Marti Oakley (c)copyright 2011 All rights Reserved

________________________________________________________

We know from history that when a country loses its ability to feed its own population, its demise is soon to follow.  As a nation we are being systematically, incrementally and intentionally driven to the point where we cannot feed our own people.  The quickest way to collapse the economic viability of a nation is to destroy its agricultural sector.  It isn’t gold or silver, global investments and markets, or multi-national corporations and illegal agreements that sustain economies.  What does sustain and support a vibrant economy is a strong independent agricultural sector.   

The underlying backbone to every economic model is agriculture.  And that model is not predicated upon anything other than local, hands on, food production in all its forms.  Key to undermining and destroying that model is the intentional destruction of the right to engage in agricultural activity using arbitrary regulations, laws, rules and agency police state enforcement actions perpetrated against independent and/or family owned agricultural operations.  Creating barriers to entry into agriculture is key to collapsing an independent agricultural sector which is what got us the fake food safety bill passed by “Dirty Harry” Reid, and his merry band of corporate hiney-hugging, US senators. 

While these operations may be small financially, in comparison to big Ag industrialized activities, the independent sector comprises the bulk of our food supply.  It is this supply that our own government is determined to eradicate in favor of global corporate stakeholders. 

And now they come for the cows……..

A huge battle is being waged across the Western states where cattle ranching has been practiced for more than 100 years.  The Bureau of Land (mis)Management, (BLM) has pitted ranchers against wild horse advocates as the BLM unlawfully began rounding up wild horses and burro’s, both protected by law, sending them to kill buyers, slaughterhouses, and to private facilities for use in unapproved drug testing, experiments, and if all else failed, to friends of the BLM for warehousing at a cost of many millions of dollars per year to American taxpayers.  This was money that never had to be spent if the wild horses had been left on their federally protected reserves not to mention the billion or so that has been spent illegally and unlawfully rounding them up.

The promise to ranchers was that this eradication of the wild horses would open up more public lands to grazing permits if they would support the BLM’s unlawful activity.  The true intention was to convert all the land to UN Agenda 21 “re-wilding, non-human habitat zones” (except for their mining, drilling and water theft friends).  Apparently a system of land theft based on fictional “biodiversity” is far more desirable than encouraging the continued production of beef cattle in order to maintain a necessary sector of food production for the country.

Wild horse advocates warned that cattle and cattle ranching would be next.  This wasn’t about saving the environment, or water shortages or any of the other bogus fictional “scientific” reasons for eradicating to extinction the wild horse populations.  The wild horses were just the first step in a systematic decimation of the agricultural sector, including cattle ranching, in the Western states.

According to the sponsor of this bill, Rep. Adam Smith [D-WA9], grazing is “impractible” on public lands.  But apparently, gas and oil drilling, mining, water diversion and theft, is not.  “And for other purposes”, that ubiquitous statement attached to every piece of legislative crapola that comes out of the District of Criminals which signals the insertion of non-related issues, is the red flag that while grazing will not be allowed in perpetuity, that does not mean that other more environmentally devastating activities won’t be taking place. 

Make no mistake, behind this bill is a plan already set into motion that will facilitate any number of environmentally damaging activities.  But hey!  There won’t be any cattle grazing in those areas anyway.

H.R. 3432 Rural Economic Revitalization Act  (Page 2 line 1)   

Congress finds the following:

3 (1) The use of Federal lands by grazing permit

4 tees and lessees for commercial livestock grazing is

5 increasingly difficult due to growing conflicts with

6 other legitimate multiple uses of the lands, such as

7 environmental protection and burgeoning rec

8 reational use, and with congressionally mandated

9 goals of wildlife and habitat protection and improved 

10 water quality and quantity.

Other legitimate multiple uses?  This from a bunch of desk jockey’s who most likely have never stepped foot on any of the land in question and have no real idea of how to improve water quality or quantity, much less have any real concern for protecting wildlife and habitats. 

While alluding to the financial pressures ranchers are facing, and while never acknowledging that that pressure is a direct result of federal agency interference and mismanagement with the intent to force them out of business, the bill continues on to say that the costs exceed any benefits.  Keep in mind that the costs they speak of are a direct result of government regulation and interference. 

I don’t know about any of you, but I personally like to eat and I consider that benefit to be invaluable in my continued survival.

 “Growing conflicts with other legitimate multiple uses of the lands”.

This appears to be based on the fictional “multiple (R)use doctrine” that the BLM created for itself to by pass property rights, vested and senior water rights associated with private property, in order to sell or lease out land, water and mineral or gas and oil activities to preferred stakeholders.  And, they will be performing these activities on YOUR land, without your permission and in violation of your property and individual rights.  In other words, multi-national corporations will be allowed to contaminate water supplies and water-sheds and to use up valuable water resources while devastating local environments and at the same time driving local ranchers and farmers out of business and facilitating the flight from the area of the general populations.  It’s a win-win all the way around for the BLM, UN Agenda 21 proponents, and Ken Salizar at the DoI who stated he was looking forward to the industrialization of the western states. 

Page 2 line 17:

(3) Attempts to resolve grazing conflicts with

18 other multiple uses often require extensive range de

19 velopments, intensive herd management, and contin

20 uous monitoring that greatly increases costs to both

21 permittees and lessees and taxpayers, far out of pro

22 portion to the benefit received.

Let me translate this little piece of legislative deception:

The only grazing conflicts are those that exist in areas where the DoI and BLM have created a conflict.  The intent to dispossess rightful land owners, to divest them of their right to water resources in favor of mining, drilling, and water contractors is the conflict central to the problem.  

The BLM and DoI have consistently shown that they are either incapable of managing the ranges efficiently, or intentionally unwilling to do so, although why anyone thought an agency should be in charge of these ranges rather than the people who live on them who know how to effectively manage them without interference from some bureaucrat is beyond me.  The continuous monitoring mentioned is simply a means to an end and is not done to protect the environment or water quality and supply.  It is only a system of harassment and intimidation used to make ranching and farming so costly, so burdened with arbitrary regulations, rules and non-positive code & title, that no one could possibly meet all the unlawful requirements much less remain financially viable while attempting to do so.  

The bill ends with this final statement:

Pages 7 & 8: 

(d) RELATION TO VALID EXISTING RIGHTS.—Noth

21 ing in this Act affects the allocation, ownership, interest,

22 or control, in existence on the date of the enactment of

23 this Act, of any water, water right, or any other valid ex

24 isting right held by theUnited States, Indian tribe, State,

8) 1  county, municipality or private individual, partnership or

2 corporation.

Did this put your mind at ease?  Did it make you think they weren’t really after your water rights? Really?  Here’s the real deal:

They don’t have to use this bill to come after  your water rights, the CLEAR Act which was never brought to vote in either house, was shipped over to the EPA for implementation by regulation.  This calls for the changing in language from “navigable waters” to “waters of America” with regards to regulation of water….an all-inclusive change in meaning that renders your water rights as moot.  The waters of America language is intended to seize control of all waters, from any source whatsoever, as owned and controlled by the Federal government.

To have included surrender of water rights, or any provision to surrender water rights in this UN inspired piece of legislation would have presented a conflict between federal corporations and agencies. Also, by including this little piece of deceptive language, it provides an air of legitimacy and concern while never admitting that your water rights are already under attack from another agency and you are going to lose them anyway if you haven’t already.  But that last paragraph gave a lot of you the warm fuzzies, didn’t it?

Re-wilding, non-human habitat and other phony environmental scams

According to Darol Dickinson of Texas Longhorn’s, an expert in independent beef production with more than 40 years of hands on experience with markets and cattle production, we do not produce enough beef to supply US markets right now.  Knowing this, why would we be forcing the export of beef to foreign markets?  And why in the world would we be decimating the beef industry when it is a mainstay of our diet and economy?  Wouldn’t the prudent thing to do be to encourage, support and protect this valuable food resource?

This bill H.R. 3432  is not about making rural areas economically viable.  It is about ending grazing permits on public land (that would be land that supposedly is owned by the public but which the government has decided belongs to them) and by extension forcing the movement of local populations into other areas and away from the rural areas as the cattle industry is forced into collapse.  This is right up the UN Agenda 21 alley.  

H.R. 3432 is not about revitalizing anything.  It is another piece of legislation that has been waiting for the right time to be introduced and is part of an incremental long term plan to end grazing on public lands, thereby reducing the number of producers who are not corporately, globally connected. Having driven the cattle producers into financial ruin, the DoI is now prepared to step forward and permanently retire grazing leases and this bill makes it clear that the intent is to end the practice of grazing leases altogether.   

This bill is an open attempt to begin land sequestering, removing it from public use and habitation as demanded under the UN Biodiversity non-human habitat map. 

UN Red Zones...Non human habitat

 When will the governors of these western states step forward and revoke the corporate charters and agreements with federal corporate agencies and return ownership and control of all lands inside the geographical boundaries of each state, to the state(s) and to the people, respectively?  For any contract to be valid, equal benefit and consideration must be given to all parties.  As the states must contract with the federal corporations in order for those federal agencies to gain access, and as it is apparent that there is no benefit to the state(s) to allow the contracts with BLM and DoI to continue, these contracts should and must be revoked.  The land claimed as owned or managed by federal agencies must be reclaimed by the state(s) under eminent domain as greater economic benefit to the state would ensue as a result.  

I believe it is time to force the departure of corporate federal agencies from inside the boundaries of each state.  Let them practice their crap inside the District of Criminals on CRAPital Hill.  Aside from a few other specific spots, that’s the only place they have any real authority anyway. 

_______________________________________________

To authorize voluntary grazing permit retirement on Federal lands managed by the Department of Agriculture or the Department of the Interior where livestock grazing is impractical, and for other purposes.

http://www.westernwatersheds.org/legislative-initiatives/REVA.pdf?utm_content=susanrudnicki%40gmail.com&utm_source=VerticalResponse&utm_medium=Email&utm_term=this%20legislation&utm_campaign=Public%20Land%20Livestock%20Grazing%20Buy-Out%20Legislation%20Introduced%20in%20Congresscontent

Advertisements