Category: Uncategorized

  Credibility in the same sentence as the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) has been and will be an oxymoron for generations to come.  If virtues such as ethics and responsibilities and laws are not changed within our government agencies and their actions, then what we get is what we deserve if we do nothing about this situation.  Gone are the days where government employees, especially those who work within the BLM, can be trusted or believed.

Keep in mind this article is discussing an agency that remains the most sued and litigated agency in history.  Their explanation (excuse) is that land issues are and always will be heavily litigated.  The problem is, upon even a simple investigation, their statement is incorrect (gee, what a surprise).  It is this agencies approach, and callous attitude toward the taxpayers, by bending or ignoring laws meant to safeguard the public at large, are the reasons they use taxpayers hard earned money in order to defend themselves in court, in the millions of dollars.

So as a psycho or child would do, BLM employee’s attack Horse Advocates, as having no credibility – well here are other subjects, other environments, other situations, and other people with a diversity of backgrounds, who say the same things Horse Advocates are saying.

In reality the litigations and lawsuits conducted against the BLM have mostly been developed due to BLM decisions favoring pre-selected and small private interest groups only.  Then the American general public pays with their hard earned tax paying dollars, an estimated $112 Billion over the past few years and counting.  The fact is, and made very clear through documents available to the general public, non-profits, other organizations, and advocates have to step in and correct their bad behavior and their bad decision making process by the BLM, often through litigation.

So public relations people and BLM staff tell the public, just as a little child caught in a bad lie would do, how it is everybody else’s fault.  Yes, BLM people say the non-profits, the organizations that demand truth from the BLM, or the advocate’s who demand explanations on their prevalent mismanagement of America’s wild horses, lack credibility; or worse, all of these organizations and people, and the American public in general are all lying.

Ironically, you can almost see a small child standing there, in their broad BLM logo across their t-shirts, shorts, and dirty sneakers, while wiping their eyes of gator-tears, and hoping their lie acceptable.  They then hope, beyond all hopes that the people they just lied to do not read the actual information that is out there, the reality, against the BLM and their recent decisions.

Open Debate – BLM’s Nightmare

Examples are plenty in regard to BLM incompetence, bad decision making, catering toward a narrow scope of interest groups only, abuse of animals, questionable and often illegal conduct by employees, and the list goes on and on – and by the way, well documented – the key here is the term “well documented”.

There are many, many wholesome documents and reference material available to the public; at last perusal it appears an easily concluded 60 to 1 ratio (60 articles arguing “against” every 1 article or decision BLM places into public scrutiny).  We, as Americans and taxpayers, had better start questioning agencies such as the BLM and their use of our tax money.  They spend frivolously in the billons of dollars, as well as distributing their lies or misinformation given to the public about what they receive, and how they spend our tax dollars.

It becomes quite obvious, after looking at the Anti-BLM references, which are very well documented and referenced, that the BLM relies heavily on the general public not reading this material what so ever.  And BLM staff will condemn, most often, this same material being untrue or lacks credibility.  This is something like Richard Nixon stating “I did nothing illegal,” while obviously his nose literally twitched at every syllable he said, and small children asked there parents, “Why is that man’s nose twitching all the time?”

BLM and their robust credibility gap

Here is a quote from a BLM training page:  “Technical credibility is the cornerstone for a successful career in any organization. Development in your technical area coupled with leadership development will set a solid foundation for career growth. Use your IDP as a tool to balance development in these two essential areas.”¹

This is yet another profound statement by this particular government agency.  This journalist, as well as many others, to include Congressmen and groups who’s purpose is to protect our environment, without a doubt conflict with just about everything the BLM does, decides, or spends money upon and in a frivolous and most often arbitrary manner of incompetence.  One has to question their training, ethics, and what types of people are being hired at the BLM.

Questionable Technical Behavior of BLM Staff

This is extraordinary, as there is a robust amount of documents and reference material that directly opposes just about everything the BLM does, decides, or spends money upon.  Often government researchers also write contrary articles or make statements that are in direct conflict with BLM’s Staff decisions (see www.peer.org for robust and profound articles on BLM, and by the way also written by previous BLM & government personnel).

A recent decision making document describing the transfer of water from public lands to a small special interest group, researched and written by BLM Researchers (poor quality at best) and shoveled to the public as a reality, is scrutinized by other ecologists well known in this same field of research.

One Ecologist states, “The federal government’s own scientists are confirming this Las Vegas water project would be an epic environmental disaster,” said Rob Mrowka, a Nevada-based ecologist with the Center for Biological Diversity. “It’s really no exaggeration to say that the natural, cultural and social heritage of central Nevada is at grave risk from this project.”²

“Some of Nevada’s rarest and most unique species rely on wetlands and springs,” said Mrowka. “They’ve evolved over tens of thousands of years in response to isolation and fragmentation of habitat that occurred after ice ages. The Las Vegas water grab could undo all that and put them on a very real path toward extinction.” ²

This is what we are paying for, as taxpayers; make no doubt, in the billons of dollars.  This water situation is only good for a small amount of people and for only a short time period, which undoubtedly and unconscionably by the BLM and other agencies supposed qualified scientists, state as a very high potential outcome.  This is by definition, an extreme conundrum of thought, to say the least.  Why?  Is there a better alternative?  Well yes, and it has been pointed out by many advocates and organizations alike – but of course, according to the BLM, “they” (those scientists and other groups or advocates) all lie or lack credibility.

American’s and Congressmen saying the same thing as advocates and others

“In an open government, citizens should never be forced to play catch-up because policies were being drafted behind closed doors. The continued decision to withhold thousands of critical documents not only undermines the credibility of the BLM, but it violates the foundations of a government that gets its authority from the people.” Congressman Rehberg, Montana³

The above was in a letter written in 2010, WASHINGTON, D.C. – “Montana’s Congressman, Denny Rehberg, today sent a letter to Bureau of Land Management (BLM) Director Bob Abbey asking him to finally release thousands of secret documents relating to the now-infamous “treasured landscapes document.”³

That document revealed secret plans to declare millions of acres in Montana as a National Monument using the Antiquities Act.  A small special interest group was to be the profitable group-only.  The problem here, it was decided vented interest groups, and the majority of Americans, especially in Montana who it affected directly, were simply left out of any discussion and unaware the situation even existed.  More about the Treasured Landscapes situation here.⁴

This is what we all define as credibility issues, in regard to the BLM, and consistently within almost every decision they have made.  Let’s be clear within this article, telling the truth about BLM is not a credibility issue.

“After months of delay, BLM has unfortunately released a draft EIS with a flawed preferred alternative that will damage a precious Southern Arizona resource,” Grijalva said. “We can’t move forward without keeping the environment in mind. BLM’s current preferred alternative for Route Group 4 is more about future development interests than finding the least intrusive route for this current project, as the law demands.” Congressman Grijalva, Arizona⁵

Conclusively

References abound against BLM and just about every decision they make. So where does the general American Public stand on issues involving the BLM?  When the general public hears the truth, most are angry, and do not want:

1.  Tax dollars spent on litigations because the BLM staff lies;

2.  They do not want our horse herds taken from public lands;

3.  The general public does not want our environment destroyed in order for special interest groups and corporations to make higher profit margins;

4.  The general public does not want our public lands to be used for corporate welfare;

5.  The general public does not want the BLM to manage our public lands any longer due to their dishonesty;

6.  The general public does not want the BLM to have access to our hard-earned taxpayer money any longer;

7.  The general public does not want Welfare Ranchers payments to special interests;

8.  The public does not want costly decisions based on misinformation or false info;

9.  There exists much more, too much to go into here. 

^{________________________________________________________________} 

¹ http://www.blm.gov/ntc/st/en/ntc_information/00.html

² http://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2012/08/03-1

3 http://rehberg.house.gov/news-releases/rehberg-urges-blm-director-to-embrace-transparency-with-visit-to-montana/

⁴ http://www.vernal.com/stories/Talk-of-Treasured-Landscapes-irks-Public-Lands-Committee,544495?content_source=&category_id=&search_filter=&user_id=&event_mode=&event_ts_from=&list_type=&order_by=&order_sort=&content_class=1&sub_type=&town_id=&page=1

⁵ http://grijalva.house.gov/index.cfm?sectionid=13&itemid=1313

The element of a government agency, in this case the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and a sub-agency of the Department of the Interior (DOI), and their employees apparently despise taxpayers, remains a hateful situation in need of a fix.  Why the hate and animosity toward taxpayers has been allowed to go on, unchecked by government authority, is unknown.  It remains quite obvious this situation a bit more than just lack of consideration toward taxpayers, as their response toward taxpayers most often is a flippant and filled with animosity of the nature of a “Taxpayers Can Go to Hell” attitude.

History BLM and Litigation

Proof?  History shows BLM as the “Most” legally active and sued government agency in history.  Billions of dollars a year are paid by taxpayers for BLM employees and their attorney’s to file and adjudicate their irresponsible and incompetent behavior.  Most often, that is 98% of the time, BLM files a loss or settles out of court those same cases.

Indeed cases such as this, “A federal lawsuit filed Tuesday in Las Vegas claims the Bureau of Land Management violated federal environmental and American Indian cultural laws when the agency approved a wind energy project near Great Basin National Park. . .”

This is normal for BLM and within their management decision-making process.  The litigation cost taxpayers in the millions of dollars for this one.  Multiply this by hundreds of other cases (not exaggerating what so ever) over the years and you will simply obtain a small perspective of what these unnecessary lawsuits cost to taxpayers.

Robust legal actions continue as BLM employee behavior being incompetent at best; whereas conclusive, one must consider their qualifications toward managing our Public Lands!  “WWP Files Two New Lawsuits Against The BLM in S.E. Oregon and Central Idaho.”²

“The lawsuit alleges that the BLM failed to consider alternatives to livestock grazing before issuing permits and took action before environmental reviews were completed. The agency also failed to comply with the Challis Resource Management Plan, adopted in 1999, by allowing livestock turnout on Burnt Creek when range improvements were not functional or properly maintained.”²

Again, this type of legal action is not a rare situation, as a matter of fact it is, as already pointed out, a normal circumstance for what one considers “allowable” by BLM employee’s standards (i.e. legally questionable), and certainly with no attention toward common sense or competent land management values or principles.  BLM’s legal knowledge appears to be non-existent, or profoundly incompetent, as history suggests quite adamantly.

Yet, this not only costs taxpayers in the billions of dollars yearly, but remains detrimental to our environment, which is our living biosphere; the taxpayers receive nothing but destruction, public lands are trashed by at best awkward and incompetent decisions, and in some cases have been shown as dangerous to visit.  Special interrests and corporations profit on our loss, constantly.

Wildlife on the Endangered Species List or those close to extinction, have also been eliminated due to bad decision making and bad management decisions based on this same contempt toward taxpayers, and BLM / DOI tendency to favor lobby groups, corporations, or special interests.  This becomes quite costly to both taxpayers, in the billions of dollars yearly, and wildlife, to their death or extinction.

Here is another example, but make no doubt there exist many, many more.  “Today, Judge Winmill ruled, July 12, 2012, in our favor on these two test cases, holding that BLM violated the National Environmental Policy Act and the Federal Land Policy and Management Act in issuing the RMPs for Craters of Moon and Pinedale. Specifically, BLM violated NEPA in refusing to consider reductions in livestock grazing in the RMP for Craters of the Moon and in failing to consider how energy development will impact sage-grouse in combination with livestock grazing in the Pinedale Field Office. BLM also violated FLPMA by disregarding its own National Sage-Grouse Habitat Conservation Strategy and Sensitive Species Policy in issuing the new RMPs.”³

This legal action, as many others, cost the taxpayers of this nation in the millions for BLM to defend against an ill-advised environmental action.  It is fraught with incompetence, narrow in management scope if existing at all, and developed for specific special interest groups, corporations, at taxpayer expense.  This situation, as the many others, simply should not have happened under sound management based on good and truthful research.

BLM and Their Response Simply Flawed

The BLM’s response is not good enough to pass creditability of any type, especially in regard to expenditure of taxpayer’s money.  Although BLM employees attempted an explanation in “The Law Wranglers: How Litigation Impacts Public Land Management.” The explanation fails in not only proper legal attributes, but awkwardly, and unaware by the BLM author, shows exactly the things mentioned in this article, which are incompetence and those that should be paying attention, simply do not do so!

Awkward also is the fact that “if” they want to pay attention to the legal aspects of land management, then why would they not acknowledge the law to avoid litigation, which the BLM simply ignores the law constantly.  Many of the legal actions taken against BLM is due to BLM not abiding by law, or even more often – not abiding by BLM policy!

So even the article “The Law Wranglers:. . .” becomes rhetoric, and to pointedly make it appear BLM abides by those same laws, the history shows that to be ridiculous and a lie.  Then to attempt to say, historically, the legal process was brought about by antiquated laws and to fulfill land use policy changes is simply a grade-school attempt at a lie.

The history of BLM shows overwhelmingly a Bad Management principle that profoundly exists today.  Decision after decision and lawsuit after lawsuit when researched demonstrates no understanding of land management or terrestrial biology basics what so ever, and ignoring present ethics, laws, and policy of their own making.

Good decisions are not made by adapting to political agendas or manipulated research.  It is that simple, and costs very little or nothing at all to recognize the truth.

Not so surprisingly, these situations involve vented political agendas and special interest lobby group efforts, that when ulitmately implemented within our environment fail constantly.  Often cover ups of not only irresponsibility, but illegal actions by BLM employees, have been recorded previously and remain plentiful today.

BLM and Illegal Activities

Not to be overlooked is the fact that many BLM management people of today were subjects of a vast and expensive undercover operation in the late 1990s’.  These BLM employees are in charge today and oversee the operations of national offices, district offices, and general offices.  “The Bureau of Land Management (BLM) within the Department of Interior is the agency mandated by law “to protect and manage wild free-roaming horses…as components of the public lands.” Yet, the BLM facilitates the routine and illegal trafficking of wild horses to slaughter.”⁵

The undercover operation had found evidence for the issuing of: in excess of 800-plus felony warrants for arrest, 400-plus misdemeanor warrants for arrest, and all going to be placed before a Federal Grand Jury for distribution and arrest.  Instead, the costly to taxpayer’s undercover investigation and reports and warrants going to the Grand Jury stopped by the Justice Department – politician intervention via special interests, ceased the action the night before filing.  As mentioned, these same employees in the BLM, remain as managers and decision makers to this day, who were indeed subjects and even would have been in prison had the documents been filed with the Federal Grand Jury.

Many Expenditures Exist Indirectly to Court Decisions

Taxpayers today cover the cost of corral facilities and storage of horses, the result of unnecessary roundups that also have been taken to court previously and on several occasions.  These facilities cost taxpayers $65-plus million dollars yearly, plus cost of roundups, which are another few millions of dollars, and by the way it has been shown time and time again unnecessary, also agreed upon by the Federal Courts.

All roundups must be taken to Federal Court on an individual basis — prescribed by BLM attorney’s and Federal Court Judge approval, despite the obvious nature of cost-factors of such a decision.  BLM management still decides to complete roundups, and if the public and taxpayers do not like it, in their opinion, then “. . . go to hell, take us to court!”

Summation

An interesting aspect of the BLM and even the Department of the Interior is the prominent fact they are more than willing to spend taxpayer money in courts, both Federal and State, within the billions of dollars yearly.  And yet, one must answer the question, “Where are these powerful Beacons of the law, there to protect the taxpayers from such robust and irresponsible and illegal behavior?

Where is the court system, within our nation of laws, when our laws are being violated by government agency management, when taxpayers are left with nothing?  Where are these laws when it is perfectly obvious taxpayer money goes to corrupt government agencies, and what one can only attest to tremendous amounts of taxpayer money used, but with no return to the taxpayer?

And why are taxpayers literally paying for special interest groups and their court costs, via BLM or DOI, which are government agencies?  Because of this situation, what law prescribes these agencies being allowed to represent those groups?  The taxpayers, it becomes obvious, is not represented what so ever within our public land management over all scheme of things, and by the BLM or DOI.

Indeed, the decisions are based to benefit special interest group activities?  Ironically, it is then up to taxpayers to pay the court costs as individuals or non-profit groups to fight the very narrow and bad or incompetent decisions, and which many cannot do, and suddenly taxpayer lands and wildlife are destroyed!

Enough is enough – We need those that are hired and paid to protect the public, to do so.  They must defend the taxpayers from these dishonest government agencies, who remain irresponsible, pointedly making decisions favoring special interest groups or one can say – representing special interest groups and the hell with taxpayers, and making decisions that are politically motivated – and it is ruining America!

__________________________________

You can make a difference by signing and sharing this petition with others, and found at this link: Non-Partisan Federal Investigation into the Bureau of Land Management and the Department of the Interior — http://signon.org/sign/non-partisan-federal?source=c.url&r_by=4161608

__________________________________

¹ Lawsuit claims BLM approval violated laws, Rogers, Keith, Las Vegas Review-Journal, http://www.lvrj.com/news/lawsuit-claims-blm-violated-laws-with-wind-energy-project-114614369.html

² WWP Files Two New Lawsuits Against The BLM in S.E. Oregon and Central Idaho, Western Watersheds Project, http://www.westernwatersheds.org/news-media/online-messenger/wwp-files-two-new-lawsuits-against-blm-se-oregon-and-central-idaho

³ Victory in First Round of BLM RMP Litigation, Advocates for the West, Public Interest Environmental Law, http://www.advocateswest.org/bulletin/victory-first-round-blm-rmp-litigation

⁴ The Law Wranglers: How Litigation Impacts Public Land Management, http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/info/history/sidebars/flpma__nepa_and_land/the_law_wranglers.html

⁵ Horses to Slaughter — Anatomy of a Coverup within the BLM (April 1997)
http://www.peer.org/pubs/whitepapers.php