Hammond Family and Feds Abuse of Power

Posted: January 4, 2016 by gamegetterII in Uncategorized

From all I’ve read about this situation,the Hammond family does not want help from the militia,Ammon Bundy,or anyone else.
That is from a letter released by their attorney.
Ammon Bundy,and everyone else can not “win” this one,if the Hammonds had asked for help,then it would be a different story.
Since the Hammonds have announced-again,through their attorney-that they plan to surrender themselves to the feds tomorrow morning,Bundy and co. can not “win” unless they physically prevent the Hammonds from surrendering,that’s a scenario the Hammonds do not want to occur.

The Hammonds never set a fire to burn grazing lands adjacent to their own land,they set a fire as a “back burn” to get rid of invasive juniper trees,and another to stop a lightning caused brushfire.

Background on the Hammonds,and fires they were charged with lighting-with the feds charging them as “terroists” by using an anti-terrorism law…

“The fires

The first, in 2001, was a planned burn on Hammonds’ own property to reduce juniper trees that have become invasive in that part of the country. That fire burned outside the Hammonds’ private property line and took in 138 acres of unfenced BLM land before the Hammonds got it put out. No BLM firefighters were needed to help extinguish the fire and no fences were damaged.

Dwight’s wife Susan shared some crucial details in an exclusive interview with TSLN.

“They called and got permission to light the fire,” she said, adding that was customary for ranchers conducting range management burns – a common practice in the area.

“We usually called the interagency fire outfit – a main dispatch – to be sure someone wasn’t in the way or that weather would be a problem.” Susan said her son Steven was told that the BLM was conducting a burn of their own somewhere in the region that very same day, but that they believed there would be no problem with the Hammonds going ahead with their planned fire. The court transcript includes the same information in a recording from that phone conversation.”

In cross-examination of a prosecution witness, the court transcript also includes admission from Mr. Ward, a range conservationist that the 2001 fire improved the rangeland conditions on BLM.

Maupin, a former range technician and watershed specialist who resigned from the BLM in 1999, said that collaborative burns between private ranchers and the BLM had become popular in the late 1990s because local university extension researchers were recommending it as a means to manage invasive juniper that steal water from grass and other cover.

“Juniper encroachment had become an issue on the forefront and was starting to come to a head. We were trying to figure out how to deal with it on a large scale,” said the woman whose family also neighbored the Hammonds for a couple of years.

“In 1999, the BLM started to try to do large scale burn projects. We started to be successful on the Steens Mountain especially when we started to do it on a large watershed scale as opposed to trying to follow property lines.”

Because private and federal land is intermingled, collaborative burns were much more effective than individual burns that would cover a smaller area, Maupin said.”

Because private and federal land is intermingled, collaborative burns were much more effective than individual burns that would cover a smaller area, Maupin said.

Susan said the second fire, in 2006, was a backfire started by Steven to protect their property from lightening fires.

“There was fire all around them that was going to burn our house and all of our trees and everything. The opportunity to set a back-fire was there and it was very successful. It saved a bunch of land from burning,” she remembers.

The BLM asserts that one acre of federal land was burned by the Hammonds’ backfire and Susan says determining which fire burned which land is “a joke” because fire burned from every direction.

Neighbor Ruthie Danielson also remembers that evening and agrees. “Lightening strikes were everywhere, fires were going off,” she said.

Maupin said prescribed burns to manage juniper were common in the late 1990s and early 2000s, best done late in the fall when the days are cooler.”

“Prescribed burns on federal land in their area have all but stopped due to pressure from “special interest groups,” Maupin said. As a result, wildfires now burn much hotter due to a “ladder” of material on the ground – grass, brush and trees.”

“The fires now burn really hot and they sterilize the ground. Then you have a weed patch that comes back.”

More to the story?

“During her tenure with as a full time BLM employee from 1997-1999, Maupin recalls other fires accidentally spilling over onto BLM land, but only the Hammonds have been charged, arrested and sentenced, she said. Ranchers might be burning invasive species or maybe weeds in the ditch. “They would call and the BLM would go and help put it out and it was not big deal.””

The above excerpts-the part in quotation marks-starting at the fires,and ending above are from an article here

Special interest groups= enviro-nazis

There is no doubt that the feds abused their power in this case,nor is there any doubt that enviro-nazi groups had something to do with the BLM plan to force the Hammonds to sell their ranch.
This whole case reeks of crooked .gov inc. employees bowing to the demands of the environmental extremists-just like the Bundy ranch fiasco was due to a supposedly “endangered” desert tortoise.
The enviro-nazis filed multiple lawsuits in Commiefornia,now farmers in the Sacramento-San Joaquin river delta can not draw irrigation water from the river due to the presence of an “endangered”  3″ fish-the delta smelt.
Another 3″ fish-the Santa Ana sucker and it’s being “endangered” has led to over a million people being prevented from drawing residential drinking water from an existing reservoir.

The only “extremists” involved in this clusterfuck are the environmental groups who continually file lawsuits abusing the endangered species act to force ranchers off of BLM and state grazing lands,lumber companies off of USFS land,hunters off of USFS lands,oil companies off of BLM,USFS,and state owned lands.

They also file lawsuits to prevent hunting,any use of off road vehicles,like dirt bikes,ATV’s/4 wheelers,and in many cases,to ban all use of these PUBLIC lands for anything other than hiking and taking pictures.

The large tracts of BLM lands west of the Mississippi river were set up to be grazing lands as a solution to the range wars and the cattle barons forcing small ranchers out of business by denying grazing land and/or water rights to them.

The system of national forests were intended to be a public resource,and to allow for the harvest of timber,and extraction of underground resources.

The enviro-nazis want all human activity banned on all public lands-except for hiking and taking pictures/videos.

One of the biggest offenders in the environmental movement is The Center for Biological Diversity.

Here’s their BS on the delta smelt,and the Santa Ana sucker…

Delta smelt

Santa Ana sucker

The BLM and USFS have been fully infiltrated by the environmental extremists and these people are the ones forcing all these anti-ranching,anti-hunting,anti off road vehicle use,anti-public access for launching boats or fishing by wading and casting,anti-all use of PUBLIC lands by the public.

These groups,and their members in fed agencies are forcing ranchers off of BLM lands that were created for grazing cattle,they have forced timber companies off of national forest lands,their policies are what is creating larger and hotter burning forest fires.

Until these enviro-whackos got jobs with the forest service and/or BLM,people were allowed to remove dead and downed trees for firewood.

Now all the dead wood is left on the ground,and fires that used be easily contained now burn out of control.

What the Hammonds were doing is done by every rancher in the U.S. with the possible exception of a few wealthy enviro whackjobs that own small hobby ranches.

When there are brushfires heading toward your grazing lands,you set a fire so that it creates an area with nothing to burn,and the brushfire stops there.

Fires set to backburn leave the grazing land in better shape than it was prior to the fire,as all the small trees and invasive non-edible by cattle and horses plants are removed,and healthy grassland grows in the area that was backburned.

There’s no way that the Hammonds setting fires to backburn areas so that their good grazing land was protected from brushfires is simply not a “crime” that rises to the level of a felony that requires a minimum prison term in federal prison.

Even former BLM employees admit that backburning is done by almost everyone in the area of the Hammond’s ranch.

None of the others who set backburn fires were arrested and charged with a crime.

The Hammonds were charged because the “special interest groups” want the Hammond’s land to be a part of their protected area for whatever endangered species they are filing lawsuits over this week.

The fires the Hammonds set IMPROVED the grazing land,it in no way harmed it-so where’s the crime?

The BLM,USFS,and every other .gov inc. agency that has anything to do with public lands are supposed to manage public lands-for ALL of the public’s use,which includes ranching,farming,hunting,trapping,logging,oil and gas drilling,mining,and any other resource extraction.

The public leases land from the BLM or the USFS if they want to graze cattle and/or horses,harvest timber,drill for oil and gas,or operate a mine.

I’m not sure about the government being legally-under the Constitution-able to collect fees from the public for using the land.

I am sure that the Hammonds are the victims of “special interest groups”getting their claws on their land.

The end result will be the Hammond’s land becoming part of some kind of “wildlife preserve”-it won’t be a part of the national Wildlife Refuge system-as some hunting is allowed on many of the refuges.

Ask yourself this-why hasn’t any other rancher in the area been arrested and charged with a crime for backburning their own property?

Since backburning creates healthier grazing land-exactly what is it that the  Hammonds are guilty of?

Some sources are reporting that the Hammonds were involved in deer poaching-if so,why isn’t the USFWS involved? Or the state fish and game agency?

From what I can tell,the only thing the Hammonds are guilty of is owning land that a special interest group and/or BLM and/or USFS wants for other uses.





Do more PT!



Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s