Remember when the Native Americans occupied Alcatraz for several years
in the late 1960s? How about the Ruby Ridge debacle or even the Waco imbroglio?
There are a number of chapters in our country’s recent history when
groups have become fed up with Uncle Sam’s bullying behavior and
penchant for over-regulation and made a statement by resisting the government’s
authority.
History is repeating itself at the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge in
the remote and frigid southeastern corner of Oregon. Over the weekend,
a several-hundred-person procession marched through Burns, Oregon and
stopped at Dwight Hammond’s doorstep. This was a massive show of
support for Hammond, 73, and his son Steven, 46, as they prepared to report
to the BOP yesterday.
The Hammonds are at the eye of this storm after being convicted for setting
fires to federal lands in 2001 and 2006. In the 2001 incident, the Hammonds,
who leased grazing rights to the land for their cattle, said they had
started the fires on their own land to prevent the spread of an invasive
species of plant, and that the fire inadvertently burned onto public land.
In contrast, prosecutors said the fire consumed 139 acres of public land
and was set to hide evidence after the men were part of a hunting party
that illegally killed several deer on federal land. In 2006, the Hammonds
allegedly set a “back fire” meant to protect their land after
a series of lightning storms had started a fire on federal property. Prosecutors
said that fire then spread onto the federal land.
Surprisingly, the Hammonds were both charged with and convicted of violating
a federal terrorism statute that mandates a minimum of 5 years in the
pokey for anyone convicted of arson on federal property. When the case
was initially called for sentencing, the district court sentenced the
Hammonds to serve less than five years and they served their sentences.
However, the Ninth Circus remanded the case for resentencing reminding
the district court that the conviction carried a 5 year mandatory sentence.
The Hammonds were resentenced to serve the mandatory minimum sentence
and they are now wards of the BOP.
The 5 year mandatory sentence outraged many fellow ranchers and constitutionalist
groups in the northwest, who considered the case both an overreach of
federal regulation and of the federal prosecutors. Equally infuriating,
the Hammonds were deemed terrorists. Misguided for sure, but terrorists—REALLY?
For their supporters, the Hammonds represent the latest battle in a struggle
as old as the American settlement of the northwest: pitting poor cattle
farmers against the federal government and its land regulations in states
such as Oregon, where the government owns more than half of the land.
After some fire and brimstone speeches at the Hammonds’ property
over the weekend, a handful of militia members began occupying Malheur
to show their support for the Hammonds and their disdain for the government.
Now, the ball is in the DOJ’s court—do they allow the rag tag
group to occupy this godforsaken wildlife refuge in the brutal weather
it experiences in the winter or do they assemble the troops and show them
who’s boss. Time will only tell.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/post-nation/wp/2016/01/03/what-spurred-the-armed-occupation-of-a-federal-wildlife-refuge-in-southeast-oregon/