Thank you Pam for filling in those salient details about the Hammonds. They
are not the downtrodden innocents that some portray them as.
On Jan 24, 2016 4:26 PM, "Pam & Mark Keller" <pam.mark.keller@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Thank you, Treesa, for posting the great summary from HCN on the
Hammonds. It gives the flavor in an objective way. From personal
knowledge, I would add that they repeatedly abused BLM employees verbally
and threatened some at gun point. They prevented BLM firefighters from
crossing their land even if those were the only escape routes. The 2006
fire not only endangered young BLM firefighters, but we believe the
*intent *was to endanger. These charges could not be prosecuted, but I
want to emphasize that their minimum sentence was a *plea bargain*. In
other words they opted for a lesser sentence in order to avoid further
prosecution. They should either serve that sentence or go back to trial
(and I don't mean Bundy's secret "citizen court").
Pam Keller
On Sun, Jan 24, 2016 at 3:45 PM, Treesa Hertzel <autumn207@xxxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
Dave,
I am not educated on the subject, and don't pretend to be. But I have
been attempting to self-educate quickly by reading everything I can on the
issues surrounding the occupation, which range from cattle grazing rights
to arson and now wanting to take the entire refuge away from the federal
government.
Many press items I have read, such as the one below from *High Country
News*, mention that the origin of this conflict was an issue of cattle
grazing rights. Having read that over and over again, I thought it would be
interesting - albeit slow-acting - to see how reducing the number of cattle
(via a beef boycott) might affect conflicts over cattle-grazing rights.
That is all. It's an interesting idea.
I have no problem agreeing with you that boycotting beef is probably not
a solution to the current situation.
Treesa
*The dispute between the Hammonds *and the federal government dates back
decades. *HCN* reported in 1994 that Dwight Hammond, now 73, had made
death threats against managers of the refuge in 1986, ’88 and ’91. He had
also allegedly repeatedly violated a special permit that allowed him to
move his cows across the refuge only at specific times. Hammond was briefly
jailed in 1994 for "disturbing and interfering with" federal officials and
then released after two nights in jail. Afterwards, nearly 500 ranchers
apparently rallied in Burns to support the Hammonds in their ongoing
dispute.
The more recent fight is over two fires in 2001 and 2006. According to a
family member’s testimony that is central to prosecutors’ arguments, in
2001, Dwight Hammond led family members in setting a blaze that burned 139
acres of public land in order to destroy evidence of an illegal deer hunt.
Hammond argued that the fire was meant to beat back invasive juniper that
interfered with his cattle operation. Hammond lit the 2006 fire as a
back-burn to lightning-caused fires, in order to protect his cattle and
land. That backfire endangered the lives of BLM firefighters, according to
Acting U.S. Attorney Billy Williams.
On Jan 24, 2016, at 3:29 PM, David Irons <llsdirons@xxxxxxx> wrote:
Treesa,
May I respectfully suggest that a beef boycott doesn't necessarily fix
anything here. This conflict is not about cattle ranching or logging for
that matter (not a lot of harvest ready timber on the refuge). In our
collective consciousness, cattle ranching and logging have been
romanticized as emblematic of a time and a place populated by rugged
individualists (the Marlboro Man if you will). Trumpeting a need for a
return to this type of "freedom" is designed to recruit support because it
plays well in Peoria as the antithesis of Big Government Overreach.
Take a look at how the Bundy brothers and the various Malheur occupants
have made their livings or in many cases failed to make a living. NONE of
them are ranchers. In fact, I believe that these guys–generally uneducated,
disgruntled failing at life types–are mostly pawns in a much bigger, much
more well-funded power play led by forces who want to get their hands on
these lands for the purposes of resource extraction. Harney County and much
of the American West is already at, or perhaps beyond its carrying capacity
for grazing bovines. There just isn't that much more money to be made from
cattle ranching. As for the opportunity to squeeze out more money from
logging, that timber went through the mill a long time ago. The big lumber
mills are now mothballed or they have been retooled to turn toothpick-sized
timber into veneer and paper products.
Are the Bundys or anyone else going put their necks on the chopping block
in hopes of squeezing a few hundred more head of cattle onto the the Harney
County landscape, or to open or re-open one more modest-sized mill in
Hines/Burns that employees a hundred or so locals? I doubt it. This is a
power play with big $$$$ at stake. They, or whoever is underwriting this
little insurrection, want a shot at mining and drilling rights that come
into play once the land is in private hands.
The notion that the local economy can be rebuilt or bolstered with an
expansion of cattle ranching or logging is at the very least wishful
thinking and probably a bit closer to ludicrous.
Dave Irons
Portland, OR
Subject: [boo] Re: Pressure from all sidesNetflix streaming, I've been thinking a lot about the cattle problem as it
From: Autumn207@xxxxxxxxxxx
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 2016 12:57:37 -0800
To: boo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
I like this a lot. GREAT idea. Having just watched "Cowspiracy" on
relates to the Malheur situation.
regarding all the federal land where cattle roam and cause destruction.
On Jan 24, 2016, at 12:50 PM, suzy <st.murphy@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
I suggest we promote a boycott on beef as a way to show our concerns
Maybe it should be on the pledge age. Could have more impact than we
imagine if like minded people around the country make it known the power we
can use for change.
Have a love filled day!POST: Send email to boo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
HELP: Contact boo-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
POST: Send email to boo@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
HELP: Contact boo-moderators@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
