Home

McWhinney Burgers Anyone?

1 Comment

By Barbara H. Peterson

Farm Wars

If Wyoming’s Representative Sue Wallis gets her way, the answer to the question “What’s for dinner?” will be

“Why horse of course!”

From the horse’s mouth, so to speak:

Representative Sue Wallis

PO Box 71, Recluse, Wyoming 82725

Letter to the United States Congress, and to the State Legislatures

I am writing to ask you to avoid legislation that would further impact the private property rights of livestock owners, including horses, to market their animals, or to transport them for any purpose, including for their processing to be used for food. Read more…

Barbara H. Peterson

Water rights, rainwater, water contracts and the corrupt Bureau of Land Management

9 Comments

Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2010 All Rights Reserved

__________________________________________

A recent article about state governments seizing the rights to rain water off your roof, elicited a comment that almost sounded like it was relevant; until you examined the actual available data.  Because the of the convoluted logic used to make the arguments in this commentary, we felt it necessary to dispel misconceptions many people operate under when it comes to the issue of water rights.  This comment, crafted to look as though the government both state and federal is …..only trying to protect the rights of land owners….is a PR piece; gee….I wonder where this came from? 

C=Comment

A=Answer

________________________________________________________

C.  First, in the western states, water rights are held for the beneficial use by the public and apportioned for use by seniority.

A. At one time this was true, but reinterpretation by the BLM of “public use”, “adequate use” and “beneficial use” have rendered seniority use as a part of property rights, null and void.  This means you have no water rights to speak of; apportioned use is not even a consideration.  Profit is all that matters and many states no longer recognize water rights as belonging to individual land regardless of what the previous statutes and laws were.

Because water is now declared by BLM to be a salable commodity, every effort is made to contract the allocated rights to water, to private corporations for use in strip mining, geo-thermal activities, and for sale to private corporations for diversions to far away places!

These private sellers have first rights to their allocation of water before any water is released to the “public”. On public lands either owned or controlled by the BLM, ALL waters existing above or below the surface belong to and are controlled by the BLM.  They could give a crap if you have water or you don’t.  More

Media duped by Reid’s cries of ‘obstructionism’

Leave a comment

Timothy P.Carney, The Examiner’s senior political columnist, can be contacted at tcarney@washingtonexaminer.com. His column appears Monday and Thursday, and his stories and blog posts appear on ExaminerPolitics.com.

By: Timothy P. Carney
Senior Examiner Columnist
September 17, 2010

Crying “obstructionism” is a tradition for Senate majority leaders, and Harry Reid does it as frequently and piously as anyone. But Reid, with the cooperation of a news media confused by the upper chamber’s rules, has defined “obstructionism” down, and this week is blaming conservative Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., for blocking a bill even though Reid hasn’t even tried to move it yet. 

Food safety legislation sponsored by Sen. Dick Durbin, D-Ill., would give the Food and Drug Administration sweeping new powers, and thus has spurred fierce opposition from small farmers and local produce advocates, while big food producers support the measure. Coburn has expressed concerns about burdens on small business and the bill’s cost to taxpayers. He’s also argued that the bill multiplies regulatory redundancies and complexity, thus harming effective enforcement.  More

%d bloggers like this: