Settlement increased for case from 1970s'
'Sagebrush Rebellion'
By
MATEUSZ PERKOWSKI
Capital Press
A federal judge has added $150,000 to the original $4.22
million judgment won by the estate of rancher Wayne Hage in a years-long
battle over property rights.
The federal government had asked Senior Judge Loren Smith
to throw out the judgment. Instead, he increased it.
Hage, a leader of the "Sagebrush Rebellion" against
federal control of land, was the husband of former Rep. Helen
Chenoweth-Hage, R-Idaho. They both died in 2006.
The order is the most recent victory in a legal dispute
that stretches back to 1991, when Hage filed suit against the government for
taking his private property without just compensation.
In a previous court decision, Smith referred to the
well-publicized lawsuit as "a drama worthy of a tragic opera with heroic
characters."
Hage's 7,000-acre ranch in Nye County, Nev., bordered
several allotments in the Toiyabe National Forest on which he built fences,
corrals, water facilities and other rangeland improvements for cattle
grazing.
Tensions began to mount between the rancher and the U.S.
Forest Service in the late 1970s, when the agency permitted the introduction
of elk to the national forest, resulting in damaged fences and scattered
cattle, according to court records.
Over the next decade, other incidents aggravated the
strain and eventually led to the lawsuit.
According to court documents, the Forest Service excluded
Hage's cattle from forage and water in certain allotments, impounded animals
that entered those allotments and prevented him from maintaining ditches
needed to exercise his water rights.
In his legal complaint, Hage claimed the agency had
breached its contractual obligations and violated his constitutional rights.
During the course of litigation, the U.S. Court of Federal
Claims decided the Forest Service could legally prohibit grazing on the
allotments without compensating Hage, since grazing permits are licenses and
not contracts.
As such, the impoundment of cattle was not an
unconstitutional taking because the cattle had trespassed on government
land, the court said.
However, the court ruled that the agency had taken Hage's
water rights, ditch rights-of-way, roads, water facilities and other
structures without just compensation and in 2008 ordered the government to
pay him $4.22 million.
The federal government asked the court to change or set
aside the financial compensation, alleging there's no evidence Hage actually
built hundreds of miles of fences, trails, ditches and pipelines on the
allotments.
Under the law, Hage would qualify for compensation only if
he had built the structures, the government said.
Because his grazing permits only authorized Hage to
maintain the structures, he was not entitled to their full value, the
government said.
The judge disagreed.
In the context of the grazing permits, "maintenance"
included placing or construction, he said in the most recent ruling.
The government's argument "cannot be squared with the
language of the statute and the reality of range work and construction,"
Smith said.
In adding more than $150,000 to the award, the judge ruled
that his previous decision had mistakenly omitted the value of ditches and
pipelines taken by the government.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, any copyrighted
material herein is distributed without profit or payment to those who
have
expressed a prior interest in receiving this information for
non-profit
research and educational purposes only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml