BLM threatens Henderson Ranch in Texas for massive land grab

  24 Comments

The BLM is seizing rightfully owned and homesteaded property from people all over the country

By John Vibes

TEXAS (INTELLIHUB) —  This month, a federal agency called The Bureau of Land Management made news by attempting to take over a large area of land that was used and owned by a rural rancher in Nevada.  For now, the recent standoff in Nevada has come to a peaceful and successful end.  However, other cases of BLM land grabs can be seen across the country.

In one interview, the Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy explained that the BLM was systematically putting ranchers nationwide out of business by taking their land.  According to Cliven Bundy, he was taking a stand because he was one of the few left who actually had the chance.

“Years ago, I used to have 52 neighboring ranchers,” he said. “I’m the last man standing. How come? Because BLM regulated these people off the land and out of business.

Cases just like the Bundy’s can be seen all throughout the country.  At the Henderson Ranch near the border between Texas and Oklahoma, the BLM took 140 acres of legitimately homesteaded property from the Henderson family.  Additionally, the BLM seeks to use his case as precedent to seize land along a 116-mile stretch of the Red River, which separates Texas from Oklahoma.

“They’re wanting to take the boundaries that the courts placed here and extend those east and west to the forks of the river north of Vernon and east to the 98th Meridian which is about 20 miles east of us,Tommy Henderson told RFDTV.

“How can BLM come in and say, “Hey, this isn’t yours.” Even though it’s patented from the state, you’ve always paid taxes on it. Our family has paid taxes for over 100 years on this place. We’ve got a deed to it. But yet they walked in and said it wasn’t ours,” he added.

If the BLM gets their way, the government could seize 90,000 acres of property that is currently in use along the Red River.

“Originally, here the river was out there where it is now and it eroded and accreted up to here, and then it eroded and accreted back. Well, their interpretation is that it eroded up to here but avulsed back. So when you listen to them it is always erosion to the south because the property line follows it then, but it’s always avulsion when it goes north. So the boundary can move south but it can never move back north,” Henderson said.

Scott Carpenter, one of Henderson’s neighbors is in a similar position, and wants to help in the fight against the BLM.  His land is also under threat from the constant changing of borders along the river.

“We have numerous places that have been in our family for over a hundred of years, and you hate to see land that people’s worked hard for would lose. As producers we are always on a defense. We have to make decisions to try to help ourselves to help one another” Carpenter said.

(Photo: Wikimedia Commons)

Writer Bio:
(Photo: Intellihub.com)
John Vibes is an investigative journalist, staff writer and editor for Intellihub News, where this article originally appeared. He is also the author of a 65 chapter Book entitled “Alchemy of the Timeless Renaissance” and is an artist with an established record label. You can find him on his Facebook. Pick up your own copy of his book today at THIS LINK!
For media inquires, interviews, questions or suggestions for this author, email: vibes@intellihub.com or telephone: (347) 759-6075.
Read more articles by this author here.
*****

  • http://www.FUCKTHEGOV.com David

    To destroy Americas food supply.

  • oregonstu

    You aren’t doing yourself any favors by continuing to make the false assertion that the Bundys own this disputed land in Nevada, John. THEY don’t even claim to own that land. The 16,000 acres in question is land where they claim a grandfathered grazing “right”, because they grazed their cattle there prior to the passage of the Taylor Grazing Act in 1933. The Bundys claim that the State of Nevada owns this land, rather than the federal government, in which case they would be required to pay grazing fees to the state and observe their regulations. So stop saying the Bundys own this land, it is simply not true, and does serious damage to your credibility in general.

  • Banjo

    The BLM doesn’t own the land either! The Bundy’s owe nothing to them, they’ve been paying grazing fees to NEVADA, now the BLM wants to get their Grubby hands a piece of the pie, only it ain’t their pie!

  • William Ricardo Valbuena

    So anybody can have multiple rights such as forage, water, property and grazing rights, but when it comes to Federal government wanting to own more than 10 miles of a generic landscape, which is directly opposite to Article 1, section 8, clause 17 of the constitution, it’s ok, because there’s money involved.

  • Magda Helberg

    The same happens here in South Africa…there is no future for us here :(

  • oregonstu

    The case in Texas looks quite different, and I agree this is a land grab. Entirely different situation in Nevada, and that is what I was referring to.

  • Chris

    I think these people should be gunned down the moment they step onto private property with intention to seize land belonging to people who have the DEED to the land going back over 100 years… BLM is nothing more than an arm of the second coming of what the British rule was 240 years ago. Obama and company are turing us into USSR part 2 with the face of a king O the 1st.

    I hope thousands of militia stand their ground and if needed use their 2nd Amendment protections to enforce that a land grab here isn’t going to work. Then if need be Burry the BLM along the river shore.

  • Eagle2758

    Guess you never heard of Prescriptive Rights,eh. The BLM thugs also didn’t have to kill his cattle. What part of jack-boot thugs do you not understand,eh. This is a intentional jack-boot intimidation scheme. How about we send them to your house,eh, see what you do,eh.

  • Eagle2758

    How about we send BLM jack-boots to your house,eh.

  • oregonstu

    True enough, the Western Shoshone Nation owns the land. But Spain claimed it for their King fair and square, and Mexico got took it when they won their independence. The US government stole it fair and square from Mexico, and the Nevada state constitution stipulates that it belongs to the federal government.

    I’m no fan of the federal fascist corporate government, that’s for damn sure. But the land doesn’t belong to the Bundy family, and they don’t even pretend they own it.

  • oregonstu

    It’s a jack booted corporate government scheme to drum up militia support for privatization of public assets of all types, and/or to provide cover for a bit of agent provocateur action from their goons that have infiltrated the militia movement, which will be their pretext to impose martial law and round all of us up. Any militia boyz that think they are going to prevail against the national security police state are dreaming. They have you all infiltrated up the wazoo, and are monitoring every frickin word you utter. They know your plans before you do, because your plans are THEIR plans.

  • Banjo

    That’s funny, the government has also been infiltrated up the wazoo!
    First, IF a national martial law situation were to take place and God forbid there was a conflict and illegal(unconstitutional) orders were given, most of the military(excluding a few high-ranking career officers and some cool-aid drinkers) would side with the people(the Constitution) not the government! Sorry

  • David

    first of all: Bundy owns about 160 acres. The other 600,000 acres he USES is not his property. It belongs to you and me…and is administered by the BLM. They charge grazing fees on it. Those fees were established most recently by Ronald Reagan in 1986 by executive order. Bundy has not paid for those grazing rights he’s using. He now owes, with judgements and court orders against him, about $1.3 million. If he does not comply with the lawful orders, his cattle will be taken and sold, and probably his property to pay what he owes. If he doesn’t comply, he will also owe the approximate $1 million for the process of collecting his debt (and the use of law enforcement if that is necessary). The guy is a thief and a criminal. But I will say this for him. He is a completely CONSISTENT thief. And has been stealing from you and me for longer than two decades. He’s a con artist and his case has NOTHING to do with the case in Texas.

  • ArmyAviator

    WHO in Washington, ordered the BLM to send in the goon squad on Cliven Bundy’s land? WHO in Washington, has ordered the seizure of 90,000 Acres of PRIVATELY OWNED property in Texas? WHO? Is the Washington Bureaucrat such a COWARD that he/she is not PROUD of their actions? WHO is accountable for ALL of the illegal, extra-constitutional actions that the 0bama regime’s minions and useful idiots are undertaking?

  • ArmyAviator

    There is absolutely NOTHING in the US Constitution that provides for the federal government to own land….anywhere! So-called federal lands belong to the STATES where that land lies.

  • oregonstu

    Of course the government has been “infiltrated” up the wazoo, and now THEY are the infiltrators. I wouldn’t be so sanguine about most of the military siding with the people. For one thing, what ever pretext they use as a trigger, they will probably have a cover that they are rounding people up for their own protection, and/or going after “bad guys”. A big part of the problem is they are monitoring everyone so thoroughly, there is just about no way in hell for anyone to make plans without them knowing all about it. Do you imagine they don’t have all of the active duty military personnel completely monitored, or that they don’t already know who they can count on to follow their orders and who they know will disobey them in that circumstance? They will isolate and/or detain the troublesome ones, or will know to keep them away from these situations, unfortunately.

  • oregonstu

    Tell that to the state of Nevada. The Nevada constitution asserts that the land in question is federal land. How do you make a state claim ownership of land when they repudiate it? As I point out above, the land actually belongs to the Western Shoshone, but there isn’t any point in them raising a militia to try to tell that to the feds, is there?

    In any case, as I keep saying, I’m responding to the assertion in this article that the land belongs to the Bundy family, not the state of Nevada. It does NOT belong to the Bundys, and even THEY do not make that claim – so why is this guy saying that?

  • ArmyAviator

    The Nevada State Constitution does not trump the US Constitution. Accordingly, ther is NO PROVISION in the US Constitution that allows the federal government to own any land…Period! So, it matters not that the state has, as you claim, repudiated ownership. The land remains inside the boundaries of Nevada and is state land, unless deeded or titled to an individual owner. It makes no difference if you believe it or not, but Constitutional Law makes NO PROVISION for federal ownership of land. That the feds have claimed ownership for time immemorial, makes no difference. But then, why would anyone want to obey the Constitution? It apparently is meaningless to you.

  • Banjo

    That may very well be the truth, but I still believe the ratio of good (ones who take their oaths serious) to bad individuals in government and the military is high. IF orders started coming down, the ones executing those orders will start to refuse. The ones giving those orders (self-serving career officers and lower ranking ass kissers – both oath-breaking) will be outnumbered and as they are discovered, they will be dismissed/relieved of duty and detained. I only hope your stated level of infiltration (really an infestation) is too high!

  • oregonstu

    Tell that to the supreme court, I’m sure you will get a sympathetic response. I have two main points here, I’ll just keep repeating them in the faint hope they will penetrate. 1) the author states that the BUNDY family owns the land, right? And we ALL agree this assertion is wrong, right? Even the goddamned Bundys agree on that point.

    2) Whether you believe the land belongs to the Western Shoshone, the state of Nevada, or the Supreme Council of the Galactic Federation, the fact remains that both the state of Nevada and the federal government are under the illusion that the land belongs to the US government, right?

    We can talk until we are blue in the face about this, but is doesn’t change this last fact. And any number of armed militia boys showing up to “support” the millionaire Bundy family that don’t even claim to own this land will not change that reality, whether we like it or not. In fact, they will do nothing but play into the hands of the corporate state and the powerful interests that have stolen our government from us.

  • ArmyAviator

    I think that the only thing you have said in this exchange is the validity of the ownership. If the State of Nevada makes no claim to the land in question, and as I’ve said, the US Government has no Constitutional authority to claim the land I would support the notion that the Western Shoshone (if they are the appropriate Tribe) have every right to claim ownership of the land. I’d MUCH rather see the Shoshone have ownership of their ancestral lands, than the Feds. Good night.

  • oregonstu

    I’ve only said the validity of the ownership? Care to translate that? Please reread. The author of this article says the Bundy family owns the land. Even they do not say this.

    The question of whether or not the US constitution says that the federal government can “own” this land is, unfortunately, irrelevant – because the Supreme court “interprets” the constitution, and these bastards have allowed an entire litany of grossly unconstitutional acts by the US government to stand. There are far better reasons to get bent out of shape over than this.

  • oregonstu

    Banjo, have you been reading the details of the programs they are using to monitor us? Do you understand how long they have been at this, and how they have been using the psychological insights they gain from decades of experiments and studies? They know things about every one of us that we don’t know about ourselves. Unfortunately, the decent members of the military, the “oath keeper” types, are certainly already known to them. Don’t you realize they will have double agents there also, and will be monitoring them all very carefully?

    I assure you, these people are sick and evil, but they are not stupid. When the time comes, they will know where and how to put excruciating pressure on any potential “trouble makers” within the military to make them follow orders, or simply isolate or detain them before they can make any trouble. These guys are utterly ruthless, and leave no base uncovered.

    One example of how they monitor people is through their cell phone mics. Did you know they can eavesdrop on conversations even when the phones are turned off? http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2006/12/can_you_hear_me/ This isn’t limited to cell phones, it includes any device with a mic that is hooked to the internet, including computers and most new cars, wide screen TVs and a number of newer household appliances. In the military, the bugging is no doubt far more invasive.

    Did you know they can even tell who all the participants are when they bug conversations like that? Yup, they have us all voice printed now too. http://www.allgov.com/news/top-stories/governments-begin-to-build-voice-print-databases-121006?news=845876

    They are analyzing all of this information on a completely automated basis, using massive banks of supercomputers running programs that convert human languages to text and then “read”, summarize, and analyze it, kicking any flagged data out to a human agent. This is how they are able to monitor such an incredible volume of information, it is all automated. http://epic.org/privacy/profiling/tia/may03_report.pdf

  • oregonstu

    Ahem, naval gaziator… the Bundy’s do not even claim to own the land. How is this now “private land”?