Bigfoot 88
DP Veteran
- Joined
- Jan 16, 2011
- Messages
- 2,027
- Reaction score
- 1,169
- Location
- Georgia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Libertarian - Right
Seems the illegal aliens aren't the only "squatters" in this Nation.Does this agency have nothing better to do than ruin peoples lives?
Seems the illegal aliens aren't the only "squatters" in this Nation.
At least we know where the cowardly burned-out militias are "squatting" now .
Thanks for reading the article.
"Henderson holds a deed to the 90,000 acres, but such a legal document did not prevent him from losing the 140-acre parcel he had labored over and paid property taxes on for years."
You see, unlike Bundy, this fellow does have a case worth squawking about.
The article is a bit confusing on what is at issue here. Is it just 140 acres or the entire 90,000 acres he owns the deed for?
The 90,000 acre deed is his. 140 of those acres have already been seized.
Thanks. That bad in this case, but such a small percentage of his land it's hard to get worked up over. I do think the feds owe him for the land and/or should give allow a free grandfathered lease for the remainder of his days.
Thanks for reading the article.
"Henderson holds a deed to the 90,000 acres, but such a legal document did not prevent him from losing the 140-acre parcel he had labored over and paid property taxes on for years."
I didn't know you guys were into supporting freeloaders.
Now it's Texas.
Color me surprised when you guys decide which laws you will obey and which you won't.
And then threaten gun violence . :lamo
You see, unlike Bundy, this fellow does have a case worth squawking about.
The article is a bit confusing on what is at issue here. Is it just 140 acres or the entire 90,000 acres he owns the deed for?
Click the lick which is assigned to his name in the article. The information at that link is a bit clearer. BLM already seized 140 acres of his land and didn't compensate him. They're intending to seize 90,000 acres along the river but that land is not only his, other ranchers will be affected by that proposed seizure. It's not clear how much more of his land they're going to take from him.
I don't see why he can't retain title to the land if the river shifts its course. The land would now be in Oklahoma and should simply be registered in the OK land registry.
The law seems to be pretending that a river shifting its course somehow erases title to the land which now finds itself on the wrong side of the border and so that land is free for the BLM to grab. That seems kind of insane to me.
BLM Claims 90,000 Acres Does Not Belong To Texas, Attempts To Seize Ranch
Does this agency have nothing better to do than ruin peoples lives?
The 'Inquisitor'? Jeez, where do you find this crap?
Your right-wing militia with female shields should be arriving soon .
Nothing about this story makes a lick of sense...
Here's a report from a TV station:
Henderson lost a lawsuit 30 years ago that moved part of the northern Texas border over a mile to the south.
The Bureau of Land Management [BLM] took 140 acres of his property and didn’t pay him one cent.
Now, they want to use his case as precedent to seize land along a 116-mile stretch of the river.
“They’re wanting to take the boundaries that the courts placed here and extend those east and west to the forks of the river north of Vernon and east to the 98th Meridian which is about 20 miles east of us,” Henderson explained.
BLM, which oversees public land in the United States, claims this land never belonged to Texas.
The Texas landowners who have lived and cared for that land for hundreds of years beg to differ.
BLM plans on taking the land anyway. Property owners will be forced to spend money on lawsuits to keep what is theirs.
For many, that property has been in their family for generations.
"How can BLM come in and say, "Hey, this isn't yours." Even though it’s patented from the state, you've always paid taxes on it. Our family has paid taxes for over 100 years on this place. We've got a deed to it. But yet they walked in and said it wasn't ours," said Henderson.
Ever since the Louisiana Purchase in 1803, there has been controversy over where Oklahoma ends and Texas begins.
In layman’s terms the boundary is the vegetation line on the south side of the Red River.
A more technical explanation continues at the link.
It's apparent the OP link absolutely massacred the story it links to. Even then it is still unclear what this 90,000 acre number is supposed to apply to. The river is not 2,475 miles long and is not moving 100 yards.
If you do the math with the 140 lost acres it works out to about ~10 feet lost down a 116 mile stretch which makes sense in the rancher's case.
Absolutely terrible OP article, should be shot to death and cremated.
The 90,000 acre figure is explained in the text.
What part of having 140 acres seized without compensation do you find justifiable?
Your right-wing militia with female shields should be arriving soon .
Moderator's Warning: |
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?