Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 52

Thread: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

  1. #21
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by Verax View Post
    It's apparent the OP link absolutely massacred the story it links to. Even then it is still unclear what this 90,000 acre number is supposed to apply to. The river is not 2,475 miles long and is not moving 100 yards.

    If you do the math with the 140 lost acres it works out to about ~10 feet lost down a 116 mile stretch which makes sense in the rancher's case.

    Absolutely terrible OP article, should be shot to death and cremated.
    The 90,000 acre figure is explained in the text.

    What part of having 140 acres seized without compensation do you find justifiable?

  2. #22
    King of Videos
    dirtpoorchris's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    WA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:24 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    7,005

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Wtf? Land is land. Water is water. He shouldnt be allowed to restrict the water but the parameters shoudl be the same regardless. Even if the river is right on the middle point.
    I'm Finding it Harder to be a Gentleman, White Stripes ~ "You think I care about me and only me. When every girl needs help climbing up a tree."

  3. #23
    Assassin
    Verax's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    9,414

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    The 90,000 acre figure is explained in the text.

    What part of having 140 acres seized without compensation do you find justifiable?
    No it does not explain what 90,000 acres are going to be taken. All it says is the BLM is going to seize it along the new border but it doesn't elaborate exactly what. The math doesn't make sense if they were to only take the newly eroded land, they would have to be taking 1,000 or 2,000 feet beyond that, which again makes no sense.

    I never said taking 140 acres was justified, only that the original OP article is complete crap and misrepresents the story entirely. The article should have plainly stated they are attempting to steal 140 acres from this guy through a natural process that short changes the rancher because of the rules or misapplication of the rules.

  4. #24
    Phonetic Mnemonic
    radcen's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Look to your right... I'm that guy.
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:50 AM
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    33,398

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    If they "never owned it" then they should get a full refund for all taxes paid. At the least.

    Won't happen, of course, but it should.
    If you claim sexual harassment to be wrong, yet you defend anyone on your side for any reason,
    then you are a hypocrite and everything you say on the matter is just babble.

  5. #25
    Global Moderator
    The Hammer of Chaos
    Goshin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Dixie
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:40 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    44,157

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by NIMBY View Post
    Your right-wing militia with female shields should be arriving soon .

    Moderator's Warning:
    BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch NIMBY, knock off the irrelevant baiting remarks.

    Fiddling While Rome Burns
    ISIS: Carthago Delenda Est
    "I used to roll the dice; see the fear in my enemies' eyes... listen as the crowd would sing, 'now the old king is dead, Long Live the King.'.."

  6. #26
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    okla-freakin-homa
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:09 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Progressive
    Posts
    12,619

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by Bigfoot 88 View Post
    BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch Does this agency have nothing better to do than ruin peoples lives?
    It is 119,000 acres in the local papers. It is also the Red River Bottom, notorious for being fought over by Oklahoma and Texas with each new flood. I live within spitting distance of the Red River, that sandy bottom is pretty rough and very salty, little grows there with any consistency. I was a bit amazed any one ranch used so much of it.

    I'll let you 1/4 acre suburban types in on a little something... this crap goes on all the time, that it is now the focus of the hair on fire crowd is laughable.

    If you had a clue just how crappy the border is defined along the Red River you damn sure wouldn't build a home there...

  7. #27
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 12:54 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,336

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by clownboy View Post
    Thanks. That bad in this case, but such a small percentage of his land it's hard to get worked up over. I do think the feds owe him for the land and/or should give allow a free grandfathered lease for the remainder of his days.
    You are being satirical, right? I would get worked up over somebody stealing 140 acres of my land, whether I owned 140 acres or 140,000.

    Unless the feds are claiming a valid public interest, in which case eminent domain applies, the feds have no valid reason to harass this rancher, or steal his land.
    Last edited by jimbo; 04-19-14 at 09:02 PM.

  8. #28
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,880

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Click the lick which is assigned to his name in the article. The information at that link is a bit clearer. BLM already seized 140 acres of his land and didn't compensate him. They're intending to seize 90,000 acres along the river but that land is not only his, other ranchers will be affected by that proposed seizure. It's not clear how much more of his land they're going to take from him.

    I don't see why he can't retain title to the land if the river shifts its course. The land would now be in Oklahoma and should simply be registered in the OK land registry.

    The law seems to be pretending that a river shifting its course somehow erases title to the land which now finds itself on the wrong side of the border and so that land is free for the BLM to grab. That seems kind of insane to me.
    Here is a video clip that explains (see 1:21-2:27): Meet Tommy Henderson. The BLM took 140 acres and what they paid him is absurd! | Young Conservatives

  9. #29
    Sage
    RiverDad's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-14 @ 02:16 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    5,039

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by nota bene View Post
    Isn't that the most stupid BLM justification imaginable? When the river moves south it eroded but when it moved back it was via avulsion and so the border didn't change. Oh brother.

  10. #30
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    36,880

    Re: BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch

    Quote Originally Posted by RiverDad View Post
    Isn't that the most stupid BLM justification imaginable? When the river moves south it eroded but when it moved back it was via avulsion and so the border didn't change. Oh brother.
    Quite a miracle of science, yes?

Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •