Oregon Wildlife Refuge Protesters Dig in as Decades-Old Grievances Fester

BURNS, OR - Ammon Bundy speaks to members of the media in front of the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Headquarters on January 5, 2016 near Burns, Oregon. An armed group continues to occupy the Malheur National Wildlife Headquarters as they protest a second prison term for two ranchers for setting controlled burns on federal land.

By Rachel Alexander Published on January 6, 2016

Dwight and Steven Hammond, a father and son who own a family ranch in southern Oregon, have returned to federal prison to serve more time for setting controlled fires on federal land they were leasing, fires that spread to other federal lands. The additional prison time sparked a national outcry, with armed supporters even taking over the federal Malheur Wildlife Refuge headquarters near the Hammond’s ranch. As of this morning, they remain holed up there, while local sheriff Dave Ward is urging calm and reassuring the community that steps are being taken behind the scenes. “It takes only one unstable person to show up with a skewed belief window to create something that can’t be taken back,” he said.

The larger issue is the increasing frustration among ranchers toward the federal government for taking over so much private land in the West. The federal government now owns 28 percent of the land in the country. The percentage in the Western half of the United States is much higher than this. And that doesn’t even include land owned by state and local governments.

US federal land agencies - 900

Map of all federally owned land in the United States. Wikimedia Commons

Land that has been in the families of ranchers for years is being taken away from them through various methods. After the government confiscates the property, it may lease some of it back to the ranchers — but steadily increases the leasing fees. This is what provoked the Bundy standoff in spring of 2014 between protesters and law enforcement. Cliven Bundy stopped paying the grazing fees to use federal lands in Nevada, declaring that the federal government had no authority over the land. He continued to let his cattle graze on the land, until the government closed off the land to seize his cattle. After protesters showed up, law enforcement backed down and left him alone. Since then, he has continued to use the land without paying the fees.

Some believe the government’s aggressive seizure of land is a part of Agenda 21, the United Nations program launched in 1992 for the vague purpose of saving the environment. One of the goals of Agenda 21 is said to be moving people out of rural areas and into large urban areas, with the government finding ways to force people to sell off their property for reasons like saving endangered species. Whatever the public or ulterior motivations, the reality is that large swaths of land around the country are now blocked off from human habitation and often poorly managed by a highly centralized federal bureaucracy.

Sagebrush Rebellion: July 4, 1980. A group of 300 Grand County Utah residents gathered behind a flag-decorated bulldozer, in protest of the inclusion of Mill Creek Canyon as part of a BLM wilderness study area.

Sagebrush Rebellion: July 4, 1980. A group of 300 Grand County Utah residents gathered behind a flag-decorated bulldozer, in protest of the inclusion of Mill Creek Canyon as part of a BLM wilderness study area. Wikimedia Commons

In Oregon, the government set up the Malheur Wildlife Refuge in 1908, and began gradually expanding it throughout much of southern Oregon. It has grown to 187,000 acres. The protesters assert that the government forced local ranchers out of their property to make way for the expansion by diverting water during the 1980s to flood their homes and property, rendering them uninhabitable. If the government hadn’t seized so much land, the Hammonds would likely not have been forced to lease property from the government, and any controlled burns they set would have been on their own property, not involving the government. This isn’t to say the Hammonds did nothing wrong. It’s simply context for understanding the ranchers’ long-simmering frustrations with the federal government.

Civil Disobedience by the Hammonds’ Supporters

While many people are rallying around the Hammonds, some think their armed supporters have taken things too far. Occupying the Malheur Wildlife Refuge headquarters for days is trespassing. Several of the supporters have said they are prepared to shoot back at law enforcement if necessary. The Hammonds’ attorney distanced his clients from the protesters, saying the protesters do not speak for the Hammonds.

So far, law enforcement has not tried to evict the occupants, but is deliberating on how to handle the situation. There is a real concern that a confrontation could result in another Ruby Ridge or Waco, incidents where law enforcement heavy-handedly came after radical patriot types who were barricaded in buildings and wouldn’t leave. Both showdowns tragically resulted in the loss of life, and left a black mark on federal law enforcement.

Some are comparing the standoff to the tactics of the Occupy and Black Lives Matter movements. Both of those groups also engaged in trespassing. While the Occupy movement mostly stuck to public parks for their multiple day protests, since parks close in the evenings, staying overnight constituted trespassing. Unlike the Hammonds’ supporters, Black Lives Matter protesters rioted and looted, and Occupy activists caused extensive property damage during their extended stays. Both groups have violently confronted the police, also unlike the Hammonds’ supporters. In fact, during the Baltimore riots earlier this year, the mayor of Baltimore said to give the Black Lives Matter protesters “their space,” even if it meant giving them space to riot and loot. In contrast to some of the destructive actors involved with Black Lives Matter protests, the Hammonds’ supporters have been, thus far, peaceful.

The longer the Hammonds’ supporters remain in the building, the more clamoring there is to arrest them. However, since they haven’t done anything other than trespassing similar to the Occupy movement, which was allowed to camp out for months in public areas, it seems unfair to single them out for arrest.

On the other hand, since even the Hammonds have made it clear that occupying the headquarters is not endorsed by them, most people think the best resolution would be for the protesters to disband. Their actions are highly unlikely to change the outcome legally, since the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and a federal district court judge have now ruled firmly against them. The Oregon Farm Bureau intends to send a petition to President Obama asking him to pardon the Hammonds. However, since Obama ultimately controls the Department of Justice and its attorneys who successfully demanded the longer sentences, it is highly unlikely he will issue a pardon.

What could the protesters realistically accomplish? Instead of occupying the building indefinitely, the Hammonds’ supporters might consider urging Congress to investigate the prosecution. The DOJ has a history of some of its attorneys targeting people for political reasons. Supporters could also ask Congress to reform the Bureau of Land Management and other responsible federal agencies to stop the land grabs and return much of the land to private ownership. An armed confrontation would serve only to give Obama another opportunity to call for more gun control. While they may have good intentions, and the publicity has brought much needed attention to the federal land grabs, trespassing is complicating sympathy for the Hammonds and the overall land problem faced by Western ranchers.

Print Friendly
Comments ()
The Stream encourages comments, whether in agreement with the article or not. However, comments that violate our commenting rules or terms of use will be removed. Any commenter who repeatedly violates these rules and terms of use will be blocked from commenting. Comments on The Stream are hosted by Disqus, with logins available through Disqus, Facebook, Twitter or G+ accounts. You must log in to comment. Please flag any comments you see breaking the rules. More detail is available here.
  • Joe Myrick

    You people just don’t get it. You seem to go back and forth about whether there is really something going on or not in our nation like a UN program such as Agenda 21. It appears to simply be wishful thinking, and false hope, that results in the 2nd guessing of even your own selves. All of that causes one to not make the proper decision, the decision to stand against something like Agenda 21, or any federal over reach. You bark a little bit, and the Government throws you a bone and you quiet down, all while they continue to progress in their tyranny. Later you start up again with the same doings, until your thrown another bone. It could be described using Biblical scripture by calling your attention to what John wrote about being unstable in your ways, when he spoke of the double minded man, who after seeing his reflection walks away forgetting what he looks like. We are trying to rationalize things out and give the benefit of the doubt to a government that we most assuradly know is corrupt, and implementing Agenda 21, whether what we are seeing are the affects of it or not. We are being herded like cattle, and all of the decisions being made by the federal government result in them acquiring, while we pay for it, and pay for it, and pay for it, and pay for it with no end in sight. Why can’t we finalize our decision making process, and then we will move on to the next step, which is to act against it with resolve. We are to resolve to stop it, not with the use of corrupt court systems, or fraudulent presidents, but with the resolve that enough is enough. If we do not, we will be picked off one by one, until the prisons are bursting or the graves have to be large pits. We The People of these United States, are not united, and therefore we are as sheep being led to the slaughter. When will we begin to seize understanding, and move in an upright position to destroy evil, instead of waiting for someone else to do it for us. We are in grave danger.

  • Corey

    Why no mention of Mormonism and that the leader out there calls himself “Capt. Moroni”? The Mormon Church and the US govt. have always had issues over land rights and it has been ugly on both sides. This might be worth asking Mitt about…

  • Wayne Cook

    It’s an increasing greed on the part of the government, having little to do with land management, and more to do with eminent domain, with no end in sight. If the money gets big enough, the government which annexed the property in the first place, will profit by the their theivery. Call it what you like, it is one of the rungs of the socialist ladder of control.

A Generous Season
James Randall Robison
More from The Stream
Connect with Us