DIAMOND BAR CATTLE COMPANY

Rancher Accused Of Assault Denied Bond

A judge has again denied bond for a southern New Mexico rancher accused of assaulting federal officers who were helping to remove his cattle from public lands.

Kit Laney, 43, was arrested March 14 and charged with assault on a peace officer, obstruction of a court order and intimidation.

He was accused of trying to trample federal officers with his horse and trying to release some of his livestock.

Public defender Jane Greek for Laney had asked U.S. Magistrate Karen Molzen to release Laney to the custody of an Otero County man under the conditions that Laney wear an electronic monitor.

Federal prosecutors asked that bail be denied at least until all of the cattle are rounded up.

Last Tuesday, a judge denied bond for the rancher.

Greek says she will appeal the judge's decision to deny bail.


Catron commissioners jump into Laney dispute

Dana L. Bowley El Defensor Chieftain Editor

The Catron County Commission has weighed in on the Diamond Bar Ranch case on the side of owners Kit and Sherry Laney, charging that environmental groups are controlling the U.S. Forest Service and "slowly destroying our public lands."

In related developments: Clint Wellborn, District Attorney for the 7th Judicial District, has complained that to gain public support the Forest Service "intentionally misrepresented" a letter he sent to Catron County Sheriff Cliff Snyder about an aspect of the case; and Sherry Laney has asked the couple's supporters to "keep their protests and attitudes peaceful."

The Laneys and the Forest Service are involved in a decade-old dispute over grazing on the 146,000-acre Diamond Bar in the Gila and Aldo Leopold wilderness areas of southern Catron County. The Laneys claim ownership of the land and water rights based on claims of title dating to the late 1880s, before the Forest Service existed. The Forest Service claims the land and water rights belong to the government, and the Laneys need a permit to graze their cattle on the allotment — permits the Forest Service has denied them since 1996. Several court rulings have backed the Forest Service, but the Laneys have refused to remove their cattle from the land.

Two weeks ago, working under court order, the Forest Service started moving personnel onto the land to begin rounding up and confiscating the cattle. The Laneys had vowed not to interfere with the roundup or the Forest Service actions, instead continuing to press their claims in court. But on March 14, Kit Laney was arrested by Forest Service law enforcement officers after he allegedly charged them on horseback, hitting at least one worker and causing damage to the temporary holding pen.

Laney said he was responding to reports the cattle were being mistreated and wanted to check on their condition. He denied assaulting anyone. As of Monday, Laney remained in jail in Las Cruces, facing several charges.

The round up is expected to be completed this week.

The Catron commission's position was outlined in a press release issued Monday and authorized by all three commissioners. It is the first time commissioners have taken a public stance on the case.

In the release, the commission charged that the Forest Service had reneged on promises and written agreements with the Laneys, who, it said, had invested their life savings, inheritance and lives on a ranch that was largely dependent on the Forest Service grazing permit.

The release said the Forest Service reneged because of pressure from environmental groups.

The release quotes District 1 Commissioner Rufus Choate as saying, "For the past 20 years, the U.S. Forest Service has been held hostage by extreme environmental groups in the name of protection of the environment, whereas ranchers are the actual stewards of the land and have been for generations. These groups who claim to be champions of the environment are slowly destroying our public lands."

The release said more than 200,000 acres in the county have been destroyed by catastrophic wildfires, those with temperatures of 2,000 degrees and above, because environmental groups' lawsuits have prevent forest restoration projects.

It also claims that in the past 10 years, county ranchers have lost grazing rights for more than 25,000 head of cattle, costing the county more than $1 million a year in revenues.

"Environmentalists are trying to make our public lands one use only — their use," Commission Chairman Ed Wehrheim is quoted as saying. "The Catron County Commission feels that the Laneys and other Catron County ranchers are victims of this power struggle between environmental groups and the American public that has the right to use these lands.

"We are the true environmentalist's here," Wehrheim said. "We are here to protect the environment now and for generations to come."

The release said Catron County intends to take every legal means possible to defend multiple use of public land.

Meanwhile, in a strongly worded four-page letter to Forest Service Supervisor Marcia Andre in Silver City, Wellborn said he is "frustrated" that the Forest Service continues to portray the Feb. 5 letter he wrote to Snyder as "an opinion of the District Attorney."

Snyder had asked Wellborn, whose district includes Catron County, questions about the confiscation of the cattle and responsibility for enforcing state Livestock Board regulations regarding the inspection of cattle and brands before the cattle could be moved out of the county.

In his response, Wellborn told Snyder that the gathering of the cattle appeared to be being conducted pursuant to a valid federal court order. He also said the Attorney General's Office told him the Livestock Board was working with the Forest Service to assure compliance with the state cattle-inspection laws.

In that letter, Wellborn also cautioned Snyder against interfering with the execution of the court order because it could expose him to possible arrest by federal marshals.

In his letter to the Forest Service, dated March 11, Wellborn complained that the agency, without his permission or knowledge, was characterizing the Snyder letter as a formal opinion supporting the legality of the court order and Forest Service action, and had even posted it on the Forest Service Web site. He said the way the agency has portrayed the "opinion," it has implied he has reviewed the matter and consulted with the Forest Service.

Among his complaints to the agency, Wellborn said opinions by district attorneys do not carry any authority, such as one by an attorney general might, and that in any case he was not offering an opinion on the merits or legality of the case against the Laneys, only that the court order appeared to have been lawfully issued. Further, he said, the purpose of the letter to Snyder was to address the question of inspection of livestock, and was not intended as an opinion on any legal issues related to the case.

The Forest Service's use of the letter to Snyder, Wellborn wrote, was done "without my knowledge or consent. It is my belief that the Forest Service has intentionally misrepresented the nature and purpose of my letter in an effort to gain public support and justify their actions."

Wellborn went on to say that while he still would not comment on the merits of the case, "Since the Forest Service is interested in my official 'opinion,' I felt it necessary to clarify my position." He then proceeds to offer his opinions on the issues related to the inspection and transportation of the Laney cattle. Among them:

-- The Forest Service must obey New Mexico law regarding seizure, inspection and transportation of the cattle. That law includes inspection of brands before livestock is transported out of the county to protect owners from having the wrong animals taken.

-- That the Livestock Board is not required to assist in carrying out the court order or to enter into a memorandum of understanding with the Forest Service.

-- That the Livestock Board has improperly entered into a memorandum of understanding with the Forest Service by allowing the executive director to enter into the agreement without a vote of the full board taken in open meeting after taking public comment.

-- That the Livestock Board should be "very cautious about putting brand inspectors in a position where they have to rely on the credibility of the United States Forest Service. From my perspective, the Forest Service has very little credibility after the events that led me to write this letter."

Wellborn concludes that this letter should not be used "as authority or precedence regarding anything involved in this situation."

In another development, Sherry Laney has urged the couple's supporters to use only legal, peaceful means to protest the Forest Service action.

In a press release issued Saturday, while her husband sat in a Las Cruces jail, Sherry Laney said Forest Service personnel are claiming harassment by Laney supporters, including threats and efforts at intimidation.

"Neither Kit nor I will ever condone any threats or intimidating tactics made in our name," she said, suggesting those engaging in such activities might be opponents posing as supporters and trying to cause problems for the Laneys.

"People who believe in us, and believe in Kit, will keep their protests and attitudes peaceful," she said. "Anyone who refuses to do so is not acting in our behalf."

In the release, she defends her husband and says anyone who knows him knows he is not capable of the actions the Forest Service claims.