Right wing outcry brings milita. Violence?

It’s difficult to find news stories that stick to the issue of the 21 years Cliven Bundy has been in violation of the laws governing American public lands.

The lone rancher trying to save his cattle from the “govmnt” is just too good a theme. Then too, they don’t have to investigate the issue. Just report what Mr. Bundy says and give it more play than those enforcing the law. Ignore those happy to see the cattle go from these hot desert lands. It is easy to cover a story this way.

None seem to have investigated Bundy’s claim that all the other ranchers in the county are out of business — that he is the last — or that those that did quit, truly did so because of government regulations. None have investigated his claim that his family has been grazing area since the 1870s, or the matter of his alleged water rights. None have looked at his total ranch operation. He appears often in the news with an old truck, but some say he has aircraft.

The right wing media is by far the most interested in the story and in expanding and changing the issue. Harmful and illegal cattle grazing does not fit their interest. Change the subject to government tyranny. This might be what Mr. Bundy sought as he planned what to do over the last generation of time. The coverage has served to bring a hard to pin down number of anti-government protesters to the area. Alarming to many are the private militias, a name that brings back memories of violence and/or standoffs in Montana, northern Idaho, Washington State, and other places. That this might happen, explains BLM law enforcement being armed and blocking entry to the part of state highway 170.

A few web sites have reported that cattle have died. There is no information on this. However, this is very hot country. It can get well over 100° F in April. Today’s expected high is 93.º  The cattle have been fending for themselves on the desert, taking up the rare waterholes. Many are in the backcountry. An aerial count conducted April 1-3 tallied a total of 908 cows spread out across approximately 750,000 acres. Bundy’s original grazing allotment was 158,000.  Reports from the BLM indicate that a number of the cattle are unidentified — feral. Others seem to have wandered in from other places.

Roundup is stressful. Cattle could be injured or die. This happens in conventional roundups. Some these cattle could be undernourished, injured, or diseased. If they go down in the roundup, most experts on emergency large animal euthanasia recommend gunshot or captive bolts. This might explain the rumor of cattle shot. The dispersed distribution of the cattle — all over hell and back — explains the lengthy expected time for this operation to complete.

There seems to be no media interest in the tortoises, which many wrongly call “turtles.” They discount them. None have investigated what the cattle have done of other desert wildlife, the outdoor recreation, or the Lake Mead National Recreation area on which the cattle often tread.

Bundy has leveraged his allotment closing buyout money into a no grazing fee, no property tax, 19th century open range operation about five times the original size.  Without investigation, this is being ignored and the subject changed.

– – – – – –

Added 4/12- Reuters has a neutral story on the arrival of militias and the like. “Militia members, ultra-conservatives rally to cause of Nevada rancher” By Laura Zuckerman. Reuters.

Update 4/12. Confronted by a mob summoned by the right wing media, the BLM appears to have been faced with the choice of shoot or release the cattle. Both sides were armed. The BLM released the cattle. Unfortunately, this is not the end of the matter by any means, even though the mob will probably go home. Nations that allow this to happen with no further response do not last.


About The Author

Ralph Maughan

Dr. Ralph Maughan is professor emeritus of political science at Idaho State University. He was a Western Watersheds Project Board Member off and on for many years, and was also its President for several years. For a long time he produced Ralph Maughan's Wolf Report. He was a founder of the Greater Yellowstone Coalition. He and Jackie Johnson Maughan wrote three editions of "Hiking Idaho." He also wrote "Beyond the Tetons" and "Backpacking Wyoming's Teton and Washakie Wilderness." He created and is the administrator of The Wildlife News.

244 Responses to Cattle trespass operation made dangerous by media coverage

  1. skyrim says:

    I’m glad to see this being addressed. Are any one of these entities prepared to shoulder the blame if this escalates to the degree it appears to be headed? Does Mr. Bundy fully understand the danger he has put all these people in with his act of lawlessness.
    I can tell you with certainty “Whoops” just ain’t gonna get it if the stuff hits the fan.

  2. susan carter says:

    Thank You for a sensible report. The only pertinent fact is that Bundy has 900 cows on land that is not his. Case closed.

    • Barb Rupers says:

      Are there any maps that show the area in dispute and the land actually owned by Cliven Bundy and family?

      • harold poole says:

        Did you read anything? There is a mountain of records and files of bundy lawlessness. Does the BLM. Ma age it to commitees made of civilians ranchers that discuss these thing and try to work out solutions. Bundy and friends are antifederalist confederate lawbreakers itching to overthrow our constitutional government in favor of local warlords who are rulers. Read more of their beliefs and motives. Plenty of videos by them to explain them

  3. Ida Lupine says:

    It’s very concerning, from both sides. 🙁

  4. Larry says:

    Just a note about the recommended gunshot to euthanize injured cattle in this roundup. I hope that recommendation was at least in part knowing that pentobarbital will have secondary poisoning for raptors and carnivores that might feed on any such cattle not removed after such injection. Gunshots after all are the way of the processing plants.

  5. Ralph Maughan says:

    This is interesting a video of a protester confrontation with the BLM where a couple folks got tased (briefly?) and a woman (“Margaret” “eleven children”) thrown down. The protesters were hardly passive. Instructions on how respond to BLM orders and the effort to highlight the woman’s possible injuries can be heard in detail.

    Oddly enough, I realised that I took a nap in my truck a year ago at this intersection in the video.

    • Yvette says:


      The video and an article is now in ThinkProgress. At least it’s not another right-wing rant. It looks like three people from a militia in Montana have shown up, and more like minded are calling to vow support. I sure hope this doesn’t escalate further.

    • Sue carter says:

      BLM has been listening to Bundy’s threats of violence for twenty years. They would be fools to show up unprotected. Are they even wearing guns? or just tazers?

    • Louise Kane says:

      One of those losers kicked the working dog before he was tased. I thought that attacking a police dog was the equivalent of attacking an officer. As a friend stated yesterday, these people seem like they are cut from the same cloth as the smoke a pack a day, the only good wolf is dead wolf crowd. If I had the taser in my hand it would be hard to resist an extra jolt for the dog kick. Its hard to watch the BLM officers trying to deal with these crazy people. They are definitely not peaceful.

      • Yvette says:

        It is hard to watch them try to deal with this ‘mob mentality’. Go to the BLM- Nevada, and BLM facebook sites and read how they are being attacked on facebook. It makes me wonder how the people working for BLM feel. Crap, they’re just trying to work their jobs. Most of them aren’t setting policy.

        • Robin says:

          The BLM could care less about tortoises, or any other animal. They’ve been rounding up wild horses for years, and putting them in holding pens, or sending them to slaughter. This is all about oil, and gas interests, and we need to stick together against these corporations that are polluting our land, and water to line their pockets.I hate ranchers, and their abuse of animals, but I also know that corporations like Enbridge, and BP OWN THE BLM, and maybe everything else. This law, ‘Citizen’s United’ will destroy us all if we let it continue..

      • kristopher says:

        You are correct about the k-9 officer. Kicking him was just as bad as kicking the officer holding him. He did assault an officer by kicking the k-9. I wouldn’t have gave an extra jolt, I’da let that dog handle his business. And I just love how they announce they’re doing this for the good of the american people. A bunch of idiots running out to help an old rancher who has been bucking the system for entirely too long. And they don’t understand why our second amendment gets attacked.

        • wolf moderate says:

          I’d have shot that dog in the damn head! Why are k-9s at something like this? Drug seizure? Intimidation? Sorry but good ol boys ain’t scared of dogs! Lol.

          • Immer Treue says:

            “Intimidation”? If you don’t know who was doing the intimidating, you are one lost soul. Perhaps if they were on horses and broke someone’s leg, then that would be fine. One of the reasons some big city police forces use horses. Perhaps a dog won’t command the same respect as a horse.

        • wolf moderate says:

          Holy shit! Seriously? You are so far detached from reality it isn’t even fuñny. Not going yo get into the Bundy issue because its obvious who the bad guy is.

      • MJ says:

        Reviewing that video again, Bundy’s son that got tazed was lunging towards the officer (human) several times, approaching and yelling at him before the GSD responded and then was kicked. That’s ridiculous. The GSD was doing what he was trained to do, protect his handler.

        Not impressed with the handlers and don’t agree that they should have brought the dogs into this situation. It was inflammatory not controlling the situation.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I wasn’t impressed either, and don’t agree with putting animals in harm’s way like that. A show of force like this from either side wasn’t necessary. Why did the BLM do this and not go through legal channels? Shock and awe it wasn’t.

          Taking land to mitigate damages from solar farms is pretty creative.

    • kristopher says:

      After seeing that, I see at no time was the BLM officers over stepping their grounds for use of force. Crowd was indeed outraged, aggressive, and failing to comply with lawful orders. Crying about wounds they received after the fact, I have no pity for them. If you wanna run out and act like a bunch of undisciplined idiots, then suck it up and face the consequences.

    • ramses09 says:

      I can’t even watch the whole video,it makes me so mad. Those people are just plain ignorant.

  6. Yvette says:

    Ralph, you should consider publishing an editorial or opinion article in Al Jazeera. You’re well informed, and I think AJ is one of the few news networks/newspapers that publishes journalism minus the corporate America slant.

  7. Theo Chu says:

    I have emailed Sec Jewell and President Obama encouraging them to back their employees at BLM to the hilt. Caving to these extremists would be a grave mistake and would certainly embolden them for the future. That simply cannot be allowed to happen.

  8. T. Lewis says:

    Thank you for following this story and keeping us up to date. I just emailed the following comments to the Nevada BLM office. Hopefully others who value our public lands will consider doing likewise.

    Dear BLM:
    I have been following the news reports regarding the BLM’s efforts to enforce existing laws on BLM lands in Nevada near the Bundy ranch. I support BLM’s efforts and the actions taken by its employees (officers and non-law enforcement employees) to prevent the continuing abuse of BLM lands where illegal grazing is occurring. Thank you for doing your jobs and taking a stand for lawful and environmentally responsible land use. While many of the news reports are slanted and ridiculously sympathetic to Mr. Bundy and his supporters, I for one fully support your enforcement efforts and your decision to take appropriate action against those who fail to comply with existing laws. Please don’t let all the negative press get you down. You folks have a tough job to do and Americans stand behind you as you carry out your duties.

  9. JimT says:

    This is an old story in Catron County in New Mexico. Same BS arguments that have no basis in law or reality, and yet, the Feds fail to resolve them effectively. The cajones of this welfare rancher are amazing, but no surprise is these days of the return of the Sagebrush Rebellion insanity. I am hoping the BLM sticks to following the law, and seizes the cows. And if they are harmed in the roundup, the rancher has only himself to blame. If shots are fired, him and his “supporters” should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Public land ranching abuses like this lead to one logical conclusion: either end public land ranching now, or start a program of buying out and condemning ranching permits over the next 20 years. In these times of climate change and drought, it only makes sense.

    • Robin says:

      I agree, but at the same time kick out the oil, and gas industry. This the real reason why the BLM is going after Bundy. He,and his cows along with the tortoises, and wild mustangs are in their way. I can’t stand ranchers, but the BLM are no heroes. They run down wild horses in helicopters, anfd then leave them in horrendous conditions in holding pens. Most of them are shipped off illegally to slaughter. Our public lands are being destroyed by mining of oil, and gas. Pipelines are being built to carry tarsands oil from Canada. Foregn corporations are being given the power of eminent domain over our land in order to put these pipelines through our wetlands, and where ever they want them. Then most of the oil is shipped to China.

  10. DavePA says:

    Interestingly I saw a report on this the other nite on Fox and there were three female commentators and two of them kept mentioning that this was being done just to save “turtles” (letting it be known that they could care less about “turtles”)… But one of the three actually was defending the BLM and talking about the 20 years this man had not paid his fees – I thought it was interesting that they let this one person defend the action of the Feds, rare that this would be for this network. Being April 11th I am no bigger fan of paying taxes and fees then the next person, but can people really imagine the chaos and destruction that would envelope our federal lands if we let these nuts run amock. The vision of a monster truck driving around Old Faithful comes to mind!

  11. utahbiller says:

    This is a sad situation. Bundy is clearly a fool looking for attention and seems willing to see other people hurt if that is what it takes. However the BLM, maybe just because of a lack of manpower, isn’t looking too good either.

  12. Lyn McCormick says:

    I’m stunned at the Media’s ignorance on this issue, but it’s a little bit of the “chickens coming home to roost” scenario for the BLM. Allowing fees to accrue over a 20 year period sets a bad precedent. And, all the while Bundy probably taking other subsidies and expensing off his ranching business losses under the current Ag tax laws. The big ranchers and grazing associations wield tremendous control over the local BLM offices. Imagine what it will be like if the Grazing Improvement Act gets passed? This event could be the “game changer” for BLM and PL management.

    • Yvette says:

      I’m not surprised at people’s ignorance. This semester in one of my last classes, Environmental Problem Solving, we had a scenerio early in the semester. It had to do with public lands and open range. My prof. is a chemist that was an environmental manager in the private industry for oer 20 years. Plus, he is from Boston. He was absolutely clueless about open range as were everyone else in the class but me and one other lady. They had no concept of how much land is used, the relationship between federal agencies and livestock owners, the damage done to the land, or the laws surrounding the issue. I was surprised at the ignorance of so many people. It was an eye opener for me.

  13. Rusty Feasel says:

    Here is a link to some background on this matter. Both the story and the comments are informative and free of the sensationalism that pervades much of the “journalism” surrounding Mr. Bundy’s spurious claims.


  14. jerry collins says:

    They’re trespassing welfare ranchers stealing money from the taxpayers, and destroying an ego system. They should all have been jailed for threatening the officers.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      They’d hardly be the only group stealing from taxpayers, or destroying the ecosystem. Are we holding the massive solar farms accountable for wrecking turtle habitat also? We seem to be living in a dream world where we think blaming a few activities is going to turn our country into utopia. It’s not. Overpopulation is the root of every problem we have, and I do agree with wolf moderate that the current administration seems to concentrate on those two issues, which are important, and spends little time on environmental ones, except for vague references to climate change.

      I keep thinking everyone needs to rein in the energy industry. At least damage from cattle is repairable – the oil and gas companies permanently damage the landscape and leave all their crap behind as well. In Hawaii failed windfarms are just sitting there rusting. It isn’t going to be a wind, solar and hemp utopia someday.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        I also keep thinking that we can’t have polarized groups and expect to get anything accomplished as far as wildlife protection, without trying to meet in the middle somewhere.

        Yvette, I’m from the Boston area, but my husband is from the West, went to college at Davis, and lived in Idaho for several years, and has visited many ranches as a food technologist and buyer for a company.

        • Yvette says:

          No offense to anyone from Boston! My prof. keeps reminding us in a jokingly way that he’s from Boston and that if we ask him about growing cranberries he’ll know something. His interests and expertise is environmental management and chemistry, not conservation of water, wetlands, or wildlife.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            None taken – I was just saying. I probably should have been a farmer. I hate factory farming, and just love small farms.

            • LM says:

              I’ve been looking at my area and wondering, “How would one survive as a hunter/gatherer?”. It’s amazing how with the right protein & fat sources and a few roots, nuts, and berries along the way it’s probably doable. The sheer volume of food humans have become accustomed to eating on a daily basis is excessive and unnecessary.

              • Nancy says:

                Just spent part of the day getting my garden plot together LM. Course can’t even think about planting til the end of June 🙂

              • Louise Kane says:

                +1 and even relatively small plots can provide good yields. There is so much less people can get by with. And the less is actually more. You could take away 2/3 of a grocery store and people would be a lot healthier. Micheal Pollock speaks to the idea of shopping on the outside of a market. It’s so true the interior of big markets are filled with junk food with no nutritive value, and processed with scary chemicals that are usually prominent in the first few ingredients. Planting a garden is such a nice way to exercise, tread lightly and eat well.

      • Louise Kane says:

        But Ida this is not about compromise its about inciting violence against an agency that is attempting to enforce a legal action that is being enforced to protect public interests. Its not that one is more wrong than another because there will always be an opportunity to compare one injustice/wrong to another. In this particular instance, this man has been stealing from the public for a long time, breaking the law, defying court orders and now blackmailing law enforcement officials with violence and apparently getting his way. Its a dangerous precedent, IMHO and should not be tolerated. I don’t know why his healthy ass, self entitled opinions and violent self is not in jail.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          I wasn’t talking about this particular incident, Louise. I’m speaking generally. Our leadership is far from innocent either.

  15. Cody Goodnough says:

    I just heard about this on the talk radio this morning. It was really frustrating that the guys on the radio were siding with these idiots and saying that they have a right to their property and people are more important than tortoises when they have no idea what they were talking about and have no idea about the entire story. It’s good that people are putting out the truth so people don’t twist it and put out misinformation like the idiots on the radio did.

  16. Ida Lupines says:

    I hate to read ‘people are more important than tortoises, birds, wolves, etc.’ Both are important, and important to each others’ survival as well. I feel bad that we’ve gotten to a point where people feel sides have to be choses against innocent wildlife. Giving a little to get, from both sides, would go a long way to keep innocent wildlife from being uses as a symbol against what some people feel is government tyranny.

  17. Ken Cole says:

    Nevada gave up its claim to federal land when it became a state. It is in their constitution. Cliven Bundy doesn’t own the land and grazing isn’t a “right”.

    “Third. That the people inhabiting said territory do agree and declare, that they forever disclaim all right and title to the unappropriated public lands lying within said territory, and that the same shall be and remain at the sole and entire disposition of the United States; and that lands belonging to citizens of the United States, residing without the said state, shall never be taxed higher than the land belonging to the residents thereof; and that no taxes shall be imposed by said state on lands or property therein belonging to, or which may hereafter be purchased by, the United States, unless otherwise provided by the congress of the United States.”


  18. LM says:

    Two more tidbits about a proposed solar complex for SW Nevada – Sen. Reid & his son’s involvement with a Chinese firm to build this complex on the BLM land in dispute.



    • Ralph Maughan says:


      I read the Reuters link. This solar plant will be at Laughlin, Nevada. This is not at all near the area where the cattle roundup is taking place.

      I have noticed that rumors are being generated about any project in southern Nevada being used as a connection to explain this roundup. It is a cattle roundup period.

      If folks would look at past articles on The Wildlife News, going back to 2010, it is easy to see that this was always about Bundy illegally grazing and stomping around on this wonderful piece of desert and mountains.

      See for example, Ken Coles article of May 15, 2012. https://www.thewildlifenews.com/2012/05/15/bundy-will-not-move/

      • LM says:

        Thank you for the explanation.
        It does make good media conspiracy fodder. So is Laughlin NV also in Clarke County ?

    • Jay says:

      Gotta deflect from Bundy’s illegal actions somehow…couldn’t be the fact that he’s been stealing from all of us for a couple decades, now could it…

      • LM says:

        Everything BLM does on PL comes at a huge expense to the Wildlife and taxpayers. The Bundy trespass cattle issue should have been dealt with a long time ago. I am shocked at how easily the BLM rolls over to these guys.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      We seem to be vying for ‘the largest (solar and wind) plant ever’ all over the place in this country. It’s the wrong approach, IMO. I wish we’d quit selling out our lands.

      Re your comment about hunting/gathering: This man Bundy is 67. He and his wife look so fit and healthy. I have to say, those with physically active jobs and lifestyles stay so physically fit and seemingly in good health well into older age. It’s not the first time I’ve seen it. Our modern lifestyle isn’t conducive to good health. Ten-year olds are getting diagnosed with diabetes today.

  19. Barb Rupers says:

    Possibly a deal made, BLM may call of the roundup and wants to sell the cattle collected so far and willing to share the proceeds with Bundy according to this article.


    • kristopher says:

      The cattle were released and BLM pulled out for safety concerns but did in fact say that they would continue to pursue this matter administratively and judicially.

    • ramses09 says:


  20. Barb Rupers says:

    Flight restrictions in the area:

  21. wolf moderate says:


    Feds issue no fly zone? Close off 600000 acres to the public on public land to round up some cows? Does anyone know what is really happening?

    • Theo Chu says:

      Yes, I do. A bunch of trespass and feral cattle are being rounded up which should be the end of the story. But because some grandstanders have stirred up some militia types who have promised armed resistance which could conceivably from the air the agencies have temporarily closed the area off for the safety of all concerned.

      What do you think is REALLY happening? We could all use a good laugh over a tense situation.

      • wolf moderate says:

        Just curious how they can restrict access for many do to actions of a few. Oh well just heard BLM is getting out of the area. Too bad.

    • SAP says:

      Read the TFR bulletin carefully: airspace is closed from the ground to 3,000 feet Above Ground Level. Someone wants to be up there getting film, 3,000′ is close enough.

      BLM has probably brought in their guys who round up wild horses, so they’ll probably use helicopters. They’ll at least use aircraft to spot cattle and direct ground personnel to them.

      With all the media attention and anti-govt crybabies flocking to the area, we can assume that many people want to be aloft over the area, to either get footage or disrupt the operation. Pilots trying to focus on rounding up wild cattle need clear airspace up there.

  22. rich says:


    The Cliven Bundy family you praise was actually quite large with 14 children. That is not my idea of a “beautiful family”. If everyone had 14 children, Malthus would be spot on long ago. The earth really is finite and it is a long road trip to Mars. Perhaps Cliven feels he deserves free access to our public land to feed his family.

    • Ida Lupines says:

      There isn’t much we can do about what’s happened in the past. People have had children, and they are here. We’ll have to be more careful in the future is all we can do.

  23. Sam Parks says:

    The BLM pulled out and will stop rounding up the cattle! In violation of a court order to do so. All concerned parties need to contact the BLM and tell them to do their job!


    • Nancy says:

      Sam – I believe BLM was trying to do their jobs but safety has always been a top priority. Could pretty much guess (from the videos) Bundy’s Bullies would of had no problem throwing themselves on the sword, so to speak, to make a point.

      Step Two ought to be an open season on any cows left in that allotment. Free burgers & steaks if you want to hunt these feral cows down.

      Wonder how many of Bundy’s Bullies would jump at the idea before clearing out? 🙂

      • kristopher says:

        Bundy’s bullies were nothing but a bunch of conspiracy chasing idiots who have no respect for authority and if the government had actually been prepared for this and used their resources accordingly those so-called militia men woulda tucked their tails and ran pissing themselves like a bunch of whipped puppies. And those there that proclaimed themselves as oath keepers and veterans, I as a marine corps veteran myself say that they are a disgrace to the services in which they served and the american people. And the sheriff making deals, he has no authority.Any idiot knows that when a Cattlemans Association will not stand and help defend you, then 9 times outta 10, you are probably being an idiot. In this case, a freeloading idiot that feels the people and the government owe him something. BLM just needs to regroup, be allowed any necessary resources to bring this criminal to justice. And if it means shutting that area down again and using National Guardsmen to enforce these perimeters then so be it. And as for Bundy sit his but in a 4×8 for about five years for obstruction and contempt as well as seize what land he does own minus his house and one vehicle. Auction all off and use those funds to repay those he’s wronged. Anyone one else who steps outta bounds stick them in a 4×8 as well. Make them idiots an example. I just find it amazingly hilarious that after threatening officials, that after they showed their force he ran crying like a schoolhouse sissy for someone to take up for him.

  24. MJ says:

    Am I a conspiracy theorist or is this a major victory for the extreme right in establishing state’s rights, even though Bundy did not have a legal claim. This seems to be a significant precedent. The compromise appears to be via the local Sheriff, but has established that if local ranchers call in militias, the feds will not risk a Waco and will cede federal law. The influence on the media was impressive.

    The News8 story states that cattle collected so far will be sold and proceeds shared with Bundy (doesn’t he owe millions to the federal government), and implies roundup will halt. Does this mean that remaining cattle can stay?

    “We provide armed response,” according to a Montana militia member named Jim Lordy. Lordy traveled to Nevada in order to support a local rancher for believes that he should not have to follow federal court orders. When he arrived there, he told a local reporter that “[w]e need guns to protect ourselves from the tyrannical government.”

    Can we compare this to the plight of polite and legal requests to stop the slaughter of wolves and roundup of wild horses followed by state actions in opposition of voter sentiment, and supporting ranchers? Stating the obvious, but concerned about the actions to follow regarding the extreme right.

    • MJ says:

      There was a time when I believed that if things just finally reached the Supreme Court that they would be rectified, justice might be slow but it will happen eventually with due process.

      Now there is McCutcheon v. FEC, hard to say where the individual’s rights will be protected, or our right to protect our environment. There is irony that cattle moguls and wealthy trophy hunters are using individual rights as a platform, invoking the 2nd amendment to a resist a “tyrannical government” to make this work. These actions are in favor of corporate industry and are stripping the individual of our constitutional rights, our right to protect our environment and our right to representation. The majority will is completely circumvented by these actions.

    • kristopher says:

      If BLM woulda asked for the necessary means to handle that situation, those so called militia men woulda ran home like cowards. Roll in a convoy of those desert hummers, and started apprehending those being defiant they woulda backed off. And him claiming Ruby Ridge and Waco status, negative. He’s just another idiot with no respect for authority.

  25. Louise Kane says:


    Can this possibly be the end to the story. I feel like I am going to be sick. Does anyone have additional information on this? How dare this man defy a court order with violent actions and what is wrong with our government agencies when they back off and reward those actions with monetary recompense and a free pass? Why not arrest Bundy for obstruction of justice or for violating the prior orders or for not paying his grazing fees?

    What am I missing here?

    • Yvette says:

      I haven’t had something make me this mad in a very long time. We all know if this was we showed up with a militia when they were removing buffalo, or killing wolves, or even if we filmed the horrific abuse taking place in factory farms they would label us terrorists and throw us in prison.

      You know, maybe Larry Thorngren is right. This must have come from Obama. He has been a hellatious president for conservation and wildlife.

    • Chris says:

      Sigh….. I knew this was going to happen. The BLM (probably someone higher up) backed down in 2012 (the round up never got this far). And they did it again.

      It is just so depressing. If “we” can’t get a positive outcome here, where someone is clearly and proudly breaking the law and ignoring court orders, what hope is there elsewhere?

      Go ahead and list the Sage Grouse, it won’t change anything if every grazer emulates Bundy.

    • kristopher says:

      Negative, that old man hasn’t won anything. BLM isn’t even remotely close to being finished with him.

  26. This order for the BLM to pull out had to come from Obama. He has shown no interest in protecting public land or public wildlife.

    • MJ says:

      He makes a lot of pro-corporate statements, maybe this is his compromise to remaining in office? While the wildlife of Africa is a compelling and worthy cause, how does he see their value but not ours?

    • MJ says:

      Interesting opinion on Obama

        • MJ says:

          I apologize ahead that this is a wildlife blog, not a political blog, but the politics discussed directly affect the viability of wildlife and their future, so that is why they are relevant to wildlife.

          Nancy I agree that there is something to subtlety in good leadership when it is empowering the individual to perform well, but what is being talked about in the video is about being an ineffective leader, and losing the cause in compromise while pretending to support a cause. I completely agree with Professor Bromwich in every word spoken above.

          When Barack Obama was elected president the first time I shed tears because I thought that a historical milestone in democracy had been set, that the system does work at least eventually. I thought that the whole patriotic NYC Statue of Liberty dream that if you work for it you can achieve your dreams, and that democracy is awesome. You just have to be patient and believe in it.

          What I believe we have seen since has been a bait and switch.

          It is President Obama who has enabled the seeming insurmountable power of large corporations including trophy hunters and livestock ranchers beyond what was conceivable back in the days of President Eisenhower and the days of Brown v. the Board of Education.

          It is President Obama who has supported pro-corporate interests in the nomination of Supreme Court justices putting the individual’s right to representation at greater risk than ever before. That is the last stop to correcting what is wrong, and the loyalties seem to have shifted towards the wealthy and the extreme right. I believe that our constitutional rights have never been as compromised as they are now.

          The first amendment is now used to protect hate speech and hate groups, not diversity, a given in the general concept but it is becoming more popular. The second amendment has come to mean resisting the federal enforcement of legitimate law, as in Brown v Board of Education, (Eisenhower did the right thing) and now Bundy’s right to break federal law. McCutcheon v FEC decision, how do you address the fallout from that? Where are the checks and balances now?

          Racially intolerant hate groups haven’t been as prevalent or vocal in years as they have under President Obama. Did he really intend to strengthen them?

          Really worried.

          • Ida Lupines says:

            I voted for him proudly the first time around; but I see a disturbing trend that our wildlife and wild lands are being industrialized. Circumventing migratory bird and wild horse and burro laws, energy uber alles, hunting as an industry, GMO crops in the wildlife refuges, oil companies circumventing water and air quality protection laws…there’s less of a distinction now between Democrats and Republicans.

          • MJ says:

            I am stuck on the constitutionality of big corporations having the influence that they do, and that the political parties seem to have merged on that with the support of the Supreme Court. At a loss right now as to who will protect individual rights and our wildlife, or do we watch powerlessly as we lose our animals and what we know to be our wilderness? The irony of ranchers uniting on this issue in the name of individual rights is brilliant.

          • wolf moderate says:

            What did you expext? A guy from Chicago to give 2 chits about the West? He has way larger issues to worry about.

            How about a moderate Democrat like MAx Baucus? That would have been a much better choice.

            At least he lives and knows about environmental issues. Obama knows nothing and cares even less about issues that matter yo people that would read this blog.

            • ramses09 says:

              Your kidding right, about Max Baucus??? The guy is a drunk & knows nothing. He’s a shill just like all of the rest the Senate.

      • Ralph Maughan says:

        MJ, I think the video is remarkably insightful. It brings together a lot of the thoughts I have had about him. Thanks MJ.

        • Louise Kane says:

          +1 x 10
          unfortunately very insightful

        • MJ says:

          The blogs seem to be blowing up with this, not sure if they a small group or if there are really a lot of people siding with Bundy and are very misinformed. Can’t help thinking this is the result of Obama pandering to the right wing and corporate America, and not drawing a line to protect our natural resources to begin with.

  27. Louise Kane says:


    Mob Rule can not be allowed to prevail
    address by Eisenhower.

    “The proper use of the powers of the Executive Branch to enforce the orders of a Federal Court is limited to extraordinary and compelling circumstances. Manifestly, such an extreme situation has been created in Little Rock. This challenge must be met and with such measures as will preserve to the people as a whole their lawfully-protected rights in a climate permitting their free and fair exercise. The overwhelming majority of our people in every section of the country are united in their respect for observance of the law—even in those cases where they may disagree with that law.

    They deplore the call of extremists to violence.”

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      Well it has prevailed in the case of Bundy. It looks like he came out on top. It shows threats of domestic violence can win with the U.S. government. Sad day, but about 500 of the cows will be off the range. The remainder are hard to round up, probably feral. They might slowly perish, one way or another.

      • This is desert. The cattle have to come to water every day.. A half dozen men with some corral panels and a few stock trailers could capture these cows as they came to get a drink. Set up a temporary corral at each water trough and move to the next after the local cows have been captured and moved. Do it on sunday mornings while Bundy is at church singing “Put your shoulder to the wheel” and he wouldn’t notice until most of the cows are gone.
        If a lot of these cows are unbranded, an enterprising person could register a brand and capture and brand these “mavericks” and make a few bucks.

        • kristopher says:

          They really should have hired more cowboys for a roundup of this size. Not necessarily the size of the herd but the land to be covered.

      • Louise Kane says:

        Yes i know it prevailed. Its very frustrating and angering to think that the administration is allowing this to happen.

      • Theo Chu says:

        Apparently adding insult to injury they released the cows. These goons will be even more dangerous in the future. If BLM doesn’t follow-up and get these cows off they deserve our scorn. This is a sad day in America when the rule of law is crushed by some welfare ranchers and their dupes.

      • kristopher says:


        National Office

         Release Date: 04/12/14  
        Statement from Director of the Bureau of Land Management Neil Kornze on the Cattle Gather in Nevada

        As we have said from the beginning of the gather to remove illegal cattle from federal land consistent with court orders, a safe and peaceful operation is our number one priority. After one week, we have made progress in enforcing two recent court orders to remove the trespass cattle from public lands that belong to all Americans. 

        Based on information about conditions on the ground, and in consultation with law enforcement, we have made a decision to conclude the cattle gather because of our serious concern about the safety of employees and members of the public. 

        We ask that all parties in the area remain peaceful and law-abiding as the Bureau of Land Management and National Park Service work to end the operation in an orderly manner. 

        Ranching has always been an important part of our nation’s heritage and continues throughout the West on public lands that belong to all Americans. This is a matter of fairness and equity, and we remain disappointed that Cliven Bundy continues to not comply with the same laws that 16,000 public lands ranchers do every year. After 20 years and multiple court orders to remove the trespass cattle, Mr. Bundy owes the American taxpayers in excess of $1 million. The BLM will continue to work to resolve the matter administratively and judicially.

        The cattle were released.

        • Ralph Maughan says:

          They should have quietly dispatched these illegal cattle if they wanted success. A month long roundup was bound to attract a mob.

          • Nancy says:

            Since this outcome was predictable, probably would of been much easier for the BLM to have had an old fashion cattle drive, run everyone one of those trespassing cows right back on to Bundy’s ranch and then take steps to make sure they didn’t make it back to public lands again.

            I’m still trying to figure out how this guy made a living ranching, if his cows were spread out from hell and back, all these years?

            • Ralph Maughan says:

              There needs to be a good media investigation of him. I think he might have been primarily a melon farmer with the cattle kept mostly as a “middle finger” up to everyone else.

              Because so many of the cattle were essentially feral, many miles from his private property, they were not under his management at all.

  28. Harley says:

    I’m curious. There were many questions posed in the above article about the validity of this man’s claims. Do we have proof that anything he’s said has been a lie, all the claims about being a rancher since 1870 and so on and so forth? Has someone actually investigated this that doesn’t have a bias one way or another? Someone who could give facts? Yes, I know he has not been playing by all the rules and laws. That would be one of those indisputable facts. But are those questions being asked because there is knowledge of the correct answers or is it because this man is violating everything everyone here holds dear?

    And to be clear, I don’t have a horse in this race, I’m just curious is all!

    • Ralph Maughan says:


      Just by reading a local paper (Moapa Valley Progress) this morning, I discovered that Bundy’s claim he is the last rancher in Clark County, repeated time after time, is false. Here is the opinion piece from a law abiding local rancher in Logandale, NV.

      See OPEN FORUM: There Are Other Ranchers With Grazing Allotments Out There. April 9th, 2014 | Author: vrobison By BRUCE WHITNEY Logandale resident. http://mvprogress.com/2014/04/09/open-forum-there-are-other-ranchers-with-grazing-allotments-out-there/

      I have revised this comment because I made so many typos the first time. 🙁

      • Harley says:


        lol I didn’t even notice to be honest! Thank you for the link. It was interesting.

      • kristopher says:

        Ralph that statement I posted from the bureau, below that statement on their website was another paragraph detailing ranchers and revenue that the blm manages

    • Louise Kane says:

      Harley did you mean to write …I’m furious

      • Harley says:

        No, actually I’m relieved no one was hurt. Still not sure if I’m going beyond curious to be furious because I’m not sure who to be furious at since I don’t have all the facts. So I’ll remain Swiss in this.

        • Theo Chu says:

          You’ve got a particularly effective set of blinders on.

          • wolf moderate says:

            Mist westererns kills by the hand if feds are remembered as madtyrs …
            – – – –
            I want to suggest you pay attention to your spelling. webmaster

          • Harley says:

            Blinders? No. I just don’t like jumping to conclusions. I’m not going to pile on the band wagon just because everyone here has it in for ranchers, regardless of what they have done or not done. I think it’s kinda stupid that whatever laws the man was breaking was overlooked for how many years before those in charge decided to have it out at the OK Corral. The question I would love to have answered is why did they let it go for so long if it was such a crime? And maybe another, why choose now to act?

            • Theo Chu says:

              I think at first they bent over backwards to give him a chance to get it right. It certainly may have had to work it’s way up through the priorities process and then through court which easily could have taken several years. Lastly the BLM doesn’t like confrontation with ranchers – they are trained to coddle them. Despite what some people may think they don’t like confrontations – most rational people don’t like confrontations. I doubt very many of them looked forward to doing this. So it got drug out, which was a big mistake. But by giving him 20 years to get it right you would think most people would get that they aren’t the gestapo and they they’ve bent over backwards for this guy. This is not the tribal area of Afghanistan where there are warlords. We are supposedly a country of laws. This should scare the shit out of everyone. Maybe next time the shoe will be on the other foot. This is lawlessness. Not a good thing.

              • Chris Harbin says:

                Great post, although some of those rural places – like Catron County – sure seem like parts Waziristan.

              • Chris Harbin says:

                Great post, although some of those rural places – like Catron County – sure seem like parts Waziristan.

  29. Eric T. says:

    Oath Keepers rallied their troops including Sheriff Mack. They will be emboldened by this, greatly.


    • kristopher says:

      Those idiots are a disgrace to the service in which they served and the american people.

  30. Mike says:

    If this were an environmental protest, everyone would be in jail and charged with domestic terrorism.

    • Immer Treue says:

      Every once in a great while…
      + 1.

    • MJ says:

      I think it’s only terrorism if you are saying “please don’t hurt the animals” and you don’t bring a weapon. If you bring guns and say (as Bundy has stated) that you don’t obey federal law, it is no longer considered terrorism. Of course the rights of cattle ranchers to slaughter endangered species will remain protected under state law. SSS lol.

    • wolf moderate says:

      I do not want to be banned from this site, so I will Just say that perhaps its because the average american doesn’t believe what you believe.

  31. cobackcountry says:

    I personally think that the BLM officers who do not enforce the law should be fired for dereliction of duty. If the order came from Obama, then he is aiding and abetting. Shame, damn shame. So the laws of this country are publicly acknowledged to be arbitrary…. and our rights as citizens are negated by a d.b. who doesn’t pay his bills and a bunch of people who pick and chose which laws they obey and when they obey them.

    • wolf moderate says:

      Who keeps track of the laws without a colisum full of lawyers! Do you know how many federal laws exist? Just federal laws? I think it is ridiculous that you need lawyers to do or prove what’s right. Especially the obvious!

      • Ralph Maughan says:

        wolf moderate,

        The laws and regulations that apply to this situation are limited in number and not hard to understand given a bit of study.

        The BLM should have taken care of this situation way back in the 1990s. This is what can happen if you are not interested in or afraid to enforce the law.

        • wolf moderate says:

          I agree. The BLM should hsve proved there case several years ago not now. The BLM knew and now knows thar they can’t bully ranchers.

          Things would also change but at this point it appears the feds were in the wrong.

        • kristopher says:

          I agree ralph it should have been nipped a long time ago. But I think now he’s really goin to answer for this. They may think he’s won and all, celebrate and talk all you want but all he’s done is add more fuel to the fire. I’ll get worse before it gets better for him. Smartest move he could make is sellout and move. I hope they take it all.

          • rich says:


            I certainly hope you are correct but just as some banks were too big to fail, Cliven thinks he is too big to control. This evening on Faux news the local Boss Hogg sheriff had a smiling Cliven by his side on the stand as he announced that the BLM had been defeated and run out of town. Absolutely disgusting.

          • JEFF E says:

            three words

            • Nancy says:


            • Louise Kane says:

              Jeff E I just had a similar discussion this morning with a friend’s brother who asked why haven’t economic sanctions been used. If the IRS can undo the Irish and Italian mobsters why not violent ranchers?

              • MJ says:

                Louise and Jeff that seems like a real way to go, the violence in this is a lot like the mafia, it’s about taking power, bullying and political corruption. Have to wonder if the feds are already thinking that way. Hope so.

              • Ida Lupine says:

                Maybe there’s government dirty laundry that they might not want to have aired? Only time will tell why they let this drag on for so long and why they won’t take it through the courts.

  32. parandle says:

    Note: I made a comment on this contribution from a fake email address. Webmaster.
    – – – –
    Snipers, tactical gear, automatic weapons, at a cattle round up, on land that this family has owned since 1877, before the BLM even existed, while the federal government seizes an american citizens’ private property at gunpoint, and you’re either looking the other way or looking at the rancher or the people protesting against this as the enemy? Again, the US federal government is stealing land from a US citizen, and giving that American-owned land to a foreign country, China.. And you’re supporting that?
    I hope all of you who support this illegal land grab from a US citizen and the militarized tactics employed so US Senator Harry Reid and his son Rory earn mutimillion dollar profits from a $5B china owned solar manufacturing plant (signed in 2012, planned for Mar 2014.. look it up) where Mr Bundy’s cattle graze, although being told it was to protect a rare tortoise that’s not rare (look it up), 1400 of which the federal government is euthanizing (look it up), and support this out of control, , unconstitutional federal government, believe anything you’re told without the slightest clue or interest in finding your own facts, using your own critical thinking, and being your own investigator, but instead putting loyalty and ideology above truth, facts and integrity, get every bit of the big government, false narrative media, and all that that emplies, you so wantingly have begged for and deserve. We critical thinkers will do our own fact-finding, will continue verifying everything, trusting nothing coming from the government or the media without doing a whole lot of homework, will work tirelessly to: undo the corruption in our political system, without regard or loyalty to any political party or ideology, to restore our constitution, to return all land to its rightful owner (the people/the states), never settling for a “fenced off protest area” in place of our constitutional right to protest without restriction, to restore power back to the people, to restore the freedoms we were guaranteed under our constitution and bill of rights, and recognize that sadly, some folks have just been too dumbed down to realize that they’ve been sold out and lied to for a very long time and about most if not all of what they believe, and naively, they betray not only themselves but their own children and future generations out of misguided loyalty, by supporting and cheering on their very own enemy, while undermining the very people who are tirelessly trying to defeat it. For those worried about the tortoise, read “The Desert Tortoise in Relation to Cattle Grazing” Vernon Bostick, University of Arizona. They’ve known this since 1990, but still used the tortoise in 1998 as the excuse to turn private land owned by citizens of the state of NV into federal land, and all with the support of cheering environmentalist who hadn’t use their critical thinking or done their own reading, but put their loyalty to cause above everything else.

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      We got this comment from a fake email address, so he/she won’t become a future commenter at TWN. However, it is interesting because it represents almost every part of the narrative those forces trying to benefit from Bundy are promoting. This person obviously gets all the information from the right wing echo chamber and thinks of him or herself as “We critical thinkers will do our own fact-finding, will continue verifying everything, trusting nothing coming from the government or the media without doing a whole lot of homework, will work tirelessly to: undo the corruption in our political system, without regard or loyalty to any political party or ideology, to restore our constitution . . .” Hopefully readers of TWN will search the news and the rest of the web more widely. A recent study reported in Science Daily and elsewhere showed that people who have a little bit of information about a subject with emotional content often become unreasonably confident of their views.

    • MJ says:

      This is propaganda defined, it says a lot about where we are as a country. It is very organized and very intentional.

      It’s very Hitlerian, I wonder if these guys study Hitler. People who listen to it are not unintelligent as he believed they were but they are surrounded by cult-like peer pressure to believe the stories of very violent people around them. I wounder if some of the mentality is part Stockholm syndrome. Just thoughts.

      This is also the information age, so we need to get the facts out there and keep getting them out there. Social media might be a good thing.


  33. Ida Lupines says:

    I think this is a situation that is unwinnable for the government – they’ll come out looking like the bad guys no matter what they do, especially with the media involved and everyone loving an underdog story, and especially if anyone gets hurt. I think the BLM was wise to pull back in this case. It’s not like the others. I don’t know what to say about it. I do wonder if there is more than meets the eye with this land dispute.

    It’s also hard to take seriously ‘we are a country of laws’ when our leaders are making them up to suit their own purposes as they go along – and Wall Street banksters still haven’t made any restitution for their thievery or have gone to jail. The BLM has a dark cloud over them in my eyes since they may have illegally sold horses to slaughter with the help of one of Ken Salazar’s possible thugs, Tom Davis. The DOJ just stopped any investigation into it.

    • Nancy says:

      Some interesting (and scary) comments are Bundy’s website Ida. The BLM had good reason to stand down.


      • Louise Kane says:

        The situation is winnable by the government. They need to market/advertise the truth and emphasize that these are public lands that are being abused by people who are stealing from the American public. Then they need to emphasize that Bundy is using mob rule mentality against US citizens. Bundy is using this argument even though his arguments are based in lies. The federal government should make it clear that mob practices and violence will not be tolerated against US citizens and the agencies we hire or vote into office to protect us. We don’t negotiate with foreign terrorists so why should we do so with domestic terrorists.

        • cobackcountry says:

          I could not agree more. This man has now been emboldened by the government. Now every crack pot group that doesn’t like a law or court ruling can take the same action and get away with it. Imagine if crowds would have done this outside of the court after the Trevon Martin verdict? We send in the guard to restore order, and should have done so here. Comments from law abiding ranchers should be plastered on the news. Out raged non-ranchers should be shown also. Pathetic.

    • MJ says:

      This has to be winnable and it has to be done. Every terrorist organization would follow. I like the reference that Louise made regarding President Eisenhower and Brown v Board of Education, very good analogy.

      Maybe we have become complacent? in thinking that we don’t have to really fight for our democracy but it seems we do. Not just in a military way, but in the day to day of being aware and being a part of the process.

      Bullies aren’t new, and the attitudes of certain groups aren’t new, but the Obama administration can’t be passive. They can be subtle, they can use the law and not force, but they can’t be passive. Hoping that he stands up for something other than corporate rights real soon.

  34. DB says:

    The Governor should be embarrassed. State police should have intervened to stop the armed protest.

  35. Nancy says:

    “While conservative bloggers, media personalities, and even some politicians are treating Bundy as some sort of folk hero, they should be careful about the precedent Bundy is setting”

    My feelings exactly 🙂


  36. JEFF E says:

    This comment has nothing to do with the Bundy ranch per se,; but has any one asked themselves why the BLM needs to have police/military trained attack dogs? not to mention outfitted as if they are some sort of quasi military service.

    If one wants to worry about something look at the militarization of agencies such as this and even local police forces.

      • JEFF E says:

        equipment maybe/probably.

        Not the dogs. If you have had no experience with this type of animal believe me you do not want to be on the receiving end, especially if they are military trained.

    • Ralph Maughan says:

      Jeff E,

      I am concerned about this too, but not with the BLM. They have been noted for their lack of law enforcement since the agency was formed in the late 1940s. It would be interesting to find out how they gathered this law enforcement presence. I have read a lot of stories over the years how the BLM cannot protect the resources because they have so little law enforcement.

      Of course, their detractors are claiming 200 heavily armed agents, but no. There might have been 200 people in operation, but most were contract cowboys out rounding up cattle. If they were armed it would have been to put down an aggressive bull.

      • JEFF E says:

        this is the particular video that caused my comment

      • Mark L says:

        Kick a police dog, get tased
        kick a neighbor’s dog, get sued
        kick your own dog, not an issue (unless you have witnesses)
        kick a wolf (dog’ close relative)……?
        Same animals for the most part.

        • Immer Treue says:

          Kick a police dog, perhaps get tased, perhaps get chewed up.

          • Jay says:

            Not if you’re a tough guy like WolfModerate–he’d shoot that dog in the head cuz he’s a badass.

          • Louise Kane says:

            or both hopefully

          • topher says:

            It appeared that the dog may have lunged at the man who kicked him. I don’t think dogs were appropriate for this situation and were there only to intimidate. A dog used for theses things should respond to a handlers commands. Dogs are not capable of understanding this situation and should have been left in the truck if they can’t follow commands.

            • Immer Treue says:

              Dumb ass people should have understood if dogs are out, it’s for a reason. Behave yourself, stay away from dogs, ya won’t get lunged at, taste red, or bit. These people were out of line.

              • topher says:

                I won’t argue that the dogs were out for a reason, it is the reason I disagree with. I think they were there to intimidate.
                If the BLM is correct that Bundy is violating the law ,and I think they are, they should have quietly arrested Bundy before this thing escalated. Bundy could work his way through prosecution and the roundup could have been a condition of his release. It seems any other approach would have been better than the one they chose to apply in this situation.
                I’ll add that the man didn’t approach the dog. Both handler and dog approached this man. The dog should have been at a distance where he couldn’t reach the man unless released by the handler.

              • topher says:

                I will add that as a taxpayer I wouldn’t be opposed to compensating the rancher for full value of his livestock if they were all simply shot dead on the range followed by prosecution of the rancher.

              • Louise Kane says:

                Topher Like you, I don’t understand why Bundy was not arrested quietly at his home and his cattle rounded up. But the dogs are trained to protect their handlers and follow commands these people were out of line so why would it not be appropriate to have their dogs with them to help the situation. The Bundy’s made it clear that they were prepared for violence.

              • topher says:

                I think it was apparent the dog did nothing to help the situation and it’s presence only added to the problem. If the dog were kept at an appropriate distance the tasing may have been avoided. So while a dog may be a useful tool it is only a tool and the handler should understand that. To think of a dog as an officer capable of decision making in a situation like this is a mistake.

              • JEFF E says:

                There was more than one dog present; at least two and those type of dogs are not there to protect the handler, there job is to attack and subdue a human target. That is there primary job.
                Again, why does an agency like the BLM need to have that type of resource.

                • Larry says:

                  Because a responsible LE program works to have as many layers in place as possible before lethal force is used. Can’t believe that question is asked.

              • Louise Kane says:

                To set record straight about police dogs….. for what its worth one of the dogs missions is to protect their handlers

                “A police dog, often referred to as a “K-9″ (which is a homophone of canine), is a dog that is trained specifically to assist police and other law-enforcement personnel in their work. Police dogs must remember several hand and verbal commands and are responsible for a number of things. Some of those things include searching for drugs and explosives, searching for lost people, looking for crime scene evidence, and protecting their handlers. [1] The most commonly used breed is the German Shepherd Dog, although Belgian Malinois are also used.

                In many jurisdictions, the intentional injuring or killing of a police dog is a felony,[2] subjecting the perpetrator to harsher penalties than those in the statutes embodied in local animal cruelty laws,[3] just as an assault on a human police officer is often a more serious offense than a similar assault on a civilian. A growing number of law-enforcement organizations outfit dogs with ballistic vests,[4][5] and some even designate dogs as sworn officers, with their own police badges and IDs.[2][6][7][8] Furthermore, a police dog killed in the line of duty is often given a full police funeral.[8][9][10]”

                from Wikipedia but I also know this because my neighbor is a policewoman and I have friends that train rescue GSD and place them with police departments.

              • JEFF E says:

                the BLM is a Management Agency, not a Law enforcement agency. If there is evidence of illegal Activity then the appropriate Law enforcement agencies should be involved such as county/local Law enforcement agencies’, not a federal Management agency. Why does EVERY branch of Government need to have military capabilities and resources. Can’t believe you’re that naïve.
                your level of ignorance is only surpassed by your level of ignorance. It’s a wonder you can tie your own shoes.

                • Ralph Maughan says:

                  Jeff E,

                  Maybe some of LE present was borrowed from other government entities?

                • Larry says:

                  Thanks Jeff E for the opportunity to follow up. The BLM, NPS, FWS just to name three have inspectors, rangers and special agents to investigate and enforce laws promulgated by congress. Their investigative and enforcement actions are authorized in the statutes they enforce as directed by congress. They all receive federal law enforcement standard and specialized training alongside special agents from secret service, customs etc., at FLETC (Federal Law Enforcement Training Center) facilities. Including but not limited to detailed constitutional law, and case law, especially the 4th amendment. They are held to the highest standards and receive refresher courses as per policy. They must qualify with firearms, tasers or any weapon they are issued. In summary these “management agencies” grunts are the ones that have the pleasant duty to tell people like Bundy he is in the wrong and he must comply. Then they are the ones that have to stand there and listen to comments about their ancestors, looks and other slander, all the while watching every hand as it passes by the handguns and rifles slung on every shoulder and wonder silently in their mind if stuff sours will I get to go home to the family when it’s over? Being the friendly referee doesn’t cut it anymore. There are cutthroat criminals abusing our natural resources out there, look up how Bill Pogue and Conley Elms ended their career. That will give you a reality check.

                  And Jeff E., I use loafers most often.

              • Nancy says:

                “I think they were there to intimidate”

                Who, the dogs or the people topher??

                Would the dogs (or anyoneone with guns) have been there at all if the attitude had not taken a negative swing – CALLING ALL BULLIES – Bundy ranch needs you!!

                Geez, some guy on his website was fully prepared to dump para-troopers on the roundup. Bundy had his “ducks” in order and was just waiting for BLM to make a move.

              • Louise Kane says:

                Talk about hot flash, you are a real creep sometimes

            • MJ says:

              My first impression watching the video was that the handlers didn’t seem well trained and didn’t have good control of their animals, but I didn’t see the dog lunge first. In any case, kicking the dog is no different than kicking a human officer, they needed to stand down. This wasn’t peaceful disobedience to make a statement, it was a coup.

              It seemed bad judgement to bring valuable dogs and tasers to a gun fight, that’s my issue, not whether law enforcement had the right to use dogs. The militia are violent, they escalated the issue. That was a cluster.

              Agree they should have arrested Bundy at home.

            • Chris Harbin says:

              Apparently, the people did not know how to respond either. I don’t think dogs were necessarily a good choice here either. I sometimes wonder if they don’t have to find a place for dogs that end their military careers – and I say that only slightly in jest. That there is a need for animal training like that is a sad indictment on our species.Nonetheless if I had been the dog and someone kicked me I’d make a grab at them too regardless it was my job or not.

    • topher says:

      “If one wants to worry about something look at the militarization of agencies such as this and even local police forces.”
      A disturbing trend among law enforcement.

    • Jay says:

      Look at the weaponry people have access to now. After that incident in L.A. where the two bank robbers mowed through the entire police force using semi-auto high-powered rifles, virtually every police force in the U.S. has come to the realization you can’t take on AR’s with 6-shot revolvers.

      • Louise Kane says:

        chicken or egg
        does the number and range of weapons that the public has access to correlate with the militarization of agencies? too many guns everywhere especially in the public, with states like Florida proposing laws that allow citizens almost unregulated use after events like hurricanes. Mob rule and armed bully pulpit ideology is progressing like a societal cancer all defended by extremists that claim the second amendment allows them the right to bear arms to kill, maim and terrorize.

        • Larry says:

          Louise you are right. But I can’t agree with those that fault police agencies about the number/size/type of weapons they are now using. It really boils down to stopping the bad guys without injuring officers or public. That means overwhelming firepower. So as violence grows those that we depend on to crush it must be armed better. It is a violent circle much like the Cold War. The good guys have to keep being supreme. Aside from the rogue cop once in a while it is just a job and they all want to go home after their shift. Unlike the bad guys who live it 24/7. Relaxing gun laws doesn’t a peaceful town make.

          • Immer Treue says:

            Once upon a time law enforcement and conservation officers did not wear BP vests, and park rangers did not carry firearms. Times have changed.

            • Louise Kane says:

              You know they have changed and its too bad for all of us. Those BLM employees were up against a crowd that was inciting violence, revving up the fanatics and creating a dangerous situation for the employees and civilians. I watched that video several times and no matter how hard the videographers attempted to make it look like the big bad federal agencies were trampling on the little people, it was really staged and ridiculous. This was not Kent state, it was a rabble rousing armed crowd of trouble makers that were breaking the law and threatening public workers. I was surprised at the restraint the BLM showed.

            • Larry says:

              Immer Treue, how right you are. In my day IFG allowed CO’s to carry but did not encourage and provided nothing. Therefore if any did carry it was their own which made a hodgepodge of weapons. Pogue and Elms tragedy changed all that. I knew a couple of FBI agents back then in Twin Falls and they just shook their heads at us being unarmed and checking people with guns. I am really irritated at people like Rand Paul that say he sees no reason to arm fur and feather agents. But say anything for a vote, right.

          • Louise Kane says:

            I’d love to see legislators listen to constituents that are reasonably concerned about escalating violence in this country. Its frightening how many people parrot/ use the second amendment as a blanket “right” to carry every kind of weapon imaginable, to kill wildlife, to justify vigilante actions and as an excuse to back up their violent fantasies. The worst part is that the second amendment “rights” in many people’s minds have expanded so that all one hears is that its a second amendment right to carry arms with no restrictions and like an urban legend those words are cemented as truth in the general populace’s mind without critical analysis of what the second amendment says, or of what its original intent was. In the case of the people like the Bundy’s they also use this argument as the basis for a call to arms against a tyrannical government and pay no attention to the fact that the issues were dealt with in a democratic fashion as prescribed by the constitution and our state and federal laws.

            • Larry says:

              think if you peel the onion back to the core in these militias you find Walter Mitty’s wanting to be Seal Team 6, FBI fugitive squad, or the like. None of them would meet the basic requirements let alone the background checks. The Constitution is just a cover. But nothing sells news like patriotism and the flag tied neatly together with inflammatory statements and presented to citizens that want to blame government for their bad decisions.

        • Jay says:

          Its not even remotely a chicken or the egg conundrum–it very clearly originated with bad guys carrying bigger, badder weapons. The ol’ .38 service revolver is obsolete against hi-capacity supersonic rounds.

  37. Yvette says:

    I’ve not had something anger me this much in a long time. The BLM should not have pulled out until the job was done, and if threatened by an armed militia then they should have had a back up plan.

    What will they do with Clive Bundy’s remaining trespass cattle? He owes over a million dollars, and that money belongs to all of us. It’s not the money that angers me, but the fact that one person has been able to practice poor animal husbandry and graze for free. If the Department of Interior and the BLM refuse to handle this lone rancher in defiance of federal laws then I am beginning to think we should file a class action lawsuit against him and the Dept. of Interior for failure to follow the laws meant to protect our public lands.

    • Ken Cole says:

      They let all of the rounded up cattle go back onto the allotment.

    • Jerry Black says:

      “we should file a class action lawsuit against him and the Dept. of Interior for failure to follow the laws meant to protect our public lands.” YEP!!!

  38. Ramses says:

    Yvette you said it all. Thank you! And DITTO!!

  39. Jerry Black says:

    Members of militia groups and other anti-government organizations get away with illegal fishing, illegal grazing and poaching here in Montana on a frequent basis.
    Of course the “off the record” response from law enforcement is: “yes, we know they’re breaking the law, but we don’t want to have another “Ruby Ridge” incident on our hands (that’s a quote from a law enforcement official that was directed to an illegal fishing incident)….it’s not worth it.
    I see these groups getting stronger by the day and this incident with Bundy will embolden them even more.

    • Mike says:

      It’s incredibly similar to the leniency judges showed Brownshirts during Weimar Germany.

      Eventually, if not nipped quickly, these things have a way of building.

  40. Here is a summary of the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act, that eventually led to the establishment of the BLM in 1946:


    The Taylor act was supported by the livestock indusrty as it set up grazing districts and allowed individual ranchers, as members of grazing districts, to have an area where they could graze a specific numer of animals for a specified length of time.
    Prior to the act, It was every livestock owner for himself.
    Prior to 1934, large bands of domestic sheep, originating in Oregon, were trailed and grazed accross Idaho every summer with the final destination being Butte, Montana where the lambs were sold and shipped to the eastern U.S.
    This caused much range damage and made it difficult for local rancers to be able to rely on enough forage for their own livestock. More than one sheepherder met his death by irrate local ranchers.
    Local Ranchers through out the west, facing similar problems, were the main voices asking for some sort of grazing regulation. It came in the form of the 1934 Taylor Grazing Act.

    Every grazing district had a few ranchers like the Bundys in Nevada that hogged the range and put out more than their share of livestock.
    Ranchers had disagreements with each other over the quality of the bulls turned out with the cows by other members of the district. My father in law constantly complained about the poor bulls that “Harvey” turned out on the range. Eventually most of the grazing districts were divided up and fenced giving each individual rancher a private allotment.

  41. Linda Jo Hunter says:

    Must be a good time to take up ranching . . We could all go get a loan, buy some feeder cattle, turn em out on public land, claim wolf depredation if any get killed, $$ for us, not pay gazing fees, sell the hamburgers in the fall and then claim bankruptcy and cheat on our tax return. When we get caught … Just call in a well armed militia to defend us, get a few people killed then make a killing on a best selling book. Don’t you think we are all entitled to this?

  42. Mark H says:

    And these armed interlopers are different from the thugs rampaging through Eastern Ukraine how?

  43. topher says:

    Maybe someone well versed in the law could chime in on whether these offenses carry potential jail time or are more like infractions that carry a simple fine. I still don’t understand why there has been no arrest.

    • Nancy says:

      Could be wrong here topher but I’m wondering if it’s gonna go beyond paying for grazing fees on public lands and warp into open range laws?

      • Larry says:

        If Rand Paul and Ted Kruze get involved the BLM and Park Service land will be transferred to Bundy and the government will pay to reseed it.

    • Larry says:

      If this were Idaho or Utah it may be a crime to even take pictures of his cows according to their ag protect laws. Go figure.

  44. snaildarter says:

    These anarchist types are thugs just like Putin and Stalin and Hitler there is nothing high minded about what they do. These are the same people that chopped off the heads of Children during the French revolution. They are as un-American as any people who ever lived within our borders.

  45. Sam Parks says:

    I am deeply infuriated by this. So what can we do?

    Isn’t the BLM under a federal court mandate to remove the cattle? Will anybody be filing a lawsuit against the BLM for failing to enforce this?

  46. Yvette says:

    Can someone with a legal background and/or experience with legal action against a state, a federal agency or other group weigh an opinion if a class action lawsuit would be feasible?

    I’ve never been involved in any type of legal action ever. I really think if we could file a class action lawsuit against Bundy and the DOI for all the money and the damage done by his trespass cattle it might give the BLM an out on this one.

    This is horrible, because as others have said this set a precedent for any extremist group to simply grab weapons and make a stand when they don’t want to comply with the law. How in the hell have these militia groups gained so much clout as they can get by with such actions?

  47. The BLM contacted for the removal of Bundy’s cattle to the tune of $966,000. That is roughly $1000/head. Why not issue 900 BLM permits for individuals to take one or more trespassing cows to use as they see fit.
    A cow is easily killed by stunning it with a .22 shot to the forehead, followed by a quick killing cut to the throat. With an offer of a beef, free for the taking, most of those gun totin “patriots” threatening the BLM workers, would go out to shoot one of Bundy’s cows to put in their freezers.
    If the offer was sweetened with a $500 bounty + the free meat, all of those jobless folks in Las Vegas would stampede out there to shoot a cow.

    • For those of you interested, there is a guy that sells silencers for .22 firearms at the local gun shows (Lewis & Clark Traders). There was a gun show this weekend at the Boise, Idaho state fairgrounds. You have to use low velocity .22 ammo, but the maker of the silencers claimed there is almost no sound from the gunshot.

      • topher says:

        Better apply for permit first. Think it’s about 300 bucks. Without it you become an instant criminal.

  48. Jerry Black says:

    From the Seattle Times…..interesting comment section

  49. Justin Forte says:

    After the role that the cattle ranching industry had in that budget bill rider that made wolves exempt from ESA protection so they can be exterminated while violating my right to challenge the delisting judicially, I have no sympathy for cattle ranchers when they have trouble. They are the enemy in my book.You know what really angers me about this whole situation? If we had done something like this to protect wolves, we would be labeled as terrorists and the government would have us taken out! Can anyone say double standard?

  50. Ida Lupines says:

    I dunno, this doesn’t really inspire much confidence tho:


  51. Larry says:

    I don’t think this is over. It may pause for awhile but I think the U.S. Attorney for Nevada will use a different arm of the government to get restitution. If he/she does it will be done in a walnut paneled courtroom and not in the dusty desert. And it may well be enforced by the Marshal Service in which case Bundy will get a whole new view of armed government enforcers. If there is another move it will involve assets. So many comments here are under the impression that the BLM Director is calling the shots. Experience tells me the entire operation from the get-go involved the Department of Justice through the appointed AUSA. An AUSA surely approved or disapproved every action and the BLM only made recommendations or submitted plans. In the end the only thing they could decide on their own was what to have for lunch. If this operation went sour it was landing on the U.S. Attorney’s lap and I think the call to pull out came from the USA. I’m also sure the USA scaled back what would have been a bigger show if BLM went with force they thought they needed. It is true the last thing the Department of Justice needs is another Ruby Ridge or Waco. And in the end it would be over a cow. A no win deal. I look for the government to find a way in a court. U.S. Attorneys are no slouch, they are the sleeping momma grizzly and she just got kicked.

    • Jay says:

      Regarding seizing assets, you may be right, but I have a feeling our clever little mormon lawbreaker probably has his assets hidden amongst his dozens of immediate family. They can’t seize what he no longer has.

      • cobackcountry says:

        They can seize anything he ever gets back. I hope they do too. They can also seize assets they can show have been dispersed to avoid taxation. I am sure he didn’t pay his fair share of taxes on assets or income, he doesn’t feel he should pay anything.

      • Larry says:

        You could be right too. But the Bundy ranch could end up the U.S. Desert Tortoise National Park too. Nothing will surprise me now, we throw millions $$ at tribal leaders for nothing don’t we.

        • Jay says:

          We can only hope. His type disgusts me–hundreds of millions of good Americans pay their taxes as shareholders in this thing we call a democratic government, and the Bundys of the world think they’re entitled to the perks of a modern government but not obligated to pay their share.

        • cobackcountry says:

          I hope they charge him with a crime that can land him in jail. In many countries, what he and his protesters did is considered an act of war. They’d have been shot. At the very least, they obstructed justice. They crossed a line when they took the protest beyond the protest zone. I am disgusted on many levels. These morons added fuel to arguments that armed people are all out to over throw the government and have no regard for people who disagree with the views they try to force on others. They gave people the impression that it is okay to defy the legal system if it suits your agenda. Ugh, and the list goes on.

        • Larry says:

          Addendum here lest someone think I can’t tie my shoes again: Should have been more explicit on tribal leaders; only had Afghanistan tribal/war lords in mind.

          • Jay says:

            I sometimes get the impression that Jeff believes he’s the only person with that skill.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        …has his assets hidden amongst his dozens of immediate family.

        Yeah, but it’s legal! 😉 People have been advised by their tax accountants to do this forever.

        I’m just finding this whole thing fascinating. I wasn’t going to pay any attention to it at the beginning. What animals we decide deserve protecting, who and when we can grant exemptions from this protection to, when we can impose taxes and fees, who gets access to land and who doesn’t. It’ll be interesting to see how it all plays out.

        • Ida Lupines says:

          And I love Nevada, the times I have visited. Once driving across country and it was beautiful.

        • cobackcountry says:

          Here is another constitutional amendment that might come up if the land cannot be used as planned, the 5th. Eminent Domain. Republicans use it to toss private owners out in the interest of pipelines. I know it would be seen as government over stepping, because it isn’t a right winger calling for it. Yet, they preach about being “Constitution” supporters? Only when it suits them. Did I say “ugh”?

          • Ralph Maughan says:

            Most of them haven’t read the Constitution or understood it. You can see that because they quote this to prove the U.S. can’t own land. They quote Article I, section 8 (17)
            17:  To exercise exclusive Legislation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) as may, by Cession of particular States, and the Acceptance of Congress, become the Seat of the Government of the United States, and to exercise like Authority over all Places purchased by the Consent of the Legislature of the State in which the Same shall be, for the Erection of Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, and other needful Buildings;–And …”
            when the relevant language is Article 4, section 3, “(2): The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States;. . .”

            • cobackcountry says:

              I wonder if they don’t get it, or choose to ignore it? Either way, their ignorance is no defense.

  52. cobackcountry says:

    The complete irony here is that the Taylor Act was primarily backed by ranchers.

  53. Mark H says:

    Seems like the contempt power of the court should be available. In other words, lock him up and compliance with the court’s order is the key to release.

    • MJ says:

      (Y) don’t think thumbs up works here but that’s the idea.

      Technically I think it does border on treason when a militia rallies to raise arms against the federal government while trying to carry out a legal act, and all the blogging incites more of the same, but the use of non-violent enforcement through contempt of court laws shows calm and reason:

      The Constitution defines treason as specific acts, namely “levying War against [the United States], or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”

      Within the military there are regs about when you can disobey an unlawful order, analogous the right to resist a tyrannical government, but not to disobey a lawful order. When it comes to application of the 2nd amendment it seems as though legal or illegal acts by the feds is not a consideration. If you don’t like their rules you can go get the assault rifle?:

      The Uniform Code of Military Justice (UCMJ) 809[890].ART.90 (20), makes it clear that military personnel need to obey the “lawful command of his superior officer,” 891.ART.91 (2), the “lawful order of a warrant officer”, 892.ART.92 (1) the “lawful general order”, 892.ART.92 (2) “lawful order”. In each case, military personnel have an obligation and a duty to only obey Lawful orders and indeed have an obligation to disobey Unlawful orders, including orders by the president that do not comply with the UCMJ.

  54. Yvette says:

    After reading quite a few comments on the Bundy blunder from various newspapers and facebook, and from people of all walks of life, I’m even more amazed at humans’ lack of reason than I was prior to these events. I’ve come to the conclusion that a large segment of the population lacks the skill to apply even a simple level of unbiased analysis of a situation, and they react first, think later.

    Looking at peoples’ response to the Bundy blunder should scare all of us. It’s been an eye-opener.

    • Immer Treue says:



      Perhaps too much time with video games where the consequences are inconsequential. Not actual life, where consequences are real.

      There was a woman who was screaming at a BLM agent about not threatening her or another woman because she was pregnant. I’m sorry, but wtf was she doing there?

  55. vickif says:

    There is a sincere need to have people publish realistic accounts of the situation. We need more press. Every internet search engine defaults to Bundy Worship bull sites. How do we go about doing that?

  56. Ida Lupines says:

    I’m confused, the BLM descends on this man’s property with helicopters, agents, bulldozers, etc. and now they say they wanted to avoid conflict and were concerned for human safety? This should have been settled in the courts long ago, and I’d like to know why it wasn’t. BTW, some of my infinitesimal share of the public lands I’d like to donate to the wild horses per the Free Roaming Horses and Burros Act. This is what I would like our BLM to do for us as well.

    • Theo Chu says:

      Really Ida? Do you only read your own comments? It has been pointed out repeatedly that the BLM did settle this in court and they were there to implement a court order on national public ground, not “on this man’s property” as you claim. As for feral horses, yes the BLM has failed to control their populations too for some of the same reasons they backed down here. I hope that helps with some of your confusion.

      • Ida Lupines says:

        Sorry, I meant follow-through. It may have been settled, but it appears there was no follow-through for many years.

  57. IDhiker says:

    We had one of these “revolutions” here in Ravalli County, Montana, some twenty years ago. The ringleaders ran around with AK’s trying to intimidate everyone, but local law enforcement simply arrested each one when they were separated from their cronies. Then, the prosecutors sent them to prison, which was “end of story.”

    When Bundy’s supporters go home, Federal agents need to arrest him. If they can get Bin Laden, they can get Bundy, who is just a pompous big mouth.

    One general rule in these situations is to have superior force available. In law enforcement, you don’t tell anyone to do something, unless you know beforehand what you will do if they refuse to comply. The result of this BLM action was so predictable, I am surprised the BLM higher-ups weren’t astute enough to plan for it.

  58. […] Cattle trespass operation made dangerous by media coverage […]


April 2014


‎"At some point we must draw a line across the ground of our home and our being, drive a spear into the land and say to the bulldozers, earthmovers, government and corporations, “thus far and no further.” If we do not, we shall later feel, instead of pride, the regret of Thoreau, that good but overly-bookish man, who wrote, near the end of his life, “If I repent of anything it is likely to be my good behaviour."

~ Edward Abbey

%d bloggers like this: