Private Property Abuses

Violations of the Constitution

Violations of the Constitution
(A Land Management Nightmare)
By Justin O. Smith
Sent: 4/18/2014 11:54 PM
Cliven Bundy's twenty year battle over grazing rights became tense and volatile on April 10, 2014, when supporters protested and confronted Bureau of Land Management officers, who had illegally confiscated Bundy cattle, private property, calling them "trespass" cattle. A 1998 court order required Bundy to remove the livestock and pay damages for trespassing; since then, the BLM has exceeded its authority in its attempts to enforce BLM regulations. It is also now evident that Bundy did, in fact, have preemptive rights, which superseded federal claims to the land. And, while this confrontation was troubling and riveting, it is just a small part of a much greater federal assault on all private property rights across America.
An estimated 200 BLM armed officers deployed to the Bundy ranch in Bunkerville, Nevada, and over the period of three days, they threw Bundy's 57 year old sister, a cancer survivor, to the ground, tasered one son and arrested another for not protesting in a "designated free speech zone". The BLM also actually had snipers targeting the protesters, but unknown to them at the time, they had been flanked and militia members from Montana, Texas and Utah had them in their scopes.
Several elected officials were deeply troubled by what they saw. Nevada Governor Brian Sandoval, who could have de-escalated the matter by interceding, only remarked, "No cow justifies the atmosphere of intimidation which currently exists nor the limitation of constitutional rights that are sacred to all Nevadans." But, Arizona Rep Kelly Townsend was so disturbed by the BLM's actions that he drove to the Bundy ranch, and later he stated, "I don't recognize my country at this point."

Obama's New Plan for the Spotted Owl Doubles Habitat Area

WASHINGTON (AP) — To save the imperiled spotted owl, the Obama administration is moving forward with a controversial plan to shoot barred owls, a rival bird that has shoved its smaller cousin aside.

The plan is the latest federal attempt to protect the northern spotted owl, the passive, one-pound bird that sparked an epic battle over logging in the Pacific Northwest two decades ago.

The government set aside millions of acres of forest to protect the owl, but the bird's population continues to decline — a 40 percent slide in 25 years.

A plan announced Tuesday would designate habitat considered critical for the bird's survival, while allowing logging to reduce the risk of catastrophic wildfire and to create jobs. Habitat loss and competition from barred owls are the biggest threats to the spotted owl.

Interior Secretary Ken Salazar called the draft plan "a science-based approach to forestry that restores the health of our lands and wildlife and supports jobs and revenue for local communities."

By removing selected barred owls and better managing forests, officials can give communities, foresters and land managers in three states important tools to promote healthier and more productive forests, Salazar said.

The new plan, which replaces a 2008 Bush administration plan that was tossed out in federal court, affects millions of acres of national, state and private forest land in Washington, Oregon and Northern California.


North Carolina town seizes World War II vet's farm

North Carolina town seizes World War II vet's farm to make room for ballooning population.

Matthews, NC - local resident and 87-year old WW2 veteran Neubert Purser, 87, was blindsided by the local government. On the morning of March 5, 2005, Purser opened the local paper to find a 30-day notice from the Town of Matthews condemning his 71-acre farm which he had purchased in 1954. He had already told the town he did not want to sell his property but did not realize that they had the right to seize his property through eminent domain.

The reason for the town's seizure of Purser's land - and quite possibly that of others - is the rapid growth of the population. Matthews has grown from 10,000 residents in 1980 to approximately 30,000 in 2005. In short, because other people started encroaching on his space, the government took it over.

Neubert Purser served on the front line of the Battle of the Bulge in Germany during World War II, and was severely injured when fragments from an exploding shell ripped a 4-by-8 inch gash in his body.

The case was ultimately resolved, sort of, when after a lengthy lawsuit, Purser was offered $4.25 million for the property on which he may live until his death. While this may sound like a lot, the settlement was only reached because Purser had racked up $400,000 in legal fees and the eminent domain clause gave him no leg to stand on.

DAG says: This case is small, however it ought to serve as a warning. The town used its eminent domain clause to secure more public space from a citizen in order to deal with rampant growth. This same legal pathway and justification could be used to seize property when illegal immigrants begin encroaching on towns and cities.

Kelo v City of New London

Uploaded by catoinstitutevideo on Mar 19, 2009

Susette Kelo's legal battle with New London, Conn. brought about one of the most controversial and troubling Supreme Court rulings in many many years. But her fight also spurred a backlash among property owners and state legislatures. Susette Kelo now lives in a town across the river from New London.


Panel clears scientists who testified in delta smelt case

After a judge blasts two scientists in a case about California's delta smelt, an independent panel finds that the Interior Department biologists may have been unclear but didn't do anything improper.

  • The threatened delta smelt are tiny but wield big influence in California water policy.
The threatened delta smelt are tiny but wield big influence in California… (University of California)
January 06, 2012|By Bettina Boxall, Los Angeles Times

Two federal biologists accused of providing misleading and deceptive testimony in a case involving the imperiled delta smelt did not engage in improper conduct or invoke bad science, according to an independent panel.

The scientists' credibility came under attack last year, when a federal judge who had presided over many of California's most contentious water cases blasted them from the bench.

Government Closes 850 Dams with More Planned

Sheriff's Stand Tall for the Constitution - individual videos of speakers at event held in Yreka, CA - October 22, 2011
(After viewing, go back to original link below to watch the next video)
Defend Rural America - Kirk MacKenzie, Founder
Write to sign up for their newsletter:
This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

In California and Oregon, rural landowners are being fined $25,000 per fish for every one of a particular fish (the size of a large minnow) that dies on their property. People are planting them on the ranches to induce the fines!  Four of these fish would weigh a couple of ounces and if 4 died, the fine is $100k. People are coming onto their property and planting them! The fish hatchery produces over 6 million salmon per year, most are kings, 70k coho salmon, but they don't count the ones in the hatcheries! The arguments being made by the government are atrocious.

MacKenzie said there is a plan to take out energy dams in Southern Oregon that will take out what little is left from the Spotted Owl debacle. Now it's the coho salmon which the feds decided is threatened, but it turns out they aren't threatened at all! They travel to Russia and Japan and Alaska. The fed gov has planted them in reservoirs throughout the U.S. including the Great Lakes and then says there's not enough of them! They are not native to the United States. They define threatened in a way to guarantee the outcome which is that will get rid of humanity. There's a plan and 850 dams have already been removed nationwide with plans to remove alot more! With it goes the energy and the water and the sustenance that we need.


America's Landed Bureaucracy

America’s ‘Landed Bureaucracy’

America's 'Landed Bureaucracy'

By Howard Rich — “This land is your land, this land is my land.”

That’s what the classic Woody Guthrie song would have us believe, but the truth is not nearly so idyllic — or accurate. That’s because accompanying government’s ongoing explosion beyond the boundaries of common sense and core functionality has been a corresponding explosion of its physical boundaries.

This unchecked expansion is picking up steam under Barack Obama — whose administration has targeted 14 million acres in the American West, among other properties, as prime targets for Borg-like assimilation.


U.S. tackles endangered species backlog

The Associated Press

Read 5 comments5

The Obama administration in the United States is taking steps to extend new federal protections to a list of imperilled animals and plants that reads like a manifest for Noah's Ark — from the melodic golden-winged warbler and slow-moving gopher tortoise, to the slimy American eel and tiny Texas kangaroo rat.


U.S. Fish and Wildlife targets 7,015 acres in Mississippi and Louisiana for habitat

On November 27, 2007, the Center for Biological Diversity and Friends of Mississippi Public Lands (plaintiffs) filed a lawsuit against the (U.S. Fish and Wildlife)Service and the Secretary of the Interior for our failure to timely designate critical habitat for the Mississippi gopher frog (Friends of Mississippi Public Lands andCenter for Biological Diversity v. Kempthorne (07–CV–02073).
The Federal Land Grab is alive and well in Mississippi with the U.S. Department of Fish and Wildlife poised to take nearly 3,000 acres of privately owned land in Mississippi and Louisiana along with 4,000 acres of federal and state land to designate it as a 'protected' habitat for the Gopher frog! But...WAIT FOR IT...the proposed critical habitat includes land that doesn't have any of the frogs living on it! Read it yourself below. I'm not making this up!
I LOVE the term 'SET ASIDE'. Why don't they just call it what it is...STEALING OUR LAND! This abuse of private property is going on across the country in massive federal and state land grabs and YOU and I and YOUR NEIGHBORS and EVERYONE you know must stand up to this abuse of power or it will continue until they have abolished the right to own private property in our country, which is the source of our wealth, our strength and our success as a free market economy.

Angry federal judge rips 'false testimony' of federal scientists

Washington Examiner
By: Ron Arnold | 09/22/11 8:05 PM

A tough federal judge in Sacramento has become a folk hero of Central California citizens for protecting people and endangered species instead of putting the interests of either over the other.

In the process, U.S. District Judge Oliver Wanger made two huge splashes last week in what began as a water-supply war a decade ago, then grew into a convoluted endangered-fish war.

Today, it's a gigantic good science versus bad science war pitting California residents against a tiny fish and government officials diverting two years' worth of water for a large city or agricultural region and flushing it into the San Francisco Bay.


Family fights Conservation Easement in Minnesota

Summary to be posted soon...please check back.

Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM.

Chad Robert Kjeldahl appeals from the district court's 1 grant of summary judgment to defendants in this action arising out of a proposed lease of farmland subject to a conservation easement. We affirm.

Kjeldahl argues, as he did below, that 7 U.S.C. § 2002 permits transfers of conservation easements between federal agencies only where the previous owner's or operator's rights expired, that because he was a participant in the Farmers Home Administration (FmHA) leaseback/buyback program his rights had not expired, and that, accordingly, section 2002 prohibits the FmHA from including in Kjeldahl's proposed lease a conservation easement assigned to the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS). Kjeldahl also argues that an FmHA letter concerning his father indicates Consolidated Farm and Rural Development Act, Pub.L. No. 87-128, § 335(b) 1961 U.S.C.C.A.N. (87 Stat.) 358, precludes Executive Order 11990 from authorizing the transfer of conservation easements between federal agencies. This court reviews de novo a grant of summary judgment, applying the same standards as the district court. See Sierra Club v.Robertson, 28 F.3d 753, 760 (8th Cir.1994).

This court also reviews de novo the district court's interpretation of statutes. Rifkin v. McDonnell Douglas Corp., 78 F.3d 1277, 1280 (8th Cir.1996). We agree with the district court that the conservation easement is lawful. The imposition of the conservation easement in favor of the United States, to be administered and managed by the FWS pursuant to Executive Order 11990, is not inconsistent with Kjeldahl's buyback/leaseback rights. See Harris v. United states, 19 F.3d 1090, 1093-94 (5th Cir.1994). We also reject as meritless Kjeldahl's claims regarding section 335(b) and the FmHA letter
concerning his father.

Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of thedistrict court.

Fight over Conservation Easements in Oregon

Summary to be posted soon...please check back.

Myron and Dorothy Miles filed a complaint on December 8, 1989 in an attempt to force the Farmers Home Administration ("FmHA") to convey to them real property in Baker County, Oregon, free and clear of an easement to protect wetlands located thereon. The complaint originally asserted twelve claims for relief, raising primarily contract and administrative procedure issues. An amended complaint was filed, adding three claims under the Fifth Amendment alleging an unconstitutional taking and one claim in mandamus.

The district court found in favor of the United States and against the plaintiffs on all claims. The Court dismissed the Miles' claims based on contract (the first, third, and fourth claims); on mandamus, to the extent based on contract (sixteenth claim); on right of redemption (the second claim); on alleged failure to give notice (the fifth, sixth and seventh claims); on the cost to the government of protecting the subject wetlands (the eighth claim); and on the Fifth Amendment taking clause (the thirteenth, fourteenth, and fifteenth claims).

The district court determined that the remaining claims depended upon whether the property contained "wetlands" as defined in Executive Order 11990 and the Food Security Act, 16 U.S.C. § 3801(a)(16). If so, the court had to consider the extent to which the claims were actions under the Administrative Procedure Act ("APA") subject to review on the record.

Based on the facts in the administrative record, the district court found that there were substantial areas of natural wetlands on the property, and that FmHA's determination of the easement area was not arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, and was otherwise in accordance with the law. Plaintiff timely appealed. Argument was scheduled for July 10, 1991. Prior to argument, appellants moved this court for a continuance of oral argument, and, simultaneously, moved for relief from the district court's judgement under Fed.R.Civ.P. 60(b)(2), claiming that it had discovered new evidence.

Update coming soon...

National Wildlife Federation v Baxters in Idaho

Summary to be posted soon...please check back.




NATIONAL WILDLIFE FEDERATION;  Idaho Wildlife Federation, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. Mike ESPY,Secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture;  La Verne Ausman, Administrator of Farmers Home Administration;  Tracy L. Baxter, and Sharon L. Baxter, Defendants-Appellees, Farm Credit Bank of Spokane, Defendant.

No. 92-35568.

Argued and Submitted Dec. 14, 1993. -- January 20, 1995

Before:  BROWNING, NORRIS, and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges.

Thomas M. France,Nat. Wildlife Federation, Missoula, MT and Marion Yoder, Nat. Wildlife Federation, Bismark, ND, for plaintiffs-appellants.Andrea Nervi Ward, U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, DC, for defendants-appellees.Stephen C. Hardesty,Hawley, Troxell, Ennis & Hawley, Boise, ID, for defendants-appellees.

Farmers Home Administration (“FmHA”) took title to the Lazy C-H Ranch in Bear Lake County, Idaho, from a delinquent borrower, subject to a mortgage held by Farm Credit Bank of Spokane.   The mortgage covered 2,135 acres of the 4,704 acre Ranch, including approximately 730 acres of wetlands.



Follow up on The Florida Story

READ UPDATE ON 27 cases filed by D.E.R.M. to remove South Miami property owners from their homes, including fines in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, demands to remove all structures and soil to allow the land to go back to nature and told that they will have to continue paying their mortgages. THIS IS OUTRIGHT THEFT AND ABUSE OF CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS!  It has destroyed the rights of these Americans. SEE STORIES BELOW THE LINE.

Florida resident, Aida Fernandez, went on a hunger strike to protest the abuse by D.E.R.M., the Miami Dade Department of Environmental Resources Management, against 400 property owners  in an 8.5 mile area adjacent to the who faced hundred of thousands of dollars in fines and destruction of their property as the county classified their land as environmentally sensitive wetlands. The property owners call it a land grab.


Property Theft in Mississippi - Part 1

Submitted anonymously to protect the identity against further government harassment.

The story I am about to tell may intentionally leave out names but I will share if needed. It will depict methods and purposes of the US government and agencies thereof conspiring with each other and private businesses to illegally seize property from individuals right here in the State of Mississippi. It will include local agencies as well as state and federal. I personally believe that the money powers set out to “take” long before Agenda 21 was created. When I say the money powers I believe they consist of the old Trilateral Commission and the current Council of Foreign Relations.


Historic Supreme Court ruling allows the Sacketts to fight EPA takeover of their land

March 21, 2012 - Status: Victory! The U.S. Supreme Court issued an unanimous decision in favor of the Sacketts on March 21, 2012. The judgment is reversed and case is remanded.

WASHINGTON D.C.; March 21, 2012: In a precedent-setting victory for the rights of all property owners, the United States Supreme Court today held that landowners have a right to direct, meaningful judicial review if the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency effectively seizes control of their property by declaring it to be “wetlands.”

The Court ruled in favor of Mike and Chantell Sackett, of Priest Lake, Idaho, who were told by EPA — and by the Ninth Circuit — that they could not get direct court review of EPA’s claim that their two-thirds of an acre parcel is “wetlands” and that they must obey a detailed and intrusive EPA “compliance” order, or be hit with fines of up to $75,000 per day.

(Read full story at above link)

PLF Sentry

January 25, 2012

A white-hot grilling for EPA at the Supreme Court


"Don't you think most ordinary homeowners would say this kind of thing can't happen in the United States?"

- U.S. Supreme Court Justice
Samuel Alito

Oral argument was held on January 9 in Sackett v. EPA, PLF's high-profile property rights case at the U.S. Supreme Court.


It's a day that EPA would surely like to forget. The government attorney was hit with a hailstorm of rough questioning - leading The Washington Post to report: "Justices across the ideological spectrum appeared troubled by the EPA's position that Mike and Chantell Sackett do not have the right to go to court to challenge the agency's [labeling of their property as] wetlands."




Sacramento, CA; August 18, 2011: The current issue of Bloomberg Businessweek magazine reports on Sackett v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Pacific Legal Foundation’s high-profile property rights case that the U.S. Supreme Court has accepted for review in the coming term.

Dan and Denise Sterling, PLF clientsThe article, by Bloomberg News Supreme Court reporter Greg Stohr, is titled, “Mike and Chantell Sackett vs. the EPA.” It notes that the Sacketts’ case has the potential “to bolster the rights of landowners facing costly demands from the federal government.”

The litigation raises a fundamental question: When EPA declares private property to be “wetlands,” does the owner have the right to meaningful judicial review of the agency’s determination, or may EPA put a freeze on private property without effective court oversight? (continued below)


The Florida Story

This is a stick-up!
Property owners in the remaining part of 8.5 square mile area, Hialeah and South Dade in Dade County, Florida have been subjected to attacks on their private property rights by the Department of Environmental Resources Management (DERM),,,



Battle for the California Desert
Why is the Government Driving Folks Off Their Land? 

If you have been looking behind the curtain of “going green,” biodiversity, smart growth, and sustainable development, then you see with us, the kind of tyranny from which America’s forefathers fought to be free. And you will recognize that recurring theme in this video.


Water shut off to California farms because of endangered fish!

Posted 8/11/09

Read information below that explains California in its state of emergency because of liberals shutting off water to our food supply just to try and protect a fish from getting caught in our drain pipes.

Unemployment rates are now 40% because of the water being shut off to farmers. Hundreds of acres of crops are now dead. 1 million acres of fields and orchards also have no aboveground water supply. People have to go to food banks for food. Fruits and vegetable prices have skyrocketed in central California.

Federal water managers cut off water to thousands of California farms as a result of Water has been cut off since March.
Farmers in the nation's No. 1 agriculture state predicted it would cause consumers to pay more for their fruits and vegetables, which would have to be grown using expensive well water.


On the Radio

Stop Agenda 21 in MS
On the Radio

Tuesday, Oct. 4
11:00 a.m. w/JT

or via iPhone app


 WYAB-FM Jackson
Jennifer West, Chairman of the Mississippi Tea Party's Agenda 21 Committee with host Kim Wade on
September 9 - Agenda 21
37 min commercials edited out
September 29 - Fed. Land Grab
39 min commercials edited out

Friday, Sept 9 - Host Kheri Hines discusses Agenda 21 in a two hour broadcast. Guests include guests John Marler, Orlean Koehle and Michael Shaw.


Agenda 21 Radio

These shows are devoted to issues
surrounding Agenda 21

Monday 7-8EST, 6-7CST, 5-6MST, 4-5PST

Tuesday 3-4EST, 2-3CST, 1-2MST, 12-1PST

Daily 11-12EST, 10-11CST, 9-10MST, 8-9PST
Dr Richard Swier
Click Here to listen