The Property-Rights Movement or the Sagebrush Rebellion Revisited

1. The Property-Rights Movement or the Sagebrush Rebellion Revisited A Series of Analyses From Around the Country • Property Rights Movement: • Concerns the “rights” of people, companies, cities, counties • and states. • Land Ownership evident in the 1890’s with the establishment • of the first Forest Reserves. • In 1897, Congress allowed homesteaders to find farm land • inside the reserves. • - Resulted in the loss of thousands of acres of public • timbered land to developers. • Efforts by Westerners in the early 1970’s to take over • management and ownership of Federal lands were called • the "Sagebrush Rebellion."

2. The Property-Rights Movement or the Sagebrush Rebellion Revisited A Series of Analyses From Around the Country • Wise-Use Movement: • The movement began in the early 1990’s. • Today, the WUM is concerned with federal and state taking. • Elements of the WUM can be seen in the sagebrush • rebellion, but the WUM has more political support. • Wise-Use Movement Values: • People with a mission... • Local action, national press… • Philosophy… • View of Environmentalists… • Recent successes… • Libertarian bent… • Speaking Engagements…

3. Federal Workers Become Target of Wave of Threats and Violence Government employees are cast as a “New World Order” working to take over the United States. • Increase in conflicts cause reason for concern: • Seattle – A bomb detonates inside the Forest Service Office • Montana – A militia leader directed threats at public officials, • who say they now fear for their lives • Idaho – Federal agencies have stopped performing their • duties fearing violence from government opposed radicals • Nevada - Local officials say they will arrest federal workers • interfering with plans to assert control over public lands • Oklahoma – Oklahoma City bombing • Montana – Militia sent fax urging members to take actions • on April 19 (Oklahoma City and Waco, Texas incidents)

4. Home Rule Memo Grass Roots Effort by “The Federal Land Conference.” • Pros, Cons and General Observations: • Scope of “Home Rule”: Influence federal land management. • Limitations Under State Law: A county can legislate over • issues affecting the health and welfare within the county. • Home Rule Tool Kit: Laws require that the federal government • solicit local, and state input when amending land policies. • Protecting the Economy: It is the opportunity and duty of the • impacted community to present analyses that federal • agencies cannot ignore. • Environmental Impact Input: County adoption of a “county use • plan” addressing federal lands will give counties a direct role • in determining the significance of environmental impacts. • Ousting the Federal Government: County governments can • take over control of federal land through land use plans. • A judge in a Nevada case reaffirmed the authority of the U.S. • government over federally owned land.

5. Home Rule Road Show Public Lands: Ownership and Management • Wayne Hage: "The argument is not over who owns the land, but who exerts the legislative jurisdiction, that is, who makes and enforces the rules.” • Dick Carver: "The Federal government has the power to do only four things: print money, regulate commerce, establish post offices and post roads and raise armies and declare war. • Comments and Thoughts: • The proposed solutions may seem extreme, but the frustrations people are feeling are very real. • We need to be prudent and compassionate in the exercise of our duties. • Hot Topics: • -Armed law enforcement officers • -Federal claims on water rights • -Grazing

6. Western States Coalition and “Win Back the West” Seminar People believing Federal government is interfering with their daily lives. • Western States Coalition – Summit III: • Threat to western water rights. • Field-level employees marching to orders from above. • Concern with consideration of the “Ecosystem Management.” • Win Back the West Conference: A series of speakers • Advocated action through the judicial system. • Arguments are based on selective view of U.S. history and • Constitutional interpretation. • Resemblance to “New World Order” theory arguments. • No concern with Native American claims to western land.

7. Western States Coalition and “Win Back the West” Seminar Speakers at the Conference • Comisky: Why, How and Where • Why - danger of losing the right to own property in America • How-government of, by and for the people • Where – going back to local control and to use of the land • Wayne Hage: Remedies to the nationalization of land • Traditional Industry approach • Sagebrush Rebellion approach • Constitutional approach • Mike Kelly: Advocate of “Home Rule.” • Uses the constitution as the basis of power concentrating on • the state needing more power than the federal government. • Dick Carver: Threaten federal employees with arrest. • Abides by constitution laws not Supreme Court decisions. • Gene Gustin: • Advocates establishing a body with fact-finding authority.

8. Wise-Use Threats Exposed Environmentalists: An Endangered Species? • ”The War Against Greens”: • Environmentalists are having to pay for speaking out in • defense of the earth • Militant groups use tactics to silence “tree-huggers” • They have projected fear into the political process • Demolishes the fiction that anti-environmentalism is a grass- • roots movement by showing its corporate underpinnings

9. Wise-Use Directory Coalitions powering the Wise-Use Movement. • ” American Farm Bureau Federation - Large organization • associated with the Wise Use Movement • Blue Ribbon Coalition - umbrella organization of the Wise- • Use movement • Center for the Defense of Free Enterprise - sponsored • three conferences establishing the Wise-Use movement • Land Center, The - instrumental in drawing up the Catron • County, NM, land use plan and ordinance • National Cattlemen's Association – preserve public land • grazing rights and fees • Public Lands Council - Organization devoted to preserving • public land grazing rights and fees for Western cattle and • sheep ranchers • Wilderness Impact Research Foundation - 231 affiliated • groups • Wise Use Agenda - Twenty-five point program adopted by • more than 240 Wise Use Movement groups

10. Catron County Ordinance Land Use Plan Ordinance • Values and Ethics: • Advocate the rights of private property owners and local • governments according to the Constitution • These ordinances attempt to weaken five acts set forth by the • federal government. • - 1-3). Adopts the U.S. Civil Rights Act • - 4). Adopts the Public Rangeland Improvement Act • - 5). Adopts a land use plan emphasizing resource • extraction • States with Catron county land use plan ordinances: • California, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Oregon, Utah, • Washington • States considering Catron county land use plan ordinances: • Colorado, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Nevada, Oregon, • Washington, Wyoming

11. Court Cases Current litigation regarding range management issues. • McKinley v. United States:The complaint alleged that the • Forest Service improperly reduced the number of cattle • authorized under the permittee plaintiff's grazing permit • Hage v. United States:Complaint alleged that the Forest • Service has taken permittee plaintiff's private property without • just compensation contrary to the fifth amendment • Federal Lands Legal Foundation v. U.S.F.S.:This • complaint alleged that the FS failed to promulgate regulations • under Section 8 of the Public Rangelands Improvement Act • Rogers v. Borden: Plaintiff alleged that the Forest Service's • negligence in failing to enforce permit terms and conditions • resulted in a permittee's cattle straying from an allotment onto • plaintiff's property and causing damage • Poorbaurh v. United States: Plaintiff alleges that the • agency negligently allowed recreationists to trespass on • plaintiff's private property adjacent to National Forest land and • also failed to prevent cattle permitted to graze on National • Forest land from trespassing on plaintiff's property.

12. County Rights Ordinance United State Department of Agriculture Report • County Petitions: • Residents in some counties are voting on whether the county • should recognize the federal government’s lack of authority to • possess unconstitutionally held land • Petitioners contend that the federal government has no • authority to manage lands except for needful buildings. • Federal ownership is not authorized and should be under • county jurisdiction • Three issues considered by the petition: • 1.)The United States owns the National Forests and • Constitution gives Congress the power to make regulations • on the property of the United States • 2.)After Congress created the National Forests, their • administration and law-making was transferred to the • Secretary of Agriculture • 3.)The Secretary delegated the authority to an Assistant • Secretary, who then delegated the power to the Chief of the • Forest Service

13. Trends in Federal Land Ownership House Resources Hearing Summary • Speaker Remarks: • Large federal acreage locked up for preservation • Affecting the economic base of local communities • 95 million acres locked up to become wilderness • Forest Service is moving from multiple-use management • and closer to preservation management philosophy • Resource agencies have been infiltrated by preservationists • Republican agenda for this meeting was to set the stage for • future evaluation of the “negative economic impacts of • federal land ownership.”

14. Future of Public Lands Documentation from Dr. Jerry Franklin • Warning about the Future of public lands: • Federal land is under attack • Challenge to federal ownership is mounted by congressional interests and their allies • Environmental groups and scientists are unwittingly assisting in creating a case for disposal of federal lands • More than a “Sagebrush Rebellion,” or Wise-Use Movement. • -a well-organized movement to take federal land • One concept is to allocate the federal lands to “dominant use” • Discrediting the federal land management agencies • “Stealth” effort to dispose of public lands • Efforts to dispose of the federal lands should not be characterized as proposals by commodity interests • Conclusion: • Think analytically about the importance of the public land • Bring the political agenda of proposals into the open to create • a forum for debate