Oregon Under Attack versus Reality

Oregon Under Attack versus Reality

Oregon Under Attack versus Reality

David French of National Review has posted an article titled The Case for Civil Disobedience in Oregon. In the article, he details our leviathan government’s ruthless hounding and prosecution of the Hammond family of ranchers.

As French lays out the scenario, it made me think how easy it is for us city folk to sneer at the ranchers and their supporters. Most of us live in apartments, townhouses and single family dwellings, commute to work on the train or bus and pat ourselves on the back if we manage to grow a tomato or two.

Ranchers (and farmers) deal with living things. The animals they raise for our food can get sick or killed by predators. Invasive species can take over a feed crop that they are raising to feed the animals. Everything they do is regulated, for our safety, by the federal government.

On top of that, the voracious federal government, like Pac-Man gobbling energy pills wants the land the ranchers own. According to BigThink.com,

47% of the 11 coterminous western states [is federally owned]. By contrast, the federal government owns only 4% in the other states. This western concentration has contributed to a higher degree of controversy over land ownership and use in that part of the country

The federal government owns such a small part of the non-Western states that it doesn’t affect our lives, pretty much. But, with the federal government owning so much acreage in each of the Western states, it would be likely that in any direction of your privately owned land, the federal government is your neighbor.

Don’t forget the alphabet of agencies ready to swoop down with regulatory talons to prosecute you for any violations of ever expanding rules and regulations. The United States Forest Service (USFS), the National Park Service (NPS), the Bureau of Land Management (BLM), the Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), just to name a few of these agencies.

So Hammond father and son had two controlled or prescribed burns five years apart (2001 and 2006) that did some (arguable) damage to federal lands. Check out this article from New Canaan News about ranchers suing over a 2013 U.S. Forest Service controlled burn that got out of control. It happens. Things don’t always go as they should. The Hammonds paid for their “crimes” and are paying again, because the feds want another pound of flesh.

The Hammond Family of Oregon
The Hammond Family of Oregon

Against this vicious prosecution, double jeopardy and probable land grab federal greed, some other ranchers and sympathizers have taken over an abandoned wildlife refuge center as an act of civil disobedience. The left is acting as though this is akin to the Ferguson and Baltimore riots. Where are the burning businesses and cars, marchers and hatred?

The #OregonUnderAttack makes it sound as if cowboys are riding in militarized jeeps and threatening federal agents or burning federal buildings. How about this article from The Guardian

If the Oregon militiamen were Muslim or black, they’d probably be dead by now
Wajahat Ali

No, really. Mayors in cities had police and others stand down while businesses were looted and burned, citizens were intimidated and property destroyed, and some idiot wants to compare it to civil disobedience in Oregon.

The divide between our citizens grows and metastasizes like an out of control cancer. It infests and infects every action. Check out these tweets, one from Montel Williams (????!!) and weep for our nation.


Screenshot_2016-01-04-20-03-20 (1)

I pray this ends well. I pray our federal government ends it overreach in every area of our lives. Mostly, I pray that our citizenry finds common ground as Americans.

Written by

  • Chandler says:

    The Hammonds were convicted for burning land on federal property. Your and my land. And as a relative testified in court against them, they started the fires to cover a crime. They had illegally killed a number of deer, again on federal land, our land. Their reason for the fire wasn’t to control an obnoxious plant from over growing the area. It was to cover a crime. Most ranchers and farmers respect the land and the rights of others lands. Even federal land. They broke the law. Period.

    • Rebecca says:

      They were convicted under an anti-terrorism statute. Even if the relative’s testimony is correct, how does that compute?

  • Chandler says:

    They started the fire to cover the crime of poaching. Their own relative testified to that in court. Not to burn an obnoxious plant from over growing the area. State the facts not what you think is the truth.

  • Nina B Spiers says:

    There is always more to a story and from what I understand the relative mentioned above was a child when the incident happened and has serious mental health issues. I would stand with a family over the federal government any day.

  • OC says:

    “The federal government owns such a small part of the non-Western states that it doesn’t affect our lives, pretty much.”

    I live on 5 acres in MN. I wanted to dig a pond. The first place I had to go to for approval? The Army Corp of Engineers. It got worse from there…..

    • Toni Williams says:

      The federal government is way too intrusive in telling us what to do with our own lands. I was talking about the fact that the government owns so much more (percentage basis) land out west. I happen to live just outside the Great Smoky Mountains National Park….oof.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Become a Victory Girl!

Are you interested in writing for Victory Girls? If you’d like to blog about politics and current events from a conservative POV, send us a writing sample here.
Ava Gardner