DuBois column: Wolves kill permits, USDA hacked and VR for cows

 

Wolves kill permits, USDA hacked and VR for cows

The following is my interpretation of a recent court decision involving a rancher and the death of a wolf. It may not be what I think is right or fair, but it is, I believe, an accurate report on what the decision says.

The rancher, who has a grazing allotment that encompasses both the Gila and the Apache Greaves National Forests, pled guilty to having “knowingly taken” a Mexican gray wolf. He was sentenced to one year of unsupervised probation and paid $2,300 in restitution.

The Forest Service then cancelled the rancher’s grazing permit. This decision was unsuccessfully appealed.

Having exhausted his administrative remedies, the rancher then filed suit claiming the decision was issued in violation of the Administrative Procedures Act. This suit was eventually dropped.

I’m leaving out a bunch of legal mumbo-jumbo about changing counsels, briefs and response to briefs, providing adequate notice, etc.

Eventually, two suits were combined. One where the rancher sues the Forest Service and the other where the Forest Service sues the rancher.

The rancher filed suit seeking quiet title to the allotment, requesting the Court declare that “under the Quiet Title Act” the ranching entity “is the surface owner” of the allotment “by operation of specific legislative grants of Congress." 

The following, straight from the Courts decision, summarizes the claims this way:

“…Plaintiffs allege that the Allotment is their "private real property"—i.e., that they "hold legal and valid title" to it as "surface estate fee-title owner[s]" who may "fully utilize the value of the land" for "all agricultural and ranching purposes." . Plaintiffs further allege that such "vested property rights" are "valid existing rights that predated the Gila National Forest." (emphasis added). The Complaint then implies that, as preexisting private property, the Allotment never became national forest land—or did so only to a limited extent (e.g., only as to its subsurface mineral rights). Instead, Plaintiffs allege that—from the late 1800s until today—the surface of the Allotment has remained private property and continually carried with it "valid existing rights" for its owners to use that surface for any ranching or agricultural endeavor, including the grazing of livestock.”

Finally, we’ll see these ideas and legal concepts presented in Court, laid out for everyone to see. It will also be the opportunity to see the federales’ response to each of the allegations. It will be both educational and fun to see how this plays out. Except for one thing: the government never responded.

Instead, the feds filed a separate lawsuit seeking a “writ of ejectment” to have the livestock removed, and the real kicker here, they filed a Motion to Dismiss the quiet title suit. Why? Because the Quiet Title Act contains a statute of limitations consisting of twelve years. The feds claimed the statute of limitations bars Plaintiffs' claim because "Plaintiffs and their predecessors in interest 'knew or should have known' that the United States claimed a conflicting interest in the … Allotment more than twelve years (indeed, more than a century) prior to commencement of this litigation." They submitted a large number of exhibits to back up their claim, including a 1977 definition of an allotment in the federal register and a 2004 environmental assessment, all of which contains statements such as “land owned or under the control of the Forest Service.” Then, of course, there were the grazing permits themselves which permitted grazing "upon lands owned or controlled by the United States within the Apache National Forest" (1948) and "upon lands administered by the Forest Service within the Gila National Forest."

The feds won.

Many times we are very busy and resent all the time spent dealing with government forms. You best slowdown and be knowledgeable about what you are signing

USDA hacked

Something is awry with USDA’s computers.

“A large cache of publicly-accessible PDFs recently started appearing on USDA.gov that link to pirated media including movies, TV shows, sporting events, and video games in what appears to be either a hack, an inside job, or some kind of bizarre glitch.”

Don’t worry friends. All your data and personal info is perfectly safe with them!

VR goggles

After reading a study about how virtual reality goggles made cows happier, a dairy farmer decided to try it out on a few of his cows. He reports success, in that “milk production went from 22 litres to 27 litres per day.”

If you see a taxpayer wearing a government-issued VR headset, you will know we are all in trouble.

Until next time, be a nuisance to the devil and don’t forget to check that cinch.

Frank DuBois was the NM Secretary of Agriculture from 1988 to 2003, is the author of a blog: The Westerner (www.thewesterner.blogspot.com) and is the founder of The DuBois Rodeo Scholarship and The DuBois Western Heritage Foundation

 This column originally appeared in the February editions of both the New Mexico Stockman and the Livestock Market Digest.