[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help] 

Status: Not Logged In; Sign In

Fooling Us Badly With Psyops The Nobel Prize That Proved Einstein Wrong Put Castor Oil Here Before Bed – The Results After 7 Days Are Shocking Sounds Like They're Trying to Get Ghislaine Maxwell out of Prison Mississippi declared a public health emergency over its infant mortality rate (guess why) Andy Ngo: ANTIFA is a terrorist organization & Trump will need a lot of help to stop them America Is Reaching A Boiling Point The Pandemic Of Fake Psychiatric Diagnoses This Is How People Actually Use ChatGPT, According To New Research Texas Man Arrested for Threatening NYC's Mamdani Man puts down ABC's The View on air Strong 7.8 quake hits Russia's Kamchatka My Answer To a Liberal Professor. We both See Collapse But.. Cash Jordan: “Set Them Free”... Mob STORMS ICE HQ, Gets CRUSHED By ‘Deportation Battalion’’ Call The Exterminator: Signs Demanding Violence Against Republicans Posted In DC Crazy Conspiracy Theorist Asks Questions About Vaccines New owner of CBS coordinated with former Israeli military chief to counter the country's critics, BEST VIDEO - Questions Concerning Charlie Kirk, Douglas Macgregor - IT'S BEGUN - The People Are Rising Up! Marine Sniper: They're Lying About Charlie Kirk's Death and They Know It! Mike Johnson Holds 'Private Meeting' With Jewish Leaders, Pledges to Screen Out Anti-Israel GOP Candidates Jimmy Kimmel’s career over after ‘disgusting’ lies about Charlie Kirk shooter [Plus America's Homosexual-In-Chief checks-In, Clot-Shots, Iryna Zarutska and More!] 1200 Electric School Busses pulled from service due to fires. Is the Deep State Covering Up Charlie Kirk’s Murder? The FBI’s Bizarre Inconsistencies Exposed Local Governments Can Be Ignorant Pissers!! Cash Jordan: Gangs PLUNDER LA Mall... as California’s “NO JAILS” Strategy IMPLODES Margin Debt Tops Historic $1 Trillion, Your House Will Be Taken Blindly Warns Dohmen Tucker Carlson LIVE: America After Charlie Kirk Charlie Kirk allegedly recently refused $150 million from Israel to take more pro Israel stances "NATO just declared War on Russia!"Co; Douglas Macgregor

Dead Constitution
See other Dead Constitution Articles

Title: Hage Family Vindicated by Court Victory
Source: New American
URL Source: http://thenewamerican.com/node/8531
Published: Jun 25, 2008
Author: William F. Jasper
Post Date: 2008-07-02 22:32:48 by farmfriend
Ping List: *Agriculture-Environment*     Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*
Keywords: None
Views: 139
Comments: 6

Hage Family Vindicated by Court Victory

By: William F. Jasper
June 25, 2008

Nevada ranchers Wayne and Jean Hage did not live to see final victory in their epic property rights battle with the federal government, but their children, other ranchers, and property owners nationwide have benefited from their steadfast adherence to principle and perseverance in the face of overwhelming odds.

On June 6, Loren A. Smith, senior judge for the United States Court of Federal Claims, issued his final opinion in Hage v. United States, awarding the estates of Wayne and Jean Hage $4.2 million in compensation for physical and regulatory takings, plus 17 years of interest and attorney's fees. According the ABA Journal of the American Bar Association, the interest and attorney fees will amount to another $4.4 million. Unfortunately, neither Wayne nor Jean Hage were able to be in court to savor the victory. Mrs. Hage passed away in 1996 and Mr. Hage died in 2006. Both are buried on the family’s Pine Creek Ranch in Monitor Valley, Nevada.

"This decision is important to every American because it reaffirms our basic right to own property, whether you live in a major U.S. city or rural America," commented Margaret Byfield, the Hages’ third daughter and executive director of Stewards of the Range, an organization that has supported the case since the beginning.

Ladd Bedford, one of the attorneys for the Hage family, who was involved in the case from its inception, noted the important precedent: "There is now a deterrent to the federal agencies. The federal government has significant exposure by way of having to pay just compensation when they deny ranchers access to their water and range improvements."

"This is an important legal victory," according to Mike Van Zandt, the other attorney who has been involved in the case since the early 1990s. "The agencies have used their regulatory power to drive ranchers out of business with no regard for their property rights, and now the court has set limits on the agency's actions."

THE NEW AMERICAN, which has been reporting on the landmark Hage case almost from the beginning, has featured interviews with Wayne Hage, including one shortly before his death, and an article by him explaining the important issues at stake for all property owners in Hage v. the United States. In addition to being a rancher, Wayne Hage was a tireless patriot and public advocate, as well as a scholar whose pioneering legal and historical research has dramatically impacted American jurisprudence. In his path-breaking book, Storm Over Rangelands: Private Rights in Federal Lands, and in his many essays and speeches, Wayne Hage delineated the long-forgotten history and legal principles involved in water and property rights in the arid lands of the western United States, which differed greatly from those in the east. He also erased much of the confusion about the basis of private property rights in the “split estate” lands, those federal lands in which private property owners have ancient, genuine legal claim to property rights that federal agencies may not violate.

"My parents wanted resolution," commented Byfield. "They were told by the agencies that they had no property rights on the federal lands. They pursued this case so that this 60-year conflict between ranchers and agencies could be settled, and future generations of ranchers would have the security of their property rights. They succeeded."

A brief video interview with Wayne Hage on his ranch, the last one before he passed away, can be viewed on the home page of Stewards of the Range. Subscribe to *Agriculture-Environment*

Post Comment   Private Reply   Ignore Thread  

#1. To: farmfriend (#0)

This thread, this ruling, and these people are not getting the recognition they deserve. What a tremendous sacrifice to their countrymen they made. I wonder, looking at the state of the country today, if it was worth it.

In memoriam:

First published in The Asheville Tribune on October 29, 1999.

The revealing story of a rancher and the national debt

Investigative Documentary By David Morgan, The Asheville Tribune

Case History: Hage v. United States

After years of successfully ranching in California, Wayne & Jean Hage (she is now deceased) purchased a large cattle ranch in Nevada, Pine Creek Ranch, in the spring of 1978. The acreage involved is approximately 752,000 acres. However, as it is mostly desert land, the land's ability to support cattle is far less than might be supposed from its size.

Located in the high desert mountains of central Nevada, the remote operation seemed an unlikely place for a war that would rock the very foundation of federal land management agencies. Wayne purchased the operation from the well-respected Arcularius Brothers who sold the ranch because the regulatory pressure by the U.S. Forest Service had become unbearable. Since Wayne had always been able to work with the agency, he believed he could resolve problems that might occur. Wayne soon learned the only way he could satisfy the Forest Service was to allow them to confiscate his property.

One of the first incidents that drew the line between Wayne and the Forest Service revolved around a critical spring that Wayne owned. Situated close to the Forest Service Ranger Station in Meadow Canyon, the district ranger decided they would pipe the water from the spring, through a newly installed $50,000 water purification facility, into their cabin.

Wayne learned of this after the project was complete, and rightfully objected. He explained that if they needed his water, they could make appropriate arrangements. They refused to cooperate and would not acknowledge that he owned the water even though he held two court decrees affirming his water right. Wayne even held a field hearing where the state water engineer acknowledged Wayne's ownership and the Forest Service's illegal confiscation. But, still today, the Forest Service has maintained a fence around the spring so that cattle and wildlife cannot drink, and the water is still being piped into the ranger's cabin.

Retaliation

Because Wayne questioned the Forest Service's actions, the Forest Service began an unbelievable retaliation campaign. In a 105-day period they sent Wayne 40 certified letters and personally visited him 70 times, each time citing him in violation of a bureaucratic regulation. Wayne had to respond in writing and take corrective action to each one of their allegations, no matter how trivial. In fact, most, if not all, were wild goose chases or violations the Forest Service themselves had created.

Some of these charges stated Wayne was not maintaining his drift fences. In order to comply with their rules, Wayne would check and mend if necessary the fences in question. One of these incidents involved sending a horse and rider to the top of Table Mountain to ride the 20-mile fence line. After doing this, the rider found only one problem. There was one staple missing. The Forest Service had dutifully marked it with a blue flag.

Also, among these charges were 45 accounts of trespass where Wayne's cattle were allegedly found in the wrong location. For every one of these, Wayne would send a crew of riders to locate the cattle and attempt to comply with the regulations. Often, there were no cattle to be found, leaving Wayne to wonder if there ever were. Also, on several occasions there were eyewitnesses who watched the Forest Service employees move Wayne's cattle into trespass areas, and then immediately cite him for the violation.

Over the next eight years he filed three administrative appeals, and won all three. They cost him over $150,000 in attorney and consultant fees, not to mention the countless hours, personal resources, and lost income also expended. Twice, his pickup was shot at while he was close by, a not so subtle warning. His wife and children were run off the road personally by the District Ranger.

Even though he won every case, the agency would create new regulations that would wear Wayne down, force him to expend his time and resources fighting their new regulations, and eventually run him completely out of business. The final straw came when the Forest Service confiscated at gunpoint over 100 head of his cattle. Armed with semi-automatic weapons and bulletproof vests, 30 Forest Service riders confiscated his cattle in July of 1991.

Although they had no legal justification for their actions, they took the cattle, handed Wayne a bill for their cost of gathering the cattle, transported the cattle to a sale yard which refused to auction the stolen cattle, and eventually the Forest Service held their own private sale and kept the proceeds.

The confiscation did not go quite as planned, however. They needed to infuriate Wayne to the point that he would also come armed and give them the excuse to eliminate Wayne altogether. Wayne came armed, but with a 35 millimeter camera. Just more evidence for the case he knew he would have to file.

September 26, 1991, after being forced to sell every cow he owned in order to comply with federal regulations, Wayne filed a landmark takings case, Hage v. United States, for the regulatory and physical taking of his ranch.

Criminal Desperation

A year later, the same agency filed two felony charges against Wayne for clearing scrub brush from his legally owned right-of-way. Although the Forest Service knew he was not in violation and admitted this on the record later, they also knew filing criminal charges against him might force Wayne to drop his takings suit. After loosing the case at jury trial, Wayne prevailed before the Ninth Circuit, overturning the felony charges against him.

(See a complete timeline of the Hage legal battle by clicking here.)

What's It All Really About?

In a recent radio interview on WTZY (880AM) in Asheville, NC, Hage spoke about the true nature of the case. What he said was that basically all of this has to do with our national debt.

Excerpts from WTZY interview:

"During the Civil War we accumulated $2.8 billion worth of debt which the North owed mainly to the House of Erlinger in London and the House of Rothchild in Paris, who had financed both sides in the War. We couldn't pay the debt, so for the first time in our nation's history they decided to collateralize that debt with the mineral estate of the Western lands and Alaska. During the late 1800's we were able to internalize that debt to where we owed it to ourselves.

In the 1960's the general teaching of Economics 101 was that we shouldn't worry too much about our national debt as we owed it to ourselves, and hence it wouldn't have to be paid off. Besides all that gold, silver, gas, oil and other mineral rights out west more than adequately collateralize it.

"We got the land and the mineral rights away from the Indians, and we said, oh, we'll make a deal, we'll have a nation-to-nation relationship with you, and we will provide for the education and health care and housing of your people;" - President Bill Clinton, July 12, 1999, Remarks to the National Academy Foundation Conference in Anaheim, California.

But during the initiation of the Great Society and the Vietnam War we began once again to borrow from overseas, as we didn't want to tax ourselves enough to pay for what was needed. We began to "externalize" our debt, a fatal mistake. Well, when we began to externalize our debt heavily, Charles deGaulle of France said, "I don't think you fellows can redeem your dollar debt with gold." We said, "Oh, yes we can!" So he said that he would rather have gold and began to raid our Treasury. When Nixon became President, he was faced with this mess and had to close the gold window; we were running out of gold. We, in effect, were running out of collateral.

"Finally, the bill includes an unjustified transfer of millions of dollars of mineral rights to the State of Montana. I intend to use my line item veto authority to cancel the dollar drain on the (U.S.) Treasury that would result from this unwarranted action." - President Clinton, November 14, 1997, Statement on signing the Department of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1998.

What Nixon did next, and what stunned a lot of folks, was to set up the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and we began to pass massive environmental laws. And for what real purpose? All of them have had one effect collectively, whether at the Federal, state or local level. The one thing they all do is that they effect the transfer of private property out of the hands of private individuals and place that property into the hands of government. Now what is that all about?

Well, when we ran out of gold and, in order to keep the foreign interests from cashing in their bonds and notes and imploding and destroying the US economy, we had to show them that the resources of the US adequately collateralized their debt. In order for it to be properly collateralized, we had to show them that US citizens and US interests would not be developing, drilling and mining those resources. The effect of this was to disenfranchise American citizens of access to their resources for the purpose of making their resources available to the international financial interests that hold the debt of the US. Indeed, at the present time, about 40% of all our debt is held by and owed to foreign interests.

"... This exchange of land, mineral rights, commercial properties, and natural treasures between the United States and the State of Utah is the largest such land exchange in the history of the lower 48 States. The exchange will help capitalize a long-neglected State school trust by putting it on solid footing and allowing it to pay rewards to the children of Utah for generations to come. The United States will obtain valuable land, thus allowing it to consolidate resources within the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, the Goshute and Navajo Indian Reservations, and the national parks and forests in Utah. I especially wish to thank Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt and Kathleen McGinty, outgoing Chair of the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), for their contribution to this major achievement."

- President Bill Clinton, October 31, 1998 speaking about H.R. 3830, the "Utah Schools and Land Exchange Act of 1998.

Look at the mines. Where I live, in Nevada, we have major mines all around us. At one time they were all owned by US citizens. But now the only mines here that operate are those held by those countries that own the debt of the U.S. If you or I discovered a major gold deposit, neither our kids nor we would ever live long enough to mine one shovel full of it. All the rules, regulations, and laws would drive us under. We would have to sell out for nothing to the government or to a foreign entity, who would find their ability to mine it would be rather easy. (Editor's note: The recent seizure by President Clinton of over $1 trillion dollars worth of high grade coal in Utah to establish a "park" was settled by the US government paying the owners merely $14 million dollars for research and development costs of the coal. See story on Page 28 of The Asheville Tribune, Hage-Report special edition.)

Another little known but important fact that should be remembered is that treasury bills and debts held by foreign interests are secured while those held by US citizens are not.

Little by little, our entire form of government is being reversed. A fundamental tenant of economics is that all wealth comes from the land; every bit of wealth originates in the land. The cornerstone of a truly free society is the ownership of private property by the people. In such a society the people own the means of production. In a totalitarian society, the opposite takes place. There, the government owns the land, the wealth, and the means of production. They, in effect, rent the land to the people.

"As President, I have worked very hard to honor tribal sovereignty and to strengthen our government-to-government relationships. Long ago, many of your ancestors gave up land, water, and mineral rights in exchange for peace, security, health care, education from the Federal Government. It is a solemn pact."

- President Clinton, Remarks to the Conference on Building Economic Self-Determination in Indian Communities, August 6, 1998.

And what this means is that in a free society where the people own the land, the government has to come to the people for its operating budget - for tax dollars in order to operate. The government has to listen to what the people have to say. That is the essence of a free society.

In a totalitarian society where the government owns the resources, they don't have to go to the people for funds to operate.

Our government today owns over 40% of the resource base of the U.S. (Shaded areas of map above.) The corporate U.S. government has come to have its own assets and is having to listen less and less to its citizens. And it is attempting to get more and more property under the guise of environmentalism. If you really want to find out who is really behind all this, follow the money of who is behind and invests heavily in the environmental entities. It is big money, and comes from powerful interest groups from all around the world. A couple of excellent books I would advise you to read are Trashing the Economy and Undue Influence by Ron Arnold if you really want to find out who the real powers are. They can both be obtained from Stewards of the Range in Idaho; their phone number is 208-336-5922.

Now, as I have said, that if laws protecting private property can be weakened, the value of the property declines. As government regulations increase, the productive capacity of private property decreases and the value of the property itself is reduced. Government ownership of and regulation of the lands and resources of a nation have never in history provided for a free society, nor for a productive one. (Editor's note: Even today in Russia, after the recent "democratic" revolution, the government owns all of the land. The Russian citizens cannot own land in Russia.) Taking productive resources and lands away from citizens under the guise of "protecting" the environment is simply a method by which the government steals power for itself.

Karl Marx considered the elimination of private property key to the establishment of a socialist government. There was good reason behind this premise. If people had no value left in their property that value must be in the hands of government. The terms property rights and property control are synonymous. Property rights are the ability of the individual to exercise control over his property. It is only through the right to control the use of property that the individual can make the property produce value or wealth. If regulation or law transfers control over one's property to the government, then the ability of the property to produce wealth is also transferred to the government. Marx was right. The elimination of private property is essential if socialism or communism is to supplant a free society."

During a Congressional hearing, regarding Federal land acquisitions that had been done without State or Congressional consultation, Rep. John Shadegg asked Secretary of the Interior Bruce Babbitt to provide Congress with a list of other lands that were being considered for further federal acquisition, Babbitt sternly responded, "No." After a stunned silence, the secretary added, "I don't mean to be disrespectful." However, Babbitt told the Committee that if they did not cooperate, he would ask the President to "use his power" to get more lands with or without their approval.

This internet edition of the report is not the complete feature as it appeared int he print edition of the Asheville Tribune. Hard copies of this report are still available, but dwindling: Submit your comments/requests to ashevilletribune@earthlink.net or mail to Asheville Tribune, PO Box 5615, Asheville, NC 28813.

For Hage Case updates visit http://www.stewardsoftherange.org.

=======================

Think YOU and YOUR PROPERTY are safe?

READ THIS.

"Capital must protect itself in every way, through combination and through legislation. Debts must be collected and loans and mortgages foreclosed as soon as possible. When through a process of law the common people have lost their homes, they will be more tractable and more easily governed by the strong arm of the law, applied by the central power of wealth, under control of leading financiers. People without homes will not quarrel with their leaders. This is well known among our principal men now engaged in forming an imperialism of capital to govern the world. By dividing the people we can get them to expand their energies in fighting over questions of no importance to us except as teachers of the common herd. Thus by discreet action we can secure for ourselves what has been generally planned and successfully accomplished."

((((((The above was printed from the "Banker's Manifest", for the private circulation among leading bankers only, taken from the "Civil Servants' Year Book, "The Organizer" of January, 1934.)))))) The Banker's Manifesto ties in with U.S. Senate Document No. 43, 73rd Congress, 1st Session (1934), to wit:

"The ultimate ownership of all property is in the State; individual so-called "ownership" is only by virtue of Government, i.e., law, amounting to mere "user" and use must be in acceptance with law and subordinate to the necessities of the State."

Remember, it's not a question of "if" the economy will collapse, but "when". And if they can't "steal" your property with the above described scheme, they will take it via sequestration by "conservation easements" and expropriate it to international organizations, corporations and associations at "the extinction of the State" through "concessional" lending. That is what the ESA (Endangered Species Act of 1973), the UNEP (United Nations Environment Programme), UNDP (United Nations Development Programme), and the treaty entitled the "Convention On Biological Diversity" and the benign sounding phrase, "Sustainable Development" are all about. And this includes Governor Locke's "Washington Wild Salmonid Restoration" plans.

Already we are witnessing the strings working the puppets , like King County Executive Sims talking about raising building permit fees by five percent to "save the salmon." There is an old maxim of law: "deceivers deal in generalities". We are only seeing the "tip" of the iceberg.

The "plan" is to control all resources, human and natural. The control is not by elected public officials, but by a self-appointed oligarchy. This is born out by reading the details of Article 21 and 39 of the "Convention On Biological Diversity." This treaty declares there are no reservation of rights. Article 21 mandates that three international organizations, the UNEP, UNDP and the World Bank, will direct and control "the policy, strategy, programme priorities and eligibility criteria relating to access to and utilization of resources" in each member country.

Under the Uruguay Round Trade Agreements signed into law by the 103rd Congress, which are amendments of the GATT treaty (General Agreement On Trade And Tariffs), the WTO (World Trade Organization) was created. These agreements dictate policy and contain clauses that allow various other international organizations to regulate and control the member Nations' resources and production. One of these organizations is IUCN (International Union For Conservation Of Nature) which is responsible for implementing the international policy and plans and agendas on a national, regional and local level. King County Executive Sims is reacting to that policy now. And so is Governor Locke.

Question: Where is there any "authority" under the Constitution for the United States of America (Article VI) for these activities? There isn't, primarily because the UN and its agents are foreign entities which are illegally in the country in the first instance. Additionally, the UN Charter, its amendments and other interacting agreements are in contravention of the Constitution.

The whole story is a long and sordid affair. The foregoing gives you a few basic pieces of the larger puzzle. We have a Trojan horse within our gates. It must be STOPPED AND KILLED . . . BEFORE IT KILLS US.

Permission to repost granted with full disclosure/credits. -/s/ John R. Prukop

"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution are null and void."

--Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (2 Cranch) 137 (1803)

CCW Coalition: Citizens For A Constitutional Washington

John R. Prukop, Executive Director ......"

http://www.afn.org/~govern/safe.html

===============

R.I.P. Wayne and Jean.

"...as long as there..remain active enemies of the Christian church, we may hope to become Master of the World...the future Jewish King will never reign in the world before Christianity is overthrown - B'nai B'rith speech http://www.biblebelievers.org.au/luther.htm / http://bible.cc/psalms/83-4.htm

AllTheKings'HorsesWontDoIt  posted on  2008-07-03   13:19:48 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

Thanks for your excellent addition that puts it all into perspective. The next step is CO2 regulations and carbon credits because of the anthropogenic global warming scam.

farmfriend  posted on  2008-07-03   16:40:30 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

The next step is CO2 regulations and carbon credits because of the anthropogenic global warming scam.

What sort of shit are you smoking today? Do you see diabolicaly insane scientists hiding under your bed each night, who are so evil they are trying to eliminate our dependence on foreign oil and free us from those who control it?

Are you worried that people are actually concerned enough about the future of the planet that they attempt to raise awareness of those who might be able to make a difference?

Must you take a totally unrelated topic and distort it in some twisted way into a subject that obsesses you to no end?

FormerLurker  posted on  2008-07-03   16:48:05 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

You didn't read that post by allkings did you?

farmfriend  posted on  2008-07-03   16:56:23 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

There, the government owns the land, the wealth, and the means of production. They, in effect, rent the land to the people.

This is key - we don't have title to land, or property, we have 'certificates of title.'

Don't pay the tribute - see it auctioned off at the courthouse steps.

Lod  posted on  2008-07-03   16:58:50 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

You didn't read that post by allkings did you?

Quote the part that mentions global warming.

FormerLurker  posted on  2008-07-03   17:02:28 ET  Reply   Trace   Private Reply  

[Home]  [Headlines]  [Latest Articles]  [Latest Comments]  [Post]  [Sign-in]  [Mail]  [Setup]  [Help]