Blog

In the United States we have laws, as we are a law-given society.  It is when these laws are ignored and small groups, profoundly become extremely wealthy on the backs of the general public, that we must take heed in regard to the law.  We must demand Conflicts of Interest situations to be discontinued, and at the same time consider as fact the true difference between policy and the law.

The wealth, in this case, generated from an overwhelming interest of Welfare Ranchers and specifically by the BLM and within a small portion of the United States, receives tremendous amounts of tax payer dollars, with no return to the tax payer and general public situations what so ever, as well who are the actual owners of public lands.  These situations are within “Every” definition of Conflict of Interest given, both government and private; and yet ignored in total!  Why?

BLM’s Contradictory Statements

“The BLM administers nearly 18,000 permits and leases held by ranchers who graze their livestock, mostly cattle and sheep, at least part of the year on more than 21,000 allotments under BLM management. Permits and leases generally cover a 10-year period and are renewable if the BLM determines that the terms and conditions of the expiring permit or lease are being met. The amount of grazing that takes place each year on BLM-managed lands can be affected by such factors as drought, wildfire, and market conditions,” Fact Sheet on the BLM’s Management of Livestock Grazing.

The controversy starts as it is becoming more and more prevalent that the BLM, a United States government agency, has a foremost priority, or mission, to obtain benefits and do daily job situations that benefits the particular area’s cattle industry; wherever that may be.  The wild horse herd roundups and the killing of wolves becomes two primary examples of death and destruction of the same habitats, and quite costly to tax payers as well.  This is a contradictory situation, as described in BLM’s many contradictory documents, and within “All” policy and “Laws” that initially setup the public lands for the public’s use.

This becomes sadly obvious because of this same Conflict of Interest situation between a specific government agency and cattle ranchers and their lobby groups.  This needs to be corrected immediately!  It has gone-on too long and Laws and ethics violations continue to evolve on a daily basis!

http://www.blm.gov/or/districts/prineville/plans/index.php

Live Stock Grazing Federal Expenditures and Receipts Vary, Depending on the Agency and the Purpose of the Fee Charged http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-869

Negative Effects of Livestock Grazing Riparian Areas http://ohioline.osu.edu/ls-fact/0002.html

Grazing Regulations Include Doctored Environmental Analysis http://www.ucsusa.org/scientific_integrity/abuses_of_science/cattle-grazing.html

Grazing on public land: helpful to ranchers, but harmful to habitat?  http://seattletimes.com/html/localnews/2008076883_grazing28m.html

Is cattle-grazing damaging public lands in the West?  http://summitcountyvoice.com/2012/05/16/is-cattle-grazing-damaging-public-lands-in-the-west/

BLM Conflicts with Policies/Acts Set by Government

So what is untrue, in a realistic ironic statement by the BLM, is this, “In managing livestock grazing on public rangelands, the BLM’s overall objective is to ensure the long-term health and productivity of these lands and to create multiple environmental benefits that result from healthy watersheds. The Bureau administers public land ranching in accordance with the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934, and in so doing provides livestock-based economic opportunities in rural communities while contributing to the West’s, and America’s, social fabric and identity,” Fact Sheet on the BLM’s Management of Livestock Grazing.

“The Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 (43 USC 315), signed by President Roosevelt, was intended to “stop injury to the public grazing lands [excluding Alaska] by preventing overgrazing and soil deterioration; to provide for their orderly use, improvement, and development; [and] to stabilize the livestock industry dependent upon the public range” (USDI 1988). This Act was pre-empted by the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976 (FLPMA),” i.e. Taylor Grazing Act of 1934.

One of the primary problems with these documents is either government agency personnel do not read these documents, i.e. Policy, or they ignore the documents in total as well as ignore the current laws and precedence established in many cases in regard to the Conflicts of Interest (i.e. Laws).  Either way, the public lands managed currently by the BLM are indeed mismanaged, make no doubt about that.

Currently it is too the point of idiotic, as the daily complaints become more and more in regard to the Conflicts of Interest and apparent destruction of public lands habitat (i.e. photos and videos prevalent), and removing and killing wildlife without regard toward techniques (photos and videos prevalent).

Yes, what has been troublesome here is the arrogant use of abusive techniques and management by abuse as well as useless crippling and slaughter being done daily, by government employees and private contractors (i.e. photos and videos prevalent)?  One has got to wonder how our government agencies and their employees have gotten to this point, with an assumptive “acceptable abuse” management principle.

What are conflicts of interest?

“Conflicts of interest occur when an office holder puts his or her personal or financial interest ahead of the public interest. In the simplest terms, the official reaps a monetary or other reward from a decision made in his or her public capacity.”

“The most common conflicts in local government happen when officeholders face a vote on real property/land use issues that affect their own holdings,” review: Conflicts of Interest in Government

Government employees and private contractors within the government are both governed by a strict set of ethics and principles, noteworthy here is the definition of Conflict of Interest. “The SGE category was created by Congress as a way to apply an important, but Limited, set of conflict of interest requirements to a group of individuals who provide important but limited services to the Government. (i.e. Manning, Federal Conflict of Interest Law 30 (1964).”  These exist whether stated in a contract or not, as exemplary as well as binding.

“The first and perhaps most important point to emphasize is that SGEs are Government employees, for purposes of the conflict of interest laws. Specifically, an SGE is defined, in 18 U.S.C. § 202(a), as “an officer or employee . . . who is retained, designated, appointed, or employed” by the Government to perform temporary duties, with or without compensation, for not more than 130 days during any period of 365 consecutive days.”  Precedent and Laws governing this situation can be perused here: CONFLICT OF INTEREST AND THE SPECIAL GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEE.  Again and without a doubt, all contracts abide by the Laws and ethics situations in accord with government law and policy.

“Each year OGE issues a survey of prosecutions involving the conflict of interest criminal statutes (18 U.S.C. §§ 202-209). Information on the prosecutions by U.S. Attorneys’ offices and the Public Integrity Section of the Department of Justice’s Criminal Division is provided to OGE with the assistance of the Executive Office for United States Attorneys at the Department of Justice,” review: Conflict of Interest Prosecution Surveys.

Laws and Ethics Ignored by BLM

We see on the Internet or while visiting a wild horse herd round up, abuse as well as legal and ethics violations remain abundant.  We see the ignorant abuse on the Internet constantly, of those killing and torturing wolves, abundantly.  Our government and legislators sit back and do nothing, ignoring the Conflict of Interest and breaking of the Law, abundantly.  Why?

Within the research is the undeniable situation of Conflict of Interest Laws and Policy being violated, especially between the BLM and the cattle industry?  We also, without much effort, can locate information that show beyond a doubt the cattle industry, or a specific special interest group, is making a lot of money due to legislative actions, or lack of action, in regard to wild horse herd roundups and the killing of wolves.

Simply stated, and without any type of civilized-reaction or doubt, these Conflicts of Interest Must Stop Immediately.  Our legislators must be informed weekly, if not daily to stop this kind of uncivilized, ignorant, and inhumane conduct!  Taxpayers can no longer support this obvious violation of laws and violations of our natural habitats.  Ecosystems on our Public Lands are destroyed due to cattle grazing, below 1% of industry production, and we pay three times the amount at the store as well as pay for this same beef on Public Lands — essentially three seperate occasions of paying for the same beef!

Being an activist, or taking a vigorous and sometimes aggressive action in pursuing a political or social end, is a strange and often difficult task for most common folks.  Some activists are termed anarchists, or somebody who believes that governments should be changed or abolished.  This is not the roll of most activists, and those that remain active against Wild Horse Herd Roundups remain synonymous with positive attributes.

Change is Inevitable and Positive Change is not an Easy Task

Within a wayward definition, an anarchist and supposedly an activist, as opposing authorities believe the term, also defined as somebody who tries to overthrow a government or behaves in a lawless way.  Neither definition provides a likeable term toward activists, who, simply defined, are people that believe something wrong should be corrected.  Without activism the reality is we would have lost our Rights as citizens of the United States many decades ago. As it is there are not enough activists to uphold “all” of our current Rights.

Demonizing Activists

The other and more significant problem is demonizing the activist, so popular and used by politicians loosely in today’s media.  Some Journalists fall under this situation quite a bit, especially describing the opposition or those views contrary to the politician’s.  But when needed for their votes, suddenly activists become a popular necessity, and in reality can and often do sway results.

These terms are used by those who believe “hate” is acceptable in our culture.  One must wonder if politician’s consultants tell them that’s what a politician should do, or behave like, in today’s social environment; this compared to simply confronting and to actually resolve a problem or controversial situation.  Then activists would not be needed.  No, hate is not acceptable!

Rights to All Americans

Americans have Rights upheld by the Constitution and within the Bill of Rights.  There is no confusion within either document, that is, until our government agencies, and their employees attempt to persuade us toward confusion, especially when caught doing something contradictory toward either document.  Attorneys argue before our Courts, whether the arguments honest or being paid to be an ass, never the less many are most often dishonest and contrary to our existing Rights as Americans.  Fortunately, often our Rights remain upheld, whereas, there have been additions to the Bill of Rights, but nothing taken away or any existing situations edited for a different result.

Rights and the Law

Here is a quick example: Under other than perfect circumstances someone sees one of the lost arguments, although contrary to our Rights, and indeed lost in a Court of Law, assesses the questionable situation as a truth and the confusion begins; even though a quick check would show the error.  Confinement to a government agency’s Policy is another characteristic confused by most, often assumed law, but just as often contrary to the law and unenforceable; certainly debatable.

Common Folks and Activisim

Whichever the definable attribute is accepted, what makes many common folks activists today is motivated most often by our government and the way people in the government go about their daily responsibilities, or lack of. . .  Often the way our civil servants, who are responsible for safeguarding, for example taxpayer lands and wildlife, do so in a questionable or disrespectful manner toward those who actually own, in this case, our lands and wildlife and owned/managed by the government body, defined as American ownership, as the government is made up . . . for the people and of the people of the United States of America.

Manipulated Confusion

The difficulty arises when there is too much communication, or an overabundance of information, which often confuses many people; for example the controversial National Debt situation, with an overview and breakdown of the reality on the Internet and referenced here.  The breakdown of debt percentages may be enlightening to most, demonstrating that receiving the correct information most often corrects future problems of controversy.

Open Debate is Good for the Country

An Open-Debate platform, having correct information is good for our country, good for our freedoms of speech, our freedoms of daily movement and activities, and the very foundation good decisions are made upon.  Thereby, the necessity is for transparency in all matters concerning any government body.

This confusion, or overabundance of information, becomes a vast road-block to many activists that have, indeed, taken upon themselves the responsibility of correcting something wrong in our government system.

BLM and Dishonest Horse Counts

Good examples are the way the BLM do Wild Horse Counts, or how they are paid-off illegally and their fraudulent activity, or their theft of government property (steeling horses from BLM land and BLM employees paid to “Look the Other Way”) being okay, when it is not okay, and is a felony.  The BLM has the same responsibility toward upholding the laws of our nation, just as we do.

When the common folks finally have enough of this type of behavior from government employees, the common folks then become activists.  The reality is making something right, whether it is behavior or saving wildlife or icons such as our Wild Horses as far back as the 1950’s.  This roll then becomes a difficult task at best.

Activists are Patriots Make No Doubt

True-Activists are true patriots, believing in the American system in their attempts to develop the truth of the matter, in this case the lies and overall illegal nature of the current BLM activities, in the attempt to resolve problems.  As a Veteran of a foreign war myself, I can attest to the fact the roll of activist is not the same, but similar in performing an ideological and patriotic act.  Make no doubt these people that take on the activist roll are warriors, attempting resolution in an appropriate manner, legally.  It is one of our Rights as Americans; the Boston Tea Party participants were activists and patriots, as was our first Congress and President.

Sometimes I may not agree with an activist’s belief, but I believe in American Rights, and will again defend any American to have those beliefs and Rights as prescribed by our Constitution and Bill of Rights.  Picking and choosing which Constitutional Right, or choosing only a few Rights from the Bill of Rights, and benefits me only, or any I may agree with and toss the others away, is simply wrong.  If that makes me a radical, or other derogatory remarks made by those wanting to usurp my rights, then whose wrong here?

Why Information Confusion?

Our government uses confusion and the overabundance of information, as well as derogatory terms and name-calling in order to side step controversy, to cover up questionable events, cover up theft and other felonies as if our laws inAmericaare not applicable for them as well.  Currently they do this often.  This needs to be stopped.

Activists Love Their Country

This is what true activists do out of love for their country, their environment, or their condition of living standards, make no doubt about this!  Joining rather than condemning activists is good for the human spirit; positive contribution always uplifts all of our spirits.  If a person has knowledge of government crimes, yet says nothing, then later yells about their rights when violated, should perhaps rethink their living arrangement or redefine how this country become free in the first place.

Our freedoms being upheld takes cooperation and involvement from us all.  Perhaps our country is the way it is today due to lack of involvement, hate, and information confusion.  So it’s a matter of stepping forward and stating such things as, “. . . the BLM is doing things in an abusive and illegal manner”.  Then demanding our legislators fix the problem, and if they don’t then asking, Why Not?  Too many excuses are present today to hate, when none of the excuses, in reality, are real and this equates to dissention and nothing getting done.