BLM - believe they are not controlled by the Constitution.

[Virginia Foulk]

BLM Employee to Miner: My Authority Supersedes the United States Constitution Tim Brown

The Bureau of Land Management have been acting tyrannically for decades. As an unconstitutional agency, we have seen them in recent years not only violating the Constitution and the rights of the people, but we've also seen them take an armed violent stand against ranchers, both in Nevada and Oregon. All of it is unlawful. I want to share story that I ran across concerning two BLM employees and a miner in Idaho from 2012 during some research on the BLM. In a confrontation with the BLM, the Idaho miner asked, "You are telling me that you supersede the Constitution of the united States?" The BLM employee smugly replied, "Yes, I do."  

Nicole Crossman, one of the founders of the South West Idaho Mining Association, and her husband John, along with some others were at the family's camp on July 11th, 2012 when they were approached by two BLM employees, who were identified as Ann Marie Sharkey and Jeff Weiss.

Video evidence, which has now been removed and another video made private, shows what seems to be a friendly encounter between the employees and the Crossmans. However, once Sharkey spotted mining incident tools, she demanded that Mrs. Crossman produce identification. The text of the conversation comes from Mrs. Crossman.

Crossman did not comply, but rather asked Sharkey what he law enforcement status was. Sharkey claimed to be a federal BLM agent, but when asked to get her supervisor out to where they were, Sharkey called the Sheriff's Department on her radio and claimed that she owned the Crossman's claim by way of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act (FLPMA), which is an unconstitutional act.

Mrs. Crossman then informed Sharkey that she was now trespassing on a federal mining claim to which the agent demanded to see her mining corner posts, signs and notices.

"You are more than welcome to go and find them if you are so concerned of that, but the notice of location is located in that tree over there," Crossman replied.

The conversation then began to get even more heated.

"Ma'am, this is public land with a 14 day stay limit on it," said Sharkey. "How much longer do you think you will be staying?  The rest of the weekend?"

"I am not sure," replied Crossman. "And this is actually public domain once I entered it to prospect.  Especially because I have a claim here!" 

Sharkey was having none of that. "This is public land," she said.

"It was public land," said Crossman. "It is now Public domain.  Are you familiar with laws that have granted me to be entitled to this public domain?"

Sharkey snidely replied that she was familiar with the laws and when asked which ones, she said "The 1800 one."  

"There isn't an 1800 mining law," retorted Crossman.

Then Sharkey made the absolutely ridiculous claim of ownership.

"I own and manage all of these minerals you are trying to mine for," she said.  "I need to identify who I am speaking with. ID?"

Crossman asked, "You are telling me that you supersede the Constitution of the united States?"

Sharkey replied, "Yes, I do."

Crossman then educates Sharkey that she is aware of the law and of a BLM agent's status.

"No, you are a surface management agency, and what we are doing is extracting minerals from a SUB-surface area," she said. 

When Sharkey threatened Crossman with arrest for not showing her ID, Crossman said, "You don't have that authority, you are a code enforcement, not a law enforcement officer."

"No," Sharkey shot back. "I am a federal agent and I get my authority from the FLPMA."

Even the Sheriff of the county would not stop what was going on and sent her to Ada County Jail.

The claim by the BLM agent and the Sheriff is that Mrs. Crossman was charged with obstruction, but they never said what she was obstructing.

John Crossman believes that what helped his wife was that she had her law binder that South West Idaho Mining Association (SWIMA) put together. Mrs. Crossman also happens to be a secretary for SWIMA.

As we have learned, no one is required to produce identification unless a crime has been committed or one is in the process of committing a crime. No crime was being committed and if Ms. Sharkey had actually known what was going on, she would have known Crossman had a lawful claim to the minerals on the land. She didn't. Not only is she an unconstitutional agent in an unconstitutional agency, but she overstepped the bounds that even that requires!

One person in the American Mining Law Forum pointed to a 2011 Idaho Code which actually demonstrates the Ms. Sharkey is the one in violation of the law. On top of that, the penalty for Ms. Sharkey would be a fine not exceeding $5,000 and imprisonment in the county jail for no longer than one year.

One thing is for sure, this is exactly why counties need good, constitutional sheriffs to deal with these out of control, criminal and unconstitutional agents and the agencies for which they work.

Sadly, even after Crossman had done no wrong, she accepted a public defender, followed that person's advice and pled guilty and was convicted by her own admission, according to a post dated November 28, 2014.

UPDATE: We spoke to John Crossman by phone following the publishing of this article. He told us that the quotes above and the full text of the confrontation, which was placed on the sites linked to in this article, are a matter of public record and were part of their court case. He also said that the charges of obstruction were dropped to a snow mobile infraction and they were fined $56. Crossman went on to explain that the cost of pursuing things further was more than they were able to bear and so that is why they took the deal.

I can understand that. It's a shame that in the land of the free and home of the brave, a nation of law, that justice has to cost so much money.

Read more at http://freedomoutpost.com/2016/02/blm-employee-to-miner-my-authorit...

[kevin kiernan]

There will be a huge court battle coming up. We need to support by spreading Knowledge like this. Patriots will need to get load in the threads through out the internet. Hopefully some Talking head Like Beck will get on board . He will not because he called the Bundy`s a bunch of YAHOOS. Or something like that. In 2014 he was very insulting to the Liberty cause. I feel that it was because he felt like to many were stepping on his toes in the fight for Liberty. Glen can be a little full of himself. Kinda like O`Reilly. But not quite as bad.If it is not his idea, then it`s a wrong idea. He feels like his thunder got stolen I think. Any way Some one with a platform needs to organize A million Patriot March.

[kevin kiernan]

Not many government agency`s think they have to pay attention to We The People`s law. That is our fault for being lazy.

[Virginia Foulk]

Not sure where to put this, but will move if you have some place else to address this.

Conservative Leads the Fight to Give Federal Lands Back to Local Governments!  By Onan Coca / 29 February 2016

Conservative Congressional leader, Raul Labrador ×

(R-ID), is leading the fight to give local governments more control over federal land, particularly in our nation’s Western reaches. (You can read the bill being advanced here.)

Commissioners approached me in 2011 with a great idea: Gives states and localities a chance to manage a small part of the federal estate under state forestry laws to test the proposition that those closest to the land could do better.

The bill we wrote is called the Self-Sufficient Community Lands Act. It would allow governors to create community forest demonstration areas totaling up to 4 million acres nationwide -- about 2 percent of the National Forest system. Contrary to claims by some environmentalists, ownership would remain in federal hands and hunting, fishing and other recreational and Tribal rights are specifically protected in the bill.

The bill passed the House in the last Congress. But like many good conservative ideas, it died in a Senate then controlled by Democrats.

From Congressman Raul Labrador:

Dear Friends,

When President Theodore Roosevelt created the U.S. Forest Service in 1905, our government made a commitment to manage the land for multiple use to sustain local communities with timber, grazing, hunting, water and other resources.

That promise has been broken. Timber harvests are down 80 percent over the last 30 years. Since 1990, more than 400 mills have closed and more than 35,000 workers cut loose. Many of those shuttered mills and lost jobs are in Idaho’s 1^st Congressional District.

Federal mismanagement has contributed to a rise in catastrophic wildfire. The 2015 fire season saw a record 10.1 million acres scorched nationwide. In Idaho, over 750,000 acres burned, damaging grazing lands, claiming more than 80 homes and harming habitat valuable to wildlife and recreation.

The Forest Service knows it needs help.

In a 2002 internal report, “The Process Predicament,” the agency said: “The Forest Service is so busy meeting procedural requirements, such as preparing voluminous plans, studies, and associated documentation, that it has trouble fulfilling its historic mission to sustain the health, diversity, and productivity of the nation’s forests and grasslands to meet the needs of present and future generations.”

Thanks to the creativity of commissioners from five counties in the 1^st District – Boundary, Clearwater, Idaho, Shoshone and Valley – I have a bill to help. Commissioners approached me in 2011 with a great idea: Gives states and localities a chance to manage a small part of the federal estate under state forestry laws to test the proposition that those closest to the land could do better.

The bill we wrote is called the Self-Sufficient Community Lands Act. It would allow governors to create community forest demonstration areas totaling up to 4 million acres nationwide -- about 2 percent of the National Forest system. Contrary to claims by some environmentalists, ownership would remain in federal hands and hunting, fishing and other recreational and Tribal rights are specifically protected in the bill.

The bill passed the House in the last Congress. But like many good conservative ideas, it died in a Senate then controlled by Democrats. On Thursday, H.R. 2316 had a hearing in the Natural Resources Subcommittee on Federal Lands. It received a warm response from Chairman Tom McClintock, R-Calif., who said, “State management can produce healthier forests and healthier economies and this legislation offers participating states the opportunity to do so.”

Among those testifying was one of the originators of the idea, Valley County Commissioner Gordon Cruickshank. “When the national forests were created over 100 years ago, the federal government sold the idea of public ownership of forest lands by promising a steady supply of natural resources for economic stability,” he said. “I am here to say that the current federal forest management practices are not fulfilling that promise.”

Unfortunately, the Obama Administration testified against the bill. They’re opposed, even though Forest Service Acting Deputy Chief Glen Casamassa acknowledged that best management practices under state forestry laws provide for environmental protection. With the Senate now in Republican hands, I’m optimistic we can get the bill to the President.

As I travel my beautiful congressional district, there’s no doubt that federal management isn’t making good on the promise of multiple use. I talk to Forest Service officials frustrated by red tape that leaves good timber to rot and burn. They, too, would like to do a better job.

After 30 years of dysfunction, testing the hypothesis that local management can improve forest health and rural economies is long overdue.

For more on Thursday’s hearing, watch video of my testimony, Commissioner Cruickshank’s opening statement and my questions to Cruickshank and Glen Casamassa of the Forest Service. You may read the bill here.

 The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by EagleRising.com

[Virginia Foulk]

Well-Known Congressman demands that the BLM and Forest Service: DISARM!

Terresa Monroe-HamiltonWednesday, March 16, 2016

Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz wants federal agencies and the BLM disarmed before someone gets killed. Well, it’s too late for that. But I couldn’t agree more. Take away their weapons and give the power to the local authorities. The federal government should not have control of the lands in these states period. Their power should be severely curtailed for everyone’s sake. They don’t need submachine guns and are absolutely out of control. “I want to know what kind of arsenal they have. I’m met with blank stares,” he said. “They’re wholly unresponsive. They don’t feel compelled to answer our letters.” That’s the problem… sanctioned by the government, they feel above the law and in no need to answer for their actions. Totalitarian anyone?

From The Federalist Papers Project:

Utah Rep. Jason Chaffetz is sick and tired of Bureau of Land Management (BLM) agents and Forest Service armed to the teeth. It’s dangerous, unnecessary and sends the wrong message.

“These agents are more Rambo and less Andy Griffith than I would like,” he told the Deseret News Tuesday. So he wants to take away their guns and authority.

“Let’s not kid ourselves. The blood pressure is running high, especially in southern Utah, and I don’t want anyone to get killed,” Chaffetz said, adding his bill has the endorsement of his Utah colleagues in the House.

The Republican lawmaker said he also wants to issue subpoenas to the “out of control” federal agencies to find out why exactly they think they need submachine guns. He said he has asked them repeatedly with no satisfactory response.

The relationship between federal agencies and local sheriffs in Utah has soured as tensions run high in the Intermountain West over grazing, land use rights and an overzealous federal government. I know first hand about this as I come from Nevada and have lived on ranches all over the west in numerous states. Ranchers and citizens in general in these states have had it with the overreaching of the feds. Over the years, Chaffetz said, the feds have become more and more uncooperative. “The BLM is refusing to do any business in Utah,” he said, referencing canceled contracts. Yet if someone is lost or injured in a national forest or BLM-managed land, it is local deputies who respond and spend the resources, he said. Chaffetz said it makes more sense to have elected county sheriffs with public accountability in charge of law enforcement functions in their own geographic areas. And in this, he is exactly right. States’ rights is the way to go and limited government control is the answer. Unless of course, civil war is your idea of a good time.

Seems that Utah is starting to get tired of the BLM takeover, too. Think this Rep is worried about what happened in Oregon.

[kevin kiernan]

Our minerals in the grounds of We The People should only be mined by American companies. They can pay for mining rights the same as foreign government owned companies. The land can be mined the same as it has been for years. Co-existing with Ranchers and forestry industry. Any Private owned land should be left alone for the owner to make his own deals.What crimes that have been committed should be prosecuted to the full extent...The Public owned lands should be given to the States to manage themselves.And the federal courts should keep the state governments in line with the constitution..That is the way it was set up to work.