RAM wrote:It is my understanding there is NO BLM in Texas, due to the fact that Texas was an independent nation prior to being a state. All federal lands within Texas were acquired from the State of Texas. This is one of the reasons Texas has an independent layout of the public lands system, i.e. the sections are 2 miles square.
RAM,
Texas has a land grant size called a Sitio. It is 5,000 varas square or about 2.63 miles to a side. It also has a square league and labor or 5,099.01 varas square or 2.68 miles to a side. Then there are the Two league grants and others.
Then there is the King Ranch at 852,000 acres(1,331.25 Sq. Mi.) and before it was sold of in pieces the XIT at approximately 3 Million Acres (4, 687.5 Sq. Mi.) then some of the old Spanish grants were Huge.
Texas has NO part of the PLSS. The closest are the RR blocks and the University land Blocks which are normally subdivided in one mile squares. Most of those are in West Texas and the Panhandle.
Been a Registered Professional Land Surveyor in Texas for 27+ years. California for 24 years.
Stephen Johnson, PLS 6303
Politicians should serve two terms. One in office and one in prison.
Whenever politics is any part of the issue, some people should avoid the discussion altogether because the presence of the political aspect blinds them to any other aspects that exist in the situation.
They've picked their team. They've internalized the rhetoric. They see everything about the issue through the lens that filters out everything that does not fit the template. Politics often turns otherwise intelligent, reasonable people into raging idiots. It's true at both ends of the political spectrum.
[font=Verdana","sans-serif]Personally[/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif], ...[/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif][/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif]like a guy[/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif]who ...[/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif]threatened the feds withuse of deadly force[/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif], [/font]
[font=Verdana","sans-serif]I have no issue with[/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif]... [/font][font=Verdana","sans-serif]religion in thisconversation.[/font]
Of course this isn't what Jason said at all. In fact it's just about opposite of the view he expressed. But all of the words except one pronoun are his. Selective omission can turn the message completely around.
I don't know to what extent it was done to Bundy, but I do recall the media railroading of the neighborhood watch guy in Florida and that is precisely what was done to his statements by the local ABC affiliate and several race industry celebrities.
Context is very important. If one is not open to that, then one has a greater interest in ensuring that a situation fit their template for argument than they do in discerning the truth of a matter.
Although there is plenty of material for a real, and professional level discussion about land use and property rights matters in this situation, it appears that it is so politically charged that no one, or at least almost no one will ask the proper questions to get to the issues that are fit for reasonable discussion. Too many are simply entrenched in their political world view to such an extent that all that can come of it is for a bunch of otherwise intelligent and thoughtful professionals to act like a bunch of rabid jackasses.
Perhaps it would be best if this thread simply go away.
Perhaps it would be best if this thread simply go away.
Wendell at SurveyorConnect already figured this out: allowing political or religious "discussions" in a forum nominally focused on surveying isn't worth the headaches.
Jim Frame
Frame Surveying & Mapping
609 A Street
Davis, CA 95616 framesurveying.com
I asked and all I got was grief. I asked a sincere question, because in my mind I do not understand how we get from breach of contract to a discussion on property rights. My understanding is that the ranchers have no rights to federal land except as outlined in the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. So discuss away or have the administrator yank this thread because it has been short on meaningful discussion and long on soap box chest thumping over proported governmental over reach when in fact it is self inflected plight arising from beach of agreement.
I was thinking somebody in this community might have some insight to the reality of what is going on. Never was this post meant to be a political platform.
Yes, I favor the underdog. What has your mob mentality done for you?
Face it. Politics are beyond the purview of the land surveyor. The seasoned professional would have let this pass without comment.
Clark E. Stoner, PE, PLS
Bear Flag Engineering, Inc.
Sonoma County
Santa Cruz County
tel. 707.996.8449 (Sonoma) or 831.477.9215 (Santa Cruz) clark@bearflagcivil.com
What Cliven Bundy said about slavery is ignorant and reprehensible. Let anyone who thinks working on a cotton plantation as human chattel is better than just about anything try it themselves but remember you have less than zero rights.
Trying to make excuses by saying he was taken out of context is complete and utter baloney with cow patty seasoning on top.
"Gee, I wish we had one of them doomsday machines." -General "Buck" Turgidson
Dave Karoly, PLS wrote:What Cliven Bundy said about slavery is ignorant and reprehensible. Let anyone who thinks working on a cotton plantation as human chattel is better than just about anything try it themselves but remember you have less than zero rights.
Trying to make excuses by saying he was taken out of context is complete and utter baloney with cow patty seasoning on top.
David,
Are you commenting on the First, Edited version that was put out for public consumption, or are you commenting on what he really said? Which while extremely clumsy, would take someone with an agenda to call racist.
Stephen Johnson, PLS 6303
Politicians should serve two terms. One in office and one in prison.
