Oregon Situation

[mike rossi]

Another thread about this, but I don't care to read about the reasons some people think what is going on is good and American. I certainly don't want to debate about it either. 

 

But I did come across four news articles some may want to read. I think this shows how much resolve the bird-watching community has. Also, someone on here raised the issue of them blocking people from hunting, seems they might. 

 

 

http://thelapine.ca/79-year-old-bird-watcher-takes-down-oregon-militant-with-old-high-school-wrestling-move/

 

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2016/01/05/40-million-badss-birders-just-declared-war-on-oregon-terrorists/

 

 

http://www.breakingburgh.com/enraged-birders-to-retake-oregon-wildlife-refuge-in-dawn-offensive/

 

 

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2016/1/5/1466254/-Warning-from-the-Birding-Community-to-the-Terrorists-in-Oregon-We-re-Watching-You

 

 

[wildcat junkie]

Priceless that a 79 year old man took down one of these A$$HOLE PUNKS.

 

Maybe a hoard of unarmed birders would do the trick. Could you imagine the humiliation THAT would cause?

 

How could these Rambo wanabes dare open fire on unarmed people without bringing the entire country down on them?

 

These self proclaimed "Constitutional scholars" don't give a damned about anyone else rights!

Edited January 12, 2016 by wildcat junkie

[22Plinker]

I love that the FBI agent is quoted asking the elderly not to knock the militants on their asses

[Mr VJP]

Well, this is rather interesting........

 

"The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is showing they have no rules to follow and no regard for either animal or human life, in the video the BLM is burning the land around Prince Glenn, Oregon, and telling ranchers and farmers to stand down and if they attempt to stop the fire they will be arrested.

Meanwhile in the video, Oregon land owners, neighbors and citizens try to scramble to save their belongings and the life of their cattle. Folks can see these cows burned alive while the BLM federal workers start more fires in the background, including one while the film is rolling."

http://www.examiner.com/…/blm-burns-land-unsupervised-feds-…
-- Admin Robert Hase

 

[wildcat junkie]

 

Well, this is rather interesting........

 

"The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) is showing they have no rules to follow and no regard for either animal or human life, in the video the BLM is burning the land around Prince Glenn, Oregon, and telling ranchers and farmers to stand down and if they attempt to stop the fire they will be arrested.

Meanwhile in the video, Oregon land owners, neighbors and citizens try to scramble to save their belongings and the life of their cattle. Folks can see these cows burned alive while the BLM federal workers start more fires in the background, including one while the film is rolling."

http://www.examiner.com/…/blm-burns-land-unsupervised-feds-…

-- Admin Robert Hase

 

 

This is even more interesting. (this is PDF so you will have to download it) https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=1&ved=0ahUKEwjToun51aXKAhVHXBoKHbYNA7IQFggcMAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Flandrights.org%2For%2FHammond%2FFINAL-Decision-Hammond_Redacted.pdf&usg=AFQjCNE7dps22ySokA26tF9wkWFL8-5i-w&bvm=bv.111396085,d.dmo&cad=rja

 

Take the time to read through the testimony that spells out the conduct of the Hammonds that endangered the lives of hunters & guides in the area they set ablaze.( A; pages 5-7) On yet another occasion the endangered the lives of fire fighters.(B; pages 7-14)

 

Of particular interest are the threats made on August 24 2006 (page 14) to BLM officials where Steve Hammond threatened to blame BLM for setting the fires if BLM "didn't make the investigation go away".

 

Seems like they are making good on that threat with the videos Mr VJP posted above doesn't it?

 

If you ask me 5 years wasn't enough!

Edited January 13, 2016 by wildcat junkie

[diplomat019]

Good Read

 

http://www.trcp.org/media/press-release/sportsmen-mobilize-to-stop-transfer-and-sale-of-public-lands#.VpW1ADaufVp

Edited January 13, 2016 by diplomat019

[wildcat junkie]

Good Read

 

http://www.trcp.org/media/press-release/sportsmen-mobilize-to-stop-transfer-and-sale-of-public-lands#.VpW1ADaufVp

 

It amazes me how modern day hunters are brainwashed by the right, primarily the carbon fuel industry, to act against their own best interests.

 

We should be working WITH conservationists & environmentalists toward a common goal that benefits us all.

 

[Galliform]

Much of the birding community are great allies to conservation, and could be to hunters as well if approached correctly. There will always be some antis in the birding community, but we share more in common with birders and they with us than either 'side' tends to realize. I once attended a seminar for birders where some bird banders were doing a study on bird populations and nesting habits in different habitats (old growth, mid- successional, early successional forests, etc), and found universally in areas that are over-browsed by deer, bird numbers and nesting success plummets for all species that depend on understory growth. By the end, I think nearly everyone in the audience was pro-deer hunting!

 

Back on topic:

 

Audubon of Portland released this statement: http://audubonportland.org/news/audubon-society-of-portland-statement-on-the-occupation-of-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge

 

Mike Rossi, the ABA (American Birding Association) put this article out in response to the ones you posted above:

http://blog.aba.org/2016/01/birders-the-media-and-the-malheur-standoff.html

[Galliform]

Another article: http://www.outdoorlife.com/blogs/open-country/sportsmen-and-women-have-major-stake-oregon-refuge-standoff-led-bundy-family?src=SOC&dom=fb

[diplomat019]

Vjp. What would you say if the land was privatized and sold to companies who bulldozed the area and put up malls, factories, condos, etc and it was never hunted/fished again. That would be the free market at work. Wouldnt it?

[philoshop]

Vjp. What would you say if the land was privatized and sold to companies who bulldozed the area and put up malls, factories, condos, etc and it was never hunted/fished again. That would be the free market at work. Wouldnt it?

 

The Federal Government selling exploration rights to China for their solar or wind energy 'exploration' is fine.

The Federal Government selling it to someone in congress, who will in turn sell it to China, or somehow develop it for their own personal gain is fine.

But a private individual owning the land is somehow considered a threat. Got it.

[Uptown Redneck]

But a private individual owning the land is somehow considered a threat

Philoshop, as a hunter you should be the first to acknowledge that if privately held, access to what is now open land, would most likely be denied.

[diplomat019]

The Federal Government selling exploration rights to China for their solar or wind energy 'exploration' is fine.

The Federal Government selling it to someone in congress, who will in turn sell it to China, or somehow develop it for their own personal gain is fine.

But a private individual owning the land is somehow considered a threat. Got it.

i was looking at the situation thru the eyes of sportsmen.  if i owned a piece of that land there is probably a slim to none chance i would allow strangers to hunt it.  and that goes for the same if a business owned it.  as of now some peoples lively hood depends on that land.  guessing by your answer, id say you are for giving the land to individual owners.  yes?  do you think the people who ranch the land and run hunting/fishing guide services are in favor of that or in favor of keeping it federally run? 

[wildcat junkie]

The Federal Government selling exploration rights to China for their solar or wind energy 'exploration' is fine.

The Federal Government selling it to someone in congress, who will in turn sell it to China, or somehow develop it for their own personal gain is fine.

But a private individual owning the land is somehow considered a threat. Got it.

 

I would be willing to bet that IF the part about selling it to someone in congress is true, it is a "conservative"!

[Curmudgeon]

Much of the birding community are great allies to conservation, and could be to hunters as well if approached correctly. There will always be some antis in the birding community, but we share more in common with birders and they with us than either 'side' tends to realize. I once attended a seminar for birders where some bird banders were doing a study on bird populations and nesting habits in different habitats (old growth, mid- successional, early successional forests, etc), and found universally in areas that are over-browsed by deer, bird numbers and nesting success plummets for all species that depend on understory growth. By the end, I think nearly everyone in the audience was pro-deer hunting!

 

Back on topic:

 

Audubon of Portland released this statement: http://audubonportland.org/news/audubon-society-of-portland-statement-on-the-occupation-of-malheur-national-wildlife-refuge

 

Mike Rossi, the ABA (American Birding Association) put this article out in response to the ones you posted above:

http://blog.aba.org/2016/01/birders-the-media-and-the-malheur-standoff.html

 

I speak publicly to a lot of birding groups on eagle research and the use of non-lead ammunition, including a presentation at the NYS Museum as part of last fall's New York State Ornithological Assn. conference. I have never come come under any criticism from birders because I am a hunter. Most birders realize the impacts of deer on habitat. I believe they are more well informed on these matters than most hunters. I know a lot of both. 

 

Galli is right - birders can be hunter's allies. They do not understand the visceral hatred of competing species like coyotes, but neither do I.

 

Quote from one of Galli's posts:

"Imagine you are part owner of a world-class hunt club on the Pacific Flyway. One weekend, a group of men walks in, keeps your staff at bay with guns, tears down the fences, and declares you no longer have title to your land.

Fact is, you don’t have to imagine anything. That is exactly what is going on right now near Burns, Ore., at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge."

Edited January 13, 2016 by Curmudgeon

[philoshop]

I would be willing to bet that IF the part about selling it to someone in congress is true, it is a "conservative"!

 

Or maybe Harry Reid.

 

[wildcat junkie]

Or maybe Harry Reid.

 

 

Maybe or do you know this for a fact?

 

[philoshop]

It's supposed to be up to the individual States to determine how their land will be used according to the citizens of the respective States.

The People control the States, and the States control the Federal Government. I know that a lot of you are old enough to remember that basic premise, but the entire concept has been turned upside down.

And no, the People are not the Federal Government, and the government is not the people. This is the mantra of China, North Korea, and North Viet Nam.

[The_Field_Ager]

But a private individual owning the land is somehow considered a threat

Philoshop, as a hunter you should be the first to acknowledge that if privately held, access to what is now open land, would most likely be denied.

 

 

To people like you, perhaps. In my area the myth of private land closed to hunting is just that, a myth. People hunt their own patches with friends and family. That is the only difference. Plenty of Hunters around here too. By all accounts, state land was little visited by hunters this last season.

Edited January 13, 2016 by Papist

[diplomat019]

To people like you, perhaps. In my area the myth of private land closed to hunting is just that, a myth. People hunt their own patches with friends and family. That is the only difference. Plenty of Hunters around here too. By all accounts, state land was little visited by hunters this last season.

i think you're fortunate to have private land to hunt.  As am I.  i always say I'm spoiled to hunt private land, but I did grow up doing most of my hunting on public land.  I still use public land during small game.  I guess to those people who don't have private land to hunt, just tell them to not buy a license until they save up or make some friends with land i guess?  We as sportsmen paid for these lands with our own money.  Im glad we have them to hunt and fish.  

 

And I disagree with the "state land was little visited".   One of the main reasons people stay clear of public land is that there are too many hunters on it.  

[wildcat junkie]

Or maybe Harry Reid.

 

 

 

Maybe or do you know this for a fact?

 

 

 

It's supposed to be up to the individual States to determine how their land will be used according to the citizens of the respective States.

The People control the States, and the States control the Federal Government. I know that a lot of you are old enough to remember that basic premise, but the entire concept has been turned upside down.

And no, the People are not the Federal Government, and the government is not the people. This is the mantra of China, North Korea, and North Viet Nam.

So, you're dodging the question pertaining to your allegation about Harry Reid?

[22Plinker]

If people are NOT hunting state land... can someone tell that to the hunters in 7F? 

Edited January 14, 2016 by 22Plinker

[philoshop]

So, you're dodging the question pertaining to your allegation about Harry Reid?

 

I didn't see the question. I was either thinking or typing. My apologies.

This has to do with the Bundy Ranch incident, and is only pertinent as a sidebar in this discussion. The OP asked that it not be sidetracked.

[The_Field_Ager]

 And I disagree with the "state land was little visited".   One of the main reasons people stay clear of public land is that there are too many hunters on it.  

 

And yet we had numerous anecdotal accounts by people here, of empty parking lots on state lands, and few shots fired this last season.

[philoshop]

But a private individual owning the land is somehow considered a threat

Philoshop, as a hunter you should be the first to acknowledge that if privately held, access to what is now open land, would most likely be denied.

 

You've completely missed the point.

You assume that a privately held US enterprise will 'sell you out"  before the Federal Government will "sell you out".

Some of you folks have an inordinate amount of faith in the US Federal Government.