Is it OKay to trash some public land?

[MTGomer]

As some people are aware, there is a controversial pipeline in North Dakota, that is mostly finished with the exception of a bore under the Mo.

Some people supportel it for good reasons, some people oppose it for good reasons, amd a few thousand people are living in a camp on federal, public land with no utilities and no running water as they protest it.
The location of this camp is located on army corps of engineers land. Like most federal, public lands, there is a 14 day camping limit. This particular location also lies in a floodplain.
Right now the area is receiving about a foot of snow, and with next weeks wind chills predicted to reach well below 0° it is probably a safe assumption to say that many of the protesters will not be sticking around to endure a cold that you cannot understand unless you have experienced it yourself. -50 wind chills for days at a time are a very real possibility.

Human excrement, garbage, tents, tipis, cars, and anything left behind will wind up in the river that they are claiming to protect. Whether it be an ice jam or spring flooding, this area will be underwater within the next five months, possibly much sooner.
One of the malheur occupants was killed and the rest forced to surrender or share in his fate. Obviously the Bundys and and the protesters at standing rock have different causes, but they both seem to agree that the destruction of land that belongs to all Americans is a justifiable means to an end.

I guess my question is, where is the outrage from groups like BHA for the illegal occupation of our public land in North Dakota?
Limits on party size, and camping duration are in place for a reason. Pictures of the campsite portray it as more of a hippie fest of white liberal rainbow types than it is of a Native American encampment.

 

[noharleyyet]

a justifiable means to an end.

There it is. Viewpoints vary according to ideological tribalism....aka hypocrisy.

No pun.

 

[Gut Shot]

"Let him rave on so that men will know him mad."

Yule Brenner

 

[Ben Lamb]

BHA generally doesn't get involved in issues such as this, so while it's a valid point, I'm not sure it would ever come up on BHA's radar.

As to whether or not the land is getting trashed, one might say that the amount of damage done by the camps is still minuscule compared to the damage done by oil and gas development on public lands. The surface impacts of the camps can easily be mitigated while the damage of public lands from run-away development cannot, as we've seen with sage grouse and mule deer.

Harley's point of hypocrisy is well noted as well. Nobody minds it when their interests are goring the ox, but heaven forbid someone else engage in similar behavior.

 

[Jamen]

This issue has shed bad light on ND. Being from here makes me disappointed and sad that it has come to this. What started out as a small peaceful protest has turned ugly. Livestock being killed and slaughtered. Vandalism and destruction of private and government property. At least now the Corps gave them to Dec 5th to leave that area and finally the governor has stepped in and ordered immediate evacuation due to weather conditions. They are getting over a foot of snow in places and other 2 ft. Native Americans are getting upset that all these outsiders are turning this into a circus. I am not going to sit here and argue ideals with people but it has escalated to a very bad point.

 

[James Riley]

It could be said the United States is a hypocrite, a liar and a thief; that it has violated Article IV of it's own Constitution, as well as the supreme law of the land as set forth in the Sioux Treaty of 1868; that it does not believe in the rule of law, but instead abides the dictum of “might makes right.” United States v. Sioux Nation of Indians, 448 U.S. 371 (1980). It could be that some folks believe in “my country, right or wrong” and that those folks are wrong. Could be that “quasi-sovereignty” is like “limited infinity” and is also a lie, told by guilty-conscious liars. Could be a sovereign waives no rights and does not stipulate to jurisdiction in failing to participate in a known liar's own public hearings and processes.

Could be that I'll not be a hypocrite for calling out Bundy while giving a pass to the Sioux and their allies. Especially when their opposition is the United States Army. I mean the United States Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management would be interesting, but to see the Army back at it with the Sioux again, well that's just rich.

 

[MTGomer]

Their opposition isn't the army. It's Energy Tramsfer Partners.

If ACOE was their enemy ACOE wouldn't have let them illegally live on ACOE land for months.

You may have some pseudo intellectualism to make a solid case for why YOURE not a hypocrite.
But I don't know what the case is to justify those who are causing pollution while protesting pollution.

If you or I can't leave a tent deep in the wilderness for 15 days, why can people with a horrible track record of environmental stewardship get a free pass to build a small tent city unserved by utilities in a place where anything left behind will be in the river? Harley is right; ideological tribalism.

 

[James Riley]

Their opposition isn't the army. It's Energy Tramsfer Partners.

If ACOE was their enemy ACOE wouldn't have let them illegally live on ACOE land for months.

You may have some pseudo intellectualism to make a solid case for why YOURE not a hypocrite.
But I don't know what the case is to justify those who are causing pollution while protesting pollution.

If you or I can't leave a tent deep in the wilderness for 15 days, why can people with a horrible track record of environmental stewardship get a free pass to build a small tent city unserved by utilities in a place where anything left behind will be in the river? Harley is right; ideological tribalism.

ETP can't throw them off. ACOE is the one telling them to leave. That makes the Army the opposition.

Calling the United States Constitution, a U.S. Supreme Court decision, and the supreme law of the land "pseudo intellectualism" is also rich.

The pollution these people are causing is de minimus. Especially compared to the damage done by the pipeline. Just google pics of the rape. If re-seeding that gets ETP a pass, then the hypocrisy is in calling out the protester trash. Also compare the threat: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_pipeline_accidents_in_the_United_States_in_the_21st_century

As to your last paragraph, see mine, above.

Harley may be right, but his finger is pointing at him . . . and you.

 

[MTGomer]

ACOE is asking them to leave but won't force them. Since they're in violation of law, I'd say that's pretty generous.
I was calling your wordy justification pseudo intellectualism. Not the constitution.

I don't have to google-educate myself with pics of a pipeline. I have been involved in thousands of miles of pipelines. Every type and every phase. Oil, gas, sewer and water pipeline. From 2" service lines to 36" major inter-state transmission lines.
As of late, mainly water pipeline. Did you know this particular reservation is currently installing a rural water system? I.e. Pipeline. That's a good thing by the way.

 

[MTGomer]

I'm just wondering why the law is inconsistently applied. And why some abuses of public land are deplorable, and we hope for the government to imprison or even shoot the offender, while others of equal damage get a pass.

 

[James Riley]

ACOE is asking them to leave but won't force them. Since they're in violation of law, I'd say that's pretty generous.
I was calling your wordy, long winded justification pseudo intellectualism. Not the constitution.

I don't have to google-educate myself with pics of a pipeline. I have been involved in thousands of miles of pipelines. Every type and every phase. Oil, gas, sewer and water pipeline. From 2" service lines to 36" major inter-state transmission lines.
As of late, mainly water pipeline. Did you know this particular reservation is currently installing a rural water system? I.e. Pipeline. That's a good thing by the way.

They aren't asking, they ordered them out. Generous is what the Bundy's got and are still getting. My so-called wordy, long winded justification is the Constitution. You can't parse the two.

With your vast experience with pipelines and reclamation, then you obviously see your own hypocrisy in giving that a pass while calling out the protesters. You don't even know what these protesters will do in reclamation of their little camp. Also, in regard to their track record, don't confuse the Rainbow Family with the Rainbow Warriors.

 

[noharleyyet]

James, I thought I was getting a text but it was my sanctimonious bullshit detector.

 

[James Riley]

I'm just wondering why the law is inconsistently applied. And why some abuses of public land are deplorable, and we hope for the government to imprison or even shoot the offender, while others of equal damage get a pass.

Again, it is the height of hypocrisy for any white man to bring up the law in this case. Analogy, by definition, is not the thing itself. So I can't defeat your argument by simply pointing that out. Rather, the burden is upon me to draw a distinction with a relevant difference. That I have done, in spades. You may not like it but it's a fact. We have absolutely no moral or other authority to cite the law and inconsistent application in this matter.

 

[James Riley]

James, I thought I was getting a text but it was my sanctimonious bullshit detector.

Would that be like a geiger counter made of uranium?

 

[MTGomer]

They aren't asking, they ordered them out. Generous is what the Bundy's got and are still getting. .

One of the bundy clan was shot and killed. The others would have also been shot and killed if they didn't surrender. Their BS verdict is not the fault of law enforcement.

 

[Straight Arrow]

My Hunttalk contentious bullchit detector is sounding the alarm. Knock it off guys or your silly debate could face the too oft lately imposed Fin lock-up! Valid opinions are fine ... nitpicking peeing contests are not.

 

[James Riley]

One of the bundy clan was shot and killed. The others would have also been shot and killed if they didn't surrender. Their BS verdict is not the fault of law enforcement.

1. The Bundy clan was never forcibly evicted.
2. You don't know the rest would have been shot and killed if they didn't surrender. Especially if un-armed and peaceful.
3. How long did the Bundy clan get before the armed shit-talker got killed?
4. Forget the verdict: Bundy's cattle are still trashing the range.
5. If you are citing the Bundy incident for authority, then the protesters should get at least as much time.
6. "Protesters fighting pipeline construction must vacate property near the Cannonball River in North Dakota -- the location of a large campsite for demonstrators -- by December 5 or face arrest, the Army Corps of Engineers said Friday." http://www.cnn.com/2016/11/25/us/dakota-pipeline-access-army-corps/index.html

 

[airlocksniffer]

The DAPL was originally planned to go NE of Bismark but was rerouted due to concerns with water contamination. Can anybody tell me the biggest difference between the town of Bismark and the Standing Rock Reservation?

 

[MTGomer]

The DAPL was originally planned to go NE of Bismark but was rerouted due to concerns with water contamination. Can anybody tell me the biggest difference between the town of Bismark and the Standing Rock Reservation?

The most obvious answer would be population difference, but I wasn't looking to start a debate about whether or not the pipeline is a good thing or where it's route should be. That debate probably isn't appropriate for this forum especially considering the owner of the forum has asked us to keep it to public land issues, as straight arrow so tactfully points out above.

I was asking about people abusing federal public lands.

 

[Big Fin]

My Hunttalk contentious bullchit detector is sounding the alarm. Knock it off guys or your silly debate could face the too oft lately imposed Fin lock-up! Valid opinions are fine ... nitpicking peeing contests are not.

Correct you are, SA. And the two of you in this grade school pissing match, as well as a few others, seem to chime in on tangential topics whenever the slightest opportunity arises; as some would call it, "Stirring the chit." As owner of the site who is trying to keep conversations civil and meaningful for the 99.99% of people who come here to share information and read about the adventures and ideas of members, I've tired of it. I'm not in the mood to tolerate these kind of threads or the people continually involved in them.

If you want to talk about issues that are important to public land hunting, then you are welcome to participate here. We need all the good input that is available.

If the bickering continues down this path you seem to enjoy traveling, your account here will end. A few others should take note, also. There are sites where you can ramble/rant/whine about topics that mean virtually nothing to public land hunting; this site is not one of them.