Chopper Incident Has Rancher In Hot Water

...Fred Conway was taking a nap at his ranch high above Punkin Center in late June when he heard the helicopter. He grabbed his shotgun and drove a four-wheeler across his pastures to the stock pond.
He'd been feuding with the U.S. Forest Service over water it had dipped the year before to fight fires in the area. Because the agency never paid for that water, Conway told it not to come back.
Yet, here was a Bell 212 toting a 240-gallon rubber bucket from a 100-foot-long cable, making a beeline for his pond. Conway tried to wave away the pilot, but he dropped the bucket nonetheless. Conway fired at the bucket...

Somebody should tell the FS to pay their water bills.

NEWS ROUNDUP

An editorial concerning Rising Violence Against Public Land Cops. BLM up 24%, FS up 19%, FWS up 9%, NPS down by 6 incidents. Based on a report by PEER... The Bureau of Reclamation is seeking to purchase water to protect the Rio Grande Silvery Minnow... The FS spends $700,000 on a study to determine if their previous expenditure of $102 million to purchase lots around Lake Tahoe has actually helped or hindered the lake and wildlife...and, higher flows in the Klamath and Trinity Rivers should help the chinook salmon.

CRISIS ALERT! LAND TRUST LAND GRAB!

Land Rights Network
American Land Rights Association
PO Box 400 – Battle Ground, WA 98604
Phone: 360-687-3087 – Fax: 360-687-2973 – E-mail: alra@landrights.org Web Address: http://www.landrights.org Legislative Office: 507 Seward Square SE – Washington, DC 20003
Phone: 202-210-2357 – Fax: 202-543-7126 – E-mail: landrightsnet@aol.com

CRISIS ALERT: Land Trust Land Grab!

THIS IS AN ALL-OUT ALERT ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

*****VOTE THIS THURSDAY

THIS Thursday afternoon, September 4, the House of Representatives committee which writes tax laws, the Ways and Means Committee, will vote on amendments that would hand over a $948 million tax break to already gigantic and powerful Land Trusts!!!
The bill is HR 7, called the "Faith Based Initiative." It is supposed to place advantages into the federal government's tax code to benefit charities such as private schools, churches and orphanages, to encourage social service work.
INCREDIBLY, the environmentalist community, always hungry for more federal dollars, have jammed their sticky fingers into this honey pot!!! This time it is the Land Trusts who are seeking Tax Favoritism for themselves, at the expense of the rest of the country.
The Nature Conservancy (TNC), with assets of $3 Billion and annual revenue of $700 million, is leading the way. TNC and over 1,000 other Land Trusts are proposing amendments to HR 7 which would hand themselves a huge tax break - at the expense of both private property rights and the very social service organizations that the bill was designed to help!!! Also, at a cost of $948 million, it would also create an even bigger budget deficit!
Here is the deal. The Land Trusts are demanding a loophole that will discount 50% off of capital gains taxes for a seller of land -BUT only if land is sold to a Land Trust or government agency! This places churches, private schools and private parties at a comparative disadvantage when attempting to purchase land - because this Tax Favoritism only applies if land is sold to a Land Trust or the government!
This will severely devalue private property. This allows Land Trusts and government agencies to cut their offering price by nearly the amount of the tax cut, so effectively the only beneficiary is the land trust.
ALSO - this $948 million handout will increase the budget deficit.
ALSO - Land Trusts, since they are "non-profits," already have huge advantages over private parties, since they don't pay taxes and contributions to them are tax deductible. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH!!!
ALSO - this Tax Favoritism proposal will discourage private parties from even bidding on land, so the only offers for land will be made by the twin buzzards of Land Trusts and government agencies. Do you think you will get a fair price from them???
The Nature Conservancy and the other land trusts DO NOT need yet another tax break! There is already a huge budget deficit!
NO special tax loopholes, NO Tax Favoritism for mulitbillion dollar corporations like The Nature Conservancy (TNC).
TNC calls itself a "non-profit" - but profited over $700 million last year alone from grant money from taxpayers, selling land to government agencies paid by taxpayers, and insider trading deals underwritten by tax breaks financed by taxpayers. NOW THEY WANT MORE !!!
ACTION ITEMS:
NUMBER ONE.
Contact BOTH your House member and ALL of the key House Ways and Means
Committee members listed below. This issue has changed up the usual "conservatives" and "liberals" into an unpredictable mix, so ANY House member is fair game. Tell them that the gigantic Land Trusts should not gain yet another advantage over private property written into the tax code. Enough is enough!!
FAX is your most powerful tool at this late date. Phone calls too. E-mails may not be read in time.
-----You can call every Representative at (202) 224-3121. A TEMPORARY TOLL FREE NUMBER is (800) 648-3516.
NUMBER TWO.
Contact Congressmen Roy Blunt and Richard Pombo, who are leading the fight for PROPERTY RIGHTS. Blunt and Pombo believe that multi-billion dollar land trusts already have plenty of advantages built into the tax code. They are fighting for YOUR community's future and your property rights. TELL THEM to keep up the great work, and THANK THEM. Here are their key staffers:
For Rep. Roy Blunt, please contact:
April Ponnuru - april.ponnuru@mail.house.gov
Rep. Richard Pombo, please contact:
Laura Hylden - laura.hylden@mail.house.gov
NUMBER THREE.
INCREDIBLY, the Washington, DC offices of the American Farm Bureau Federation and the National Cattlemen's Beef Association have CAVED IN to the Land Trusts! They are afraid to fight, and have meekly lined up in the shadow of the Land Trust lobbyists in support of this massive handout - this sellout of private property, water rights, and tax funds. This cave-in has NOT been approved by state affiliates of either organization!
IF you are a member of the Farm Bureau or the Cattlemen's Association, then contact your state chapter and the lobbyists below and ask them what the heck is going on!!! Was this massive handout of land and water rights ever voted on by the membership??? WHY are your lobbyists in Washington, DC failing to fight for the membership???
WHY are they caving in, AFRAID to do battle with the massive land trusts who seek to convert agricultural land out of private hands and hand it over to government control??? Was this ever approved by the membership, why was this decision to cave in done in secret, in Washington, DC???
#*#*#*# Has your state organization approved this, do they even know about it??? #*#*#*#*
HERE are the Farm Bureau lobbyists who caved in:
Patricia Wolff - patw@fb.com
Richard Newpher - richardn@fb.com
Phone 202-484-3600
Fax 202-484-3604
HERE are the Cattlemen's lobbyists who caved in:
Jeff Eisenberg - jeisenberg@beef.org
Myra Hyde - mhyde@beef.org
Phone 202-347-0228
Fax 202-638-0607
TELL THEM, and your state affiliates - the multibillion dollar Land Trusts have ENOUGH advantages already!!! Enough is enough!

Potomac Horse Fever In Oklahoma

...The recent confirmation of Potomac horse fever (PHF) in an Oklahoma horse was possible because of relatively new--and inexpensive--testing techniques that aide in quickly diagnosing the disease. This allows horse owners to be alerted to the active presence of the disease's causative agent in their area. Recognition of the disease in areas unused to seeing PHF is important. This burden falls to treating veterinarians, horse owners, and diagnostic laboratory officials, who take or request blood or tissue samples from horses with clinical signs of PHF...

See the original story of finding PHF here.

What's in the recall vote for California agriculture?

...Jones' invitation to sit on Arnold's economic recovery council is a clear sign a Schwarzenegger win could take Jones back to Sacramento where he is sorely missed. Jones is a consensus builder with unquestionable integrity and tons of experience. California needs the likes of Bill Jones in state government. A Schwarzenegger win may be agriculture's biggest recall windfall...

Missing Saddles/Please Help

From: Linda Burdick [mailto:forrodeo@mercednet.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 02, 2003 8:44 PM
To: Friends of Rodeo Contacts
Cc: Rayanne Engel
Subject: Please help w/ our stolen saddles

Any help you all could give would be greatly appreciated. The top three are very important to us. Please forward this on to everyone you can... the more eyes looking, the better!

Saddles Stolen
Clements, California

8 Saddles were stolen between Friday, August 29th and Monday, September 1st:

1. Early 1970 era Earl Nanniga rope saddle - fully tooled acorn stamp - horn cap silver with overlay gold longhorn steer head & silver nameplate on cantle "Jack" (gold overlay).
2. Early 1950 era Earl Nanniga rope saddle - smooth - nutmeg colored quilted seat - no silver. Cheyenne roll.
3. Late 1940's era Hamley roughout rope saddle - seat is faded turquoise quilted. Swell fork - straight bound cantle.
4. American Rope saddle w/ rawhide cutouts on swells - slight tooling.
5. 1950's kids' saddle - tooled no silver.
6. Clements Stampede Queen trophy saddle (2002) Big Horn - all-around w/ lettering and some silver.
7. Big Horn barrel saddle.
8. Non-descript all around saddle w/ name plate on back "Patricia"
*** Also stolen: one-ear headstall and curb bit w/ roping reins.
ANY information on any of these items PLEASE call 209-759-3517.
REWARD OFFERED!

Thank you,

Rayanne Engel
Western Horseman
Equestrian Retailer
Pacific Account Executive
PO Box 699
Clements, CA 95227
209-759-3395
209-759-3196 Fax
rengel@cowboypublishing.com

California Farm Groups Shocked

"Unbelievable, dumbfounded, disappointed and shocked" are three of the reactions from farmers and other agricultural leaders who learned that Dan Sumner, director of the University of California Agricultural Issues Center in Davis testified in Geneva in late July that U.S. cotton farm programs have distorted world cotton prices to the detriment of Brazilian cotton farmers.
Sumner acknowledged that he was hired by an international law firm representing Brazil in its complaint against U.S. cotton. He said he was acting as a private, consulting economist, not as a representative of the university.

GREEN WATCH

In Pollution At The World Resources Institute, Neil Hrab of Green Watch, takes on the WRI. Also see Bonner R. Cohen's critique of the Natural Resources Defense Council.

Invasive Species & Wolves.

In the last two days, Jim Speers has posted three articles on the above subjects. An excerpt from The Purpose of Invasive Species:

Here on the East coast the date most often given as the “native ecosystem” ideal is 1492 AD. In the southwest and on the west coast, the arrival of Spanish explorers and Franciscan missionaries is the date when some sort of mystical mix of plants and animals is fixed as the “natives” of that region. Plants and animals brought from other parts of North America or from other continents after those dates are now being touted as “non-native” and somehow, mysteriously out-of-place. Based on this native worship philosophy disguised as environmental quackery, Americans are being told that thousands of plants and animals should be eradicated because they are “out of place” (i.e. “non-native”.)

And this from Endangered Wolves:

Every American citizen needs to consider what is happening with wolves. Congress passes a law (Endangered Species Act) and voila! Wolves are declared endangered and instantly a large, destructive, and dangerous carnivore that was purposely extirpated from all but one state (Minnesota) is given the status of a cow in a Hindu village. No longer does the state have ANY say in whether there will or will not be wolves within their borders. No longer can a dog owner kill a wolf attacking his pet or hunting dog. No longer can a sheep or cattle rancher protect his stock when they are ravaged by wolves. No longer can hunters expect to see big game or small game in the abundance or sizes common before wolves were reintroduced. No longer can pets or hunting dogs be allowed to roam unseen by owners. No longer can a rural grandmother let her grandchildren play outside unattended after wolves have been observed near rural residences. No longer can scouts or families camp safely in certain areas. No longer can foals be allowed to range unseen when wolves are about. Rural life, property rights, and citizen rights to make their government “insure domestic Tranquility” (per the 19th, 20th, and 21st words of the US Constitution) are all drastically reduced or eliminated.

All of Mr. Speers articles can be viewed here.

The Agriculture Ocean Transportation Coalition has circulated the following document on Carrier Collusion:

DATE: August 4, 2003
TO: AgOTC Members
FROM: Peter Friedmann
Tel: 202-783-3333 Fax: 202-783-4422 OurManInDC@aol.com
SUBJECT: Carrier Collusion
We now have an opportunity to do something about the continued ocean carrier collusion which has resulted recently in dramatic increases of rates, imposition of surcharges, inflexibility of the carriers in negotiations, manipulation of capacity, generally undermining the carrier-shipper relationship. Please take the time to read this message.
The Problem & Solution:
Only because the ocean carriers were granted a unique immunity from US antitrust laws back in 1916 are they allowed to share proprietary information, to jointly fix rates, and agree on all other terms of service. In other words, what the carriers are doing is perfectly legal under the Shipping Act, even though it greatly injures US export competitiveness, and increases cost for US consumers. The solution therefore is to change the law, to revoke the carriers’ antitrust immunity.
Fortunately, the Chairman of the Judiciary Committee with jurisdiction over US antitrust laws is Congressman Jim Sensenbrenner of Wisconsin, who agrees with us. He is prepared to introduce legislation to revoke carrier antitrust immunity.
Revoking antitrust immunity would mean that the carriers could no longer discuss pricing, no longer agree on surcharges, GRI, etc., cannot agree to reduce to capacity, cannot agree among themselves on the contract terms they will propose to their customers. Two years ago Chairman Sensenbrenner introduced such legislation, but, frankly, carrier opposition was vigorous and shipper support was tepid, largely, I believe, because rates were quite low. The environment has definitely changed.
Action Plan:
It is now up to us, as shippers, to show Congressman Sensenbrenner and the rest of Congress that the time has come to force ocean carriers to compete for shipper business, to treat shippers as their customers, and to quit jointly fixing rates and take other steps detrimental to US commerce. Chairman Sensenbrenner’s staff has specifically told us that they will move such legislation forward as soon as we can show that he has the votes to move it through his Judiciary Committee.
Specific Steps:
First, you will find attached a letter to Chairman Sensenbrenner. We are seeking 500 (or even more) companies and associations to add their names to the letter, to show the Judiciary Committee the widespread support for his effort to repeal the antitrust immunity would enjoy. Please reply if you will add your company/association name, and please pass this letter on and encourage others to sign on as well.
Second, there are 37 Members of that Committee; we need to deliver 19 votes in favor. Congressman Sensenbrenner and the former Chairman Henry Hyde are already strongly in favor, meaning we need to convince 18 other Members of the Committee that this legislation is important. We have compiled a list of all the Members of the House Judiciary Committee (attached). Please look at the list to determine if you have a presence as a constituent in any of their Districts. Then, we will want to generate as many letters as possible to those Congressmen, encouraging support for the legislation.
We have drafted a letter which you can use as is, or even better, can revise to reflect your company’s interests. It is important to describe your company, location, the products you export and the type of business and specific reasons why you would like carriers to have to compete for your business.
Politics:
There is no question that agriculture interests are going to have to take the lead on this. I do believe we will have active support from the Teamsters Union (who feel that their drivers are being disadvantaged by collective carrier agreements as to how much they will pay for trucking services), some other associations, who have frankly told me that they are looking for agriculture to take the lead. A significant challenge for us is to get the American Association of Port Authorities to at least take a neutral position. Previously, the ocean carriers which are the major tenants of the ports, operating the marine terminals, have claimed that without antitrust immunity, they will have difficulty surviving and continuing to operate and pay rent for the marine terminals. Thus, the ports have opposed efforts to revoke carrier antitrust immunity. The agriculture shippers need to educate port authorities.
So we have plenty of work ahead of us, as it is ambitious to revoke an almost 100 year old privilege that the carriers have enjoyed. But antitrust immunity has not worked. It has not protected the US flag ocean carriers, who have all disappeared. It has not provided stability in this provision of services, as carriers go in and out of business and rates fluctuate wildly. Antitrust immunity has failed to achieve its stated objectives. Now it only serves the interest of companies based overseas who control ships built overseas and manned with non-US labor. Meanwhile it hurts US interests, including US farmers, growers, and packers.
We look forward to working with you on this ambitious campaign.

House Working on Faith Based Charities Bill

One of the first items on the House agenda this month is a scaled-down version of President Bush's faith-based plan, consisting largely of tax incentives to encourage donations to religious charities.....The Senate bill also has an environmental provision some Republicans dislike. It would provide a discount in capital-gains tax when land is sold for conservation purposes. Some Republicans, including Sen. Don Nickles of Oklahoma, say that this is unfair, and that the tax should be reduced for everyone, not just some.

Whitman Denies White House Told Her To Lie

Associated Press
Tuesday, September 2, 2003; Page A19

Former Environmental Protection Agency administrator Christine Todd Whitman denies that she was told to lie about health risks in Manhattan after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
An EPA inspector general's report said Whitman assured the public that the air was safe to breathe before tests were conclusive.
Whitman told Newsweek that she did not object to the White House editing out cautionary notes from EPA scientists and said the public was not harmed by the White House decision to use reassurances about air quality right after the attack.
Emergency workers have said the EPA failed to warn them of the hazards. But Whitman said the agency advised them to wear protective gear, although many refused.

From the August 29th issue of the Weekly Newsletter of the Western States Water Council:

LITIGATION/WATER RIGHTS
Okanogan County v. NMFS/Rights-of-Way

In an unpublished August 14 decision, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed a district court decision that instream flow conditions imposed under a special use permit for ditch rights-of-way across U.S. Forest Service (USFS) lands did not deny the users their state-vested water rights. In March 2002, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Whaley rejected claims that USFS lacked authority to restrict the use of the Early Winters Ditch and the Skyline Irrigation Ditch in Okanogan County in Washington’s Methow Valley. The USFS conditions to protect minimum streamflows require that diversions stop when river water levels drop below what they were 100 years ago, before irrigation started. In 2001, USFS stopped water diverted to 400 irrigated acres. In June 2001, Okanogan County and several farmers brought suit, claiming that the USFS conditions, based on National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) requirements to protect salmon, were arbitrary and capricious and had “taken” their water (WSW #1454 and #1414). The lawsuit was filed after more than two years of negotiations over how much water must be left instream.


While acknowledging that the ESA does not grant powers to federal agencies they do not otherwise have, the Ninth Circuit cited the National Forest Management Act, Organic Administration Act, Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), and the Multiple Use Sustained-Yield Act to establish that USFS has “authority to maintain certain levels of flow in the rivers and streams within the boundaries of the Okanogan National Forest to protect endangered fish.” The court further declared, “The permits themselves, from their inception provided the government with unqualified discretion to restrict or terminate the rights of way.”

FLPMA has a savings clause which states, “Nothing in this Act...shall be construed as terminating any valid lease, permit, patent, right-of-way, or other land use right or authorization existing on the date of approval of this Act.” It adds, “All actions by the Secretary concerned under this Act shall be subject to valid existing rights.” (90 Stat. 2743, 2786-87) The court noted that despite the savings clause, the case dealt with a right-of-way and not the water rights themselves, citing Utah Power & Light Co. v. United States. The conditions of the contract controlling the right-of-way enabled the USFS to impose the conditions in question.

Moreover, while the appellants relied on United States v. New Mexico, 438 U.S. 696 (1978), to argue that the Congress did not intend to reserve water rights for wildlife preservation purposes when it set aside lands for national forests, the court held: “US v. NM did not address the power of the Forest Service to restrict the use of rights of way over federal land.” The court added, “...FLPMA specifically authorizes the Forest Service to restrict such rights of way to protect fish and wildlife and maintain water quality standards under federal law, without any requirement that the Forest Service defer to state water law.”

NEWS ROUNDUP

The Reintroduction of Wolves Stirs Debate reports on the program to reintroduce the Mexican gray wolf. Old-Growth Forest Battle Fought Acre by Acre is about the conflict over the Straw Devil timber sale in Oregon. A Seattle columnist endorses Mike Leavitt to head the EPA. The Washington Times reports the Fur Commission has offered a $100,000 reward for the arrest and conviction of those who released 10,000 mink from a farm near Seattle.

Rancher In Jail. 70 year old rancher Luther "Wally" Klump was jailed by Federal Judge John M. Roll on April 21st of this year. His crime? Tresspassing cows on federal property. Read J. Zane Walley's story about this here, and Paula Devlin's article here.

eco-logic/Powerhouse, the September 1 edition, is now online. Michael Hardiman's Washington Watch highlights S.476, The Faith Based Initiatives bill, which grants tax favoritism to land trusts and environmental groups. See H.R.7, Rep. Roy Blunt's bill, which provides assistance to faith based organizations without the tax breaks for the land trusts. S.476 has already passed the Senate.

"Markets Reward Eco-Terror. So Let's Fix Them" is an interesting article by James D. Miller, an Assistant Professor of Economics at Smith College. Says Miller:

Giving in to terrorists encourages them. Unfortunately, markets automatically respond to eco-terrorism by doing exactly what the terrorists want. If, for example, SUV dealerships were subject to a significant risk of arson, their insurance rates would rise, which would in turn raise the price of SUVs and therefore result in Americans driving fewer big cars.

We need to change economic cause and effect to stop the market from rewarding environmental terrorism.

Read the article to see his proposals.

Kane County, Utah is having a big battle with the BLM. At issue are President Clinton's designation of the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument and control of county roads. On August 13, Kane County Commissioner Mark Habbeshaw and County Sheriff Lamont Smith removed 31 BLM signs from 19 county roads. Reportedly, BLM first initiated a "criminal investigation" of the two county officials, but according to State Rep. Mike Noel, now "BLM's going to put together an independent group to review and investigate the events that led up to the county's actions. Marty Ott, formerly from Tropic and the current State Director for Montana BLM, is coming down to mediate the issue and look into it." Check out articles on this issue here and here.

Charlie Daniels new book, "Ain't No Rag: Freedom, Family and the Flag" is reviewed here. An exerpt from the review by La Shawn Barber:

Daniels's book is a straightforward account of his life and outspoken opinions on the hottest political topics. Politically correct he is not. He is a plain and simple man who worked hard to achieve success in the music business - and he loves his country. How refreshing!

The title of the book is taken from his controversial song, "This Ain't No Rag, It's a Flag", and is a collection of columns that have appeared on his band's web site. With plainspoken "cowboy logic", Daniels reminds the reader what it means to be an American: love of country, freedom and God. Divided into three themes: "Cowboy Logic", "Why I Love America" and "Faith and Family," the 241-page book is good reading. Daniels makes no apologies for his simple prose and candid views. Having traveled all over the world performing for fans, including U.S. troops, he's done a whole lot of living. He discusses issues like abortion, welfare, illegal immigration, hyphenated Americans, patriotism and his love for Jesus Christ. Daniels warns, chastises, praises, advises and evangelizes.

Land Rights Advocates Allege Bush Administration Betrayal

Land rights advocates (search) are scratching their heads as to why the White House has asked the Supreme Court not to hear two cases challenging seven controversial national monuments named by President Clinton in the waning days of his administration.

During his race for president in 2000, then-Gov. George W. Bush campaigned against the monuments, giving hope to many western landowners who found their private property subject to strict federal protections.

Three years later, the monuments remain, encompassing millions of acres of land in places like Montana, Oregon, Nevada and Idaho, where the government already owns huge chunks of untamed wilderness. And some property owners are becoming disillusioned.

It appears the Bush Justice Department is sticking with tradition and defending the actions of the previous President. They are doing the same with abortion clinics.