Help strengthen alternative media by visiting our supporters

Sheepdog Supplies

Government Theft Of Private Property

The citizens in small communities across the west are being pushed into a corner and then administratively denied due process.

Government Theft Of Private Property

Government Theft Of Private Property

By Tim Ravndal

A process mandated by federal law requires federal agencies to coordinate their plans, programs and management activities with local government. It is a powerful tool that can be used to protect private property rights, productive uses of land, and local economies from burdensome government regulations.

Under the Multiple Use and Sustained Yield Act of 1960 the federal government laid the foundation for beneficial use of the land and resources for the people.  Several years later the right to beneficial use of natural resources evolved to FLPMA in 1976.

The Hage family bought a ranch in central Nevada in 1978.  They worked hard to develop a large cow/calf operation that included development of grazing allotments.

It was not long before Mr. Wayne Hage realized he was facing a regulatory takings of the family ranch by the federal government.

Through the adoption of new regulations, the federal government incrementally gained control of all grazing rights and the public use of natural resources. Hage realized the family ranch was being stolen by the federal government.  They forced his family off of the land that he developed to care for his cattle and the future.

Mr. Hage and his family stood on the front lines fighting for private property rights from the beginning.  The family knew it was their duty to place a foundation of freedom in the West for the American People.

Margaret Byfield

Margaret Byfield, the daughter of the late Wayne Hage, launched “Stewards Of The Range”.  The American Land Foundation merged with Stewards Of The Range in 2009.

The organization is now known as American Stewards of Liberty.  Margaret insists that the inherent rights of the people cannot be taken without a fight.

Byfield’s family experienced unprecedented regulatory pressures that eventually led to Hage v. United States, the first federal lands grazing case filed in the United States Court of Federal Claims.

27 years later the 9th Circuit moved on the takings claims against the Hage Estate and the American people.

The people continue to see regulatory takings of private property rights on the front lines of planning from the local government level up to the top!

Every local government in the United States is in control of the future of land management if they use the tools available.  Under federal law, there is a planning process known as “Coordination”.

From the beginning American Stewards of Liberty pushed local government officials across the country to engage in coordination planning.  Contact American Stewards For Liberty for more information.

Unfortunately, many local government officials were more comfortable with the “Cooperating Agency” planning process.  In this process they did not have to do any work.  Lead agencies provide a final planning document to sign at the end of the process.

The cooperating agency process leaves the people without true representation.  Agency personnel meet regularly in different parts of the country leaving local elected officials out of the planning process until the end

Now enter the new era where the planning process is done through collaboration.  In this planning strategy, special interest groups grab what they can and twist arms behind closed doors.

The people are then delivered the final product with little opportunity for input.  Agencies engaged in this process claim that the National Environmental Policy Act requires them to have public involvement from the scoping stage through to the end.

Under Collaboration, that is usually considered lip service as the process moves on without interference from the people.   Usually the citizens do not hear about the process until it has been finalized between the collaborating partners.

Fred Kelly Grant

Mr. Fred Kelly Grant initiated the coordination process in Owyhee County, Idaho that stopped the federal government from moving forward to take land away from private ranchers.

Even though Mr. Grant is working on being retired, he summed up his work of a half century in a book he wrote called “Justice My Ass”

More recently the American West has seen the attack on the Bundy ranch where even the law gets broken by the very agencies that write it.

Not long ago, Joe Robertson from Montana was thrown in prison as a result of the ongoing effort to eliminate all private property inholdings.

The citizens in small communities across the west are being pushed into a corner and then administratively denied due process.  Standing for Freedom and Liberty, will take an awakening by the people of this country in the name of survival.

LaVoy Finicum, Joe Robertson and a few other American Patriots stood on the battlefield till the end.  #neverforget


The views, opinions, or positions expressed by the authors and those providing comments are theirs alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views, opinions, positions of Redoubt News. Social Media, including Facebook, has greatly diminished distribution of our stories to our readers’ newsfeeds and is instead promoting Main Stream Media sources. This is called ‘Shadow-banning’. Please take a moment and consider sharing this article with your friends and family. Thank you. Please support our coverage of your rights. Donate here:

2 Comments on Government Theft Of Private Property

  1. We here in Sanders County Montana have been trying to get our County Commissioners to invoke Coordination for years now. It is like talking to a post.

  2. Rusty may be like Rodney: no respect?

    “Jurisdiction can be challenged at any time.” Basso v. Utah Power & Light Co., 495 F 2nd 906 at 910.

    “It is axiomatic that the prosecution must always prove territorial jurisdiction over a crime in order to sustain a conviction therefore.” U.S. v. Benson, 495 F.2d, at 481 (5th Cir., 1974).

    “The law provides that once State and Federal Jurisdiction has been challenged, it must be proven.” Main v. Thiboutot, 100 S. Ct. 2502 (1980).

    “Where there is absence of proof of jurisdiction, all administrative and judicial proceedings are a nullity, and confer no right, offer no protection, and afford no justification, and may be rejected upon direct collateral attack.” Thompson v Tolmie, 2 Pet. 157, 7 L. Ed. 381; and Griffith v. Frazier, 8 Cr. 9, 3 L. Ed. 471.

    “the burden of proving jurisdiction rests upon the party asserting it.” Bindell v. City of Harvey, 212 Ill.App.3d 1042, 571 N.E.2d 1017 (1st Dist. 1991).

Comments are closed.