much have gas prices dropped since the 10,000 oil wells have been drilled in ND??? Are the American people so stupid to let industry destroy OUR public lands with the promise of energy independence???
Industry is screwing the American people and you guys are cheering them on.
Post by: pianoman9701 on April 14, 2014, 07:34:05 AM
1600 acres of critical habitat.... Big deal. You guys are making a mountain out of a molehill. Literally.
It is a big deal. It's a big deal to the person(s) who owns the land. And, it's a big deal to the next landowner(s) who loses land because someone discovers what we think is a rare rat.
It's also not enforced equally. It's even used by the government to forward agendas. Take for example the wolf program. The introduction of the Canadian grey wolf will almost certainly mean the end of the few remaining native Cascade wolves which have been protected under the ESA for 40+ years. However, when the USFWS developed it's wolf introduction plan, the native wolves of the Cascades were not even considered. When the larger Canadian wolves move in, that species will either be killed or bred out of existence. Where's the outrage and the restrictions to save an endangered creature? There is none and it will become extinct.
The corrupt government will only enforce the ESA when it fulfills established goals and agendas. Unfortunately for our native wolves, they meet neither of the criteria.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 14, 2014, 07:40:28 AM
And be specific.
Critical habitat requires consultation for FEDERAL PROJECTS. So please explain to me why this 1600 acres is a big deal. Show me a map of the land ownership and how it might affect development.
Post by: JLS on April 14, 2014, 07:42:02 AM
These articles all detail INDUSTRY... it doesn't mention a farmer or small landowner wanting to build a house, or a little old lady that is not allowed to put in her garden.
Why are HUNTERS (We are hunters here right???) in favor of our big pieces of federal land being developed by industry????? Seriously...why?
How much have gas prices dropped since the 10,000 oil wells have been drilled in ND??? Are the American people so stupid to let industry destroy OUR public lands with the promise of energy independence???
Industry is screwing the American people and you guys are cheering them on.
Thank you! :tup: :tup:
Sometimes I wonder whether this is actually a hunting website, or a right wing political website that sometimes talks about hunting.
Post by: PolarBear on April 14, 2014, 07:51:23 AM
I see this as nothing more than a way for bitter citiot environmentalists to control us rural folk and for the county to steal more land and money. It will be just another added fee when you want to sell or develop.
Post by: pianoman9701 on April 14, 2014, 08:06:13 AM
so tell me more about what it means for the private landowner????
And be specific.
Critical habitat requires consultation for FEDERAL PROJECTS. So please explain to me why this 1600 acres is a big deal. Show me a map of the land ownership and how it might affect development.
Are you trying to tell me that you've never seen instances of private landowners not being able to use their land because of an ESA hold? It also seems that you hold individual private landowners more dearly than industrial or corporate landowners. Why is that? Should property rights be different for individuals than they are for industry/corporations? "These articles all detail INDUSTRY... it doesn't mention a farmer or small landowner wanting to build a house, or a little old lady that is not allowed to put in her garden."
I'd like to learn something new. Why don't you please show me a map of the 1600 acres and show me how no private landowners will be affected. And also explain to me why it's OK to infringe upon industrial/corporate land rights but not those just trying to build a house or put in a garden. Thanks.
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on April 14, 2014, 08:13:35 AM
1600 acres of critical habitat.... Big deal. You guys are making a mountain out of a molehill. Literally.
The big issue will be how these listings affect private property rights, local economies, and the ability to use our natural resources. The videos illustrate the hardship placed on individuals due to the presence of the Mazama Pocket gopher. This type of activity is happening all around the country.
"VITTER: Endangered Species Act’s hidden costs - Respect for private property at risk"
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/feb/8/endangered-species-acts-hidden-costs/
"The Radical Abuse of the ESA Threatens the US Economy"
http://www.forbes.com/sites/davidblackmon/2013/02/18/the-radical-abuse-of-the-esa-threatens-the-us-economy/
"Lawsuit challenges feds over 'sue and settle' tactics on endangered species"
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/03/18/lawsuit-challenges-feds-over-sue-and-settle-tactics-on-endangered-species/
"Abuse of Endangered Species Act threatens American's private property rights"
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/12/28/abuse-endangered-species-act-threatens-american-private-property-rights/
These articles all detail INDUSTRY... it doesn't mention a farmer or small landowner wanting to build a house, or a little old lady that is not allowed to put in her garden.
In the beginning :chuckle: ask the Bundy's about progressive laws :chuckle:
Why are HUNTERS (We are hunters here right???) in favor of our big pieces of federal land being developed by industry????? Seriously...why?
no we do no support raping and pillaging
How much have gas prices dropped since the 10,000 oil wells have been drilled in ND??? Are the American people so stupid to let industry destroy OUR public lands with the promise of energy independence???
Get the damn ethanol out of it and it would drop, as would everything that uses corn. ethanol also uses more energy to produce than it yields
GREAT green idea there!
Industry is screwing the American people and you guys are cheering them on.
And our government isn't??
Post by: Curly on April 14, 2014, 10:18:18 AM
A couple has 5 acres that they have lived on for the last twenty years. Their retirement plan involves subdividing the 5 acres into several lots and selling to make money for their retirement.
As retirement nears, they get ready to put their parcel on the market but then find that they need to have a gopher study done to find out if any gophers live on their property. They hire a biologist and $1,500 and 1 year later they have a study done where they find they have a family of gophers calling their property home.
Now their property is only worth what their one old home and the acreage is worth (which isn't enough to sell to cover their retirement costs). Now they are stuck working instead of enjoying the retirement they had counted on.............all because of some damn mole/gopher. :bash:
Post by: huntrights on April 14, 2014, 11:27:31 AM
so tell me more about what it means for the private landowner????
And be specific.
Critical habitat requires consultation for FEDERAL PROJECTS. So please explain to me why this 1600 acres is a big deal. Show me a map of the land ownership and how it might affect development.
Information on the 1607 acres:
http://www.theolympian.com/2014/04/09/3077490/gophers-going-on-endangered-species.html?sp=/99/224/&ihp=1
Here are the videos from page 1 of this thread; please take a few minutes to watch them.
These examples are very real, they are in Thurston County, they are very specific, they show the negative impact on private land owners, and they are directly related to the Mazama Pocket Gopher.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iCHh5TRMw0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dcwNOb9sYfE
Additional information:
Excellent report.
“Common Sense Conservation”
http://www.myfreedomfoundation.com/docLib/201211281_CommonSenseConservation.pdf
Finding Solutions to Improve the Endangered Species Act
http://hastings.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=355394
Further Details Sought on Costs of Hundreds of Endangered Species Act Lawsuits and Settlements
Chairman Hastings asks Obama Administration for more information
http://naturalresources.house.gov/news/documentsingle.aspx?DocumentID=297790
Good report with several case studies.
“National Center for Policy Analysis Bad for Species, Bad for People:
What’s Wrong with the Endangered Species Act and How to Fix It”
http://www.ncpa.org/pdfs/st303.pdf
Tiny animal, big threat to property owners
http://mynorthwest.com/194/2495014/Tiny-animal-big-threat-to-property-owners
“The Endangered Species Act (ESA) and Claims of Property Rights “Takings””
http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL31796.pdf
“The Endangered Species Act:
Making Innocent Species the Enemy (full)”
http://perc.org/articles/endangered-species-act-1
“How Environmentalists Abuse Private Property Rights and Get Funding via Backroom Legal Settlements”
http://webworks.typepad.com/lakecountyfiscalrangers/2013/12/how-environmentalists-abuse-private-property-rights-and-get-funding-via-backroom-legal-settlements.html
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 14, 2014, 12:19:33 PM
Post by: Curly on April 14, 2014, 12:30:29 PM
There is a lot more area than 1600 acres that is habitat for the gophers. There is potential pocket gopher habitat all over the county and anytime someone wants to do something with their property that has potential pocket gopher habitat, they have to hire a bio to study it and tell the county there isn't gophers living on the property.
Sounds like the area they designated as critical gopher habitat is mostly on JBLM property? So, I guess that is good that they aren't taking private citizen's property to designate critical gopher habitat, but they actually will essentially be taking private property by not allowing development if gopher colonies are found to exist on the property.
http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01215/wdfw01215.pdf (http://wdfw.wa.gov/publications/01215/wdfw01215.pdf)
The above link has some good info on the gopher.
Post by: ICEMAN on April 14, 2014, 02:34:38 PM
1600 acres of critical habitat.... Big deal. You guys are making a mountain out of a molehill. Literally.
Wow.... Do you own land?
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 14, 2014, 04:59:59 PM
my guess is that that is why it is such a small amount.
having an endangered species on your private property can be a pain.it does not mean that you can't do anything with your property, you just have to be mindful of the resource
Post by: buckfvr on April 14, 2014, 05:05:19 PM
So are you saying we still have caribou ????????????? Verified ??????????yes. There is a small herd up here on the border with ID and BC. They spend some time in each area.
From what we are hearing, there has been no confirmation in Wa. for the last few years.......I know they were there, but the wolf thing has made it a secret. Can you confirm officially, or are you going by hearsay ?
Post by: Elkaholic daWg on April 14, 2014, 06:22:51 PM
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 14, 2014, 06:23:54 PM
Post by: Easy-E on April 14, 2014, 08:37:53 PM
I'd like to help the gophers in eastern Washington go on the endangered list!!! They're all over my place there...
2nd gopher exterminated tonight. 2 for 2; one for me, and one for the dog. We've agreed on a $3 bounty per critter, so now we're even!
Anyone know what a good quality gopher cape goes for? :chuckle:
Post by: Windwalker on April 16, 2014, 10:36:25 PM
Have wandered all over, under and through many a brush patch and as a kid growing up in the country, gained a dubious notoriety for sneaking up and catching all sorts of critters.
Then one day I came across an oddity I have never seen. Looked it up and turns out it (best I could figure) was a Camas pocket gopher. Big dam thing the size of a small lab puppy. (might be stretching that a tad bit) Had a standoff in the middle of the street. Held up my boot and he stood on his hind legs and proceeded to chomp it. What the hell? Was close to midnight and getting off work..a couple of other guys with me (city types) didn't hold the same fascination and kept their distance.
Looked like a gopher but walked like a pit bull- stocky scrappy critter.
He gave me the stink eye and wandered off to who knows where.
Have sent my share of gophers to meet their maker but never laid eyes on a goph'zilla like that one.
Post by: REHJWA on April 16, 2014, 11:39:05 PM
generally the feds try to make critical habitat designations on public property.they don't want the designation to look like a take or a land grab.
my guess is that that is why it is such a small amount.
having an endangered species on your private property can be a pain.it does not mean that you can't do anything with your property, you just have to be mindful of the resource
I guess paying the county $1500 to tell you 3.8 of your 5 acres can't be:
disturbed/used for anything including pets
used as a garden
landscaped ie...no trees, no shrubs, and only native grasses
isn't a "land grab" because it is only a small amount?
I think taking away 78% of YOUR land is just plan theft...
Post by: Southpole on April 17, 2014, 07:53:01 AM
Ok- I got one question..anyone ever came across a Camas pocket gopher?Are you sure it wasn't a mountain beaver :dunno:
Have wandered all over, under and through many a brush patch and as a kid growing up in the country, gained a dubious notoriety for sneaking up and catching all sorts of critters.
Then one day I came across an oddity I have never seen. Looked it up and turns out it (best I could figure) was a Camas pocket gopher. Big dam thing the size of a small lab puppy. (might be stretching that a tad bit) Had a standoff in the middle of the street. Held up my boot and he stood on his hind legs and proceeded to chomp it. What the hell? Was close to midnight and getting off work..a couple of other guys with me (city types) didn't hold the same fascination and kept their distance.
Looked like a gopher but walked like a pit bull- stocky scrappy critter.
He gave me the stink eye and wandered off to who knows where.
Have sent my share of gophers to meet their maker but never laid eyes on a goph'zilla like that one.
Post by: WAcoyotehunter on April 17, 2014, 09:39:10 AM
I have not heard of that happening.generally the feds try to make critical habitat designations on public property.they don't want the designation to look like a take or a land grab.
my guess is that that is why it is such a small amount.
having an endangered species on your private property can be a pain.it does not mean that you can't do anything with your property, you just have to be mindful of the resource
I guess paying the county $1500 to tell you 3.8 of your 5 acres can't be:
disturbed/used for anything including pets
used as a garden
landscaped ie...no trees, no shrubs, and only native grasses
isn't a "land grab" because it is only a small amount?
I think taking away 78% of YOUR land is just plan theft...
Post by: Curly on April 17, 2014, 10:15:55 AM
I have not heard of that happening.generally the feds try to make critical habitat designations on public property.they don't want the designation to look like a take or a land grab.
my guess is that that is why it is such a small amount.
having an endangered species on your private property can be a pain.it does not mean that you can't do anything with your property, you just have to be mindful of the resource
I guess paying the county $1500 to tell you 3.8 of your 5 acres can't be:
disturbed/used for anything including pets
used as a garden
landscaped ie...no trees, no shrubs, and only native grasses
isn't a "land grab" because it is only a small amount?
I think taking away 78% of YOUR land is just plan theft...
Did you watch the youtube videos that huntrights posted in post #37?
Post by: huntrights on April 17, 2014, 01:12:30 PM
"Gophers, artillery, and US fish & Wildlife"
http://myfreedomfoundation.com/blog/liberty-live/detail/gophers-artillery-and-us-fish-wildlife
Those that have been following the sometimes questionable behavior and regulations imposed by some of our national, state, and local regulatory entities have most likely realized that blind faith in what they do is misplaced trust. As citizens who are affected by what they do, we must scrutinize and question their science sources (if any), motives, and political bias. All may not be government For the People as we would like to believe.
We must continue to remind these regulatory entities that they work for us. Remember – We The People.
Post by: huntrights on April 18, 2014, 07:42:31 AM
:twocents:
Use/abuse of the ESA is involved in this issue as well.
As the report implies, there appears to be a lot more to this story than meets the eye. This situation appears to have come dangerously close to a tragedy that could have resulted in death and/or injury to men, women, and children along with putting LEOs in a very precarious position of having to open fire on those people (American ranchers and their families). All of this to protect a turtle (ESA use/abuse) and collect grazing fees. It will be interesting to see what is revealed as the layers of this “political onion” are peeled away.
Watch this Fox News report:
"This Incredible New Footage Shows How Close Bundy Standoff Came To A Massacre
The inside story of how one New Yorker may have kept the Bundy protestors from a bloody end"
There is a shorter clip of the report in this link:
http://www.westernjournalism.com/footage-bundy-massacre/
This is the full report:
"Exclusive Video: Bundy Ranch"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtEVg8KNgBA
Fox News was there. Apparently the the rest of what has been called the "Main Stream Media" was not. People should question who is running the "Main Stream Media".
Post by: huntrights on April 22, 2014, 07:11:17 PM
From the Heritage Guide to the Constitution:
The Fifth Amendment - Takings Clause
http://www.heritage.org/constitution#!/amendments/5/essays/151/takings-clause
Excerpt:
"Despite the frustration and cost of litigation of enforcing the Takings Clause, property owners remain indefatigable, and they are especially so when they perceive regulation to exceed a reasonable scope and invade that which may fairly be thought to be one of the natural rights of ownership. The ultimate purpose of the Takings Clause was well described by the Court more than forty years ago as "designed to bar Government from forcing some people alone to bear public burdens which, in all fairness and justice, should be borne by the public as a whole." Armstrong v. United States (1960). That is the central principle that prompted the Framers to add the Takings Clause to the Bill of Rights."
Reference the loss of property use due to the Mazama Pocket Gopher in the examples given earlier.