Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
With beef prices averaging almost $6.00 this year , we need cattle to be able to graze. With China and Japan importing more and more beef we will continue to have higher and higher costs for beef.
The federal government (Obama) bought up much cattle to keep beef prices high after a drought.. the government has their hands into everything. We the people are getting the shaft over and over.
The Fed's "own" the land because the land was not "owned" by anyone when a Territory became a State ..... that is not the case with the Red River that forms the border between Texas and Oklahoma. FED's also own land that they have purchased for Military installations of all sorts.
The Maps that are in the pdf files at the BLM website on this new "land grab" show clearly that the only BLM "land" is the river bed that they laid claim to in an Oil rights case in 1918.
"BLM officials believe they have a responsibility to manage land they believe is federal which includes an estimated 90,000 acres along 116 miles of the Red River."
Think about that for a minute - the FED's want to add 90,000 acres to the river bed (which is the only part they claim to "own") over a 116 miles stretch. It's the only part of the Red River they claim to "own".
This particular 'land grab' has to do with Oil and Gas Leases and Royalties. It's not like there is going to be any big "Stand Off" between Ranchers/Farmers and the FED's - they want what is UNDER the ground of that River Bed.
The Fed's "own" the land because the land was not "owned" by anyone when a Territory became a State ..... that is not the case with the Red River that forms the border between Texas and Oklahoma. FED's also own land that they have purchased for Military installations of all sorts.
The Maps that are in the pdf files at the BLM website on this new "land grab" show clearly that the only BLM "land" is the river bed that they laid claim to in an Oil rights case in 1918.
"BLM officials believe they have a responsibility to manage land they believe is federal which includes an estimated 90,000 acres along 116 miles of the Red River."
Think about that for a minute - the FED's want to add 90,000 acres to the river bed (which is the only part they claim to "own") over a 116 miles stretch. It's the only part of the Red River they claim to "own".
This particular 'land grab' has to do with Oil and Gas Leases and Royalties. It's not like there is going to be any big "Stand Off" between Ranchers/Farmers and the FED's - they want what is UNDER the ground of that River Bed.
My point is there is no reason for the Feds to own any land. All of our land is in a state and should be owned by people or the state, not the Feds.
My point is there is no reason for the Feds to own any land. All of our land is in a state and should be owned by people or the state, not the Feds.
Amen to this, they cant even get their **** straight with this country and they want to worry about land LOL... They need to worry about our god damn illegal immigration problems, career criminals, and guard our country.
My point is there is no reason for the Feds to own any land. All of our land is in a state and should be owned by people or the state, not the Feds.
I don't disagree with what you are saying - I was just explaining how it all happened.
These "territories" that became States had no Government and they did have a lot of land that wasn't owned by anyone ..... that land transferred to the Federal Government when they joined the USA.
Hard to go back in time and "change" all that. I'm just very grateful that is not the case with my State, which did not transfer any land to the Federal Government.
I don't disagree with what you are saying - I was just explaining how it all happened. These "territories" that became States had no Government and they did have a lot of land that wasn't owned by anyone ..... that land transferred to the Federal Government when they joined the USA.
Hard to go back in time and "change" all that. I'm just very grateful that is not the case with my State, which did not transfer any land to the Federal Government.
We are discussing the Red River here.
Texas was a nation before it became a state.
It seems that I read some information, some time back, concerning a law on the books stating that if land owned by the federal government was not producing anything to benefit the said state on an economic basis that the land had to be returned to the state. Seems like it also involved the percentage the government could own.
Is anyone familiar with a law on that regard?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
