He says he shouldn't have to pay them to blm because they don't own the land any more than he does and he was there before them. He already said he would be willing to pay them to the state of Nevada Clark County who actually own the land.. He isn't against paying them, he's against paying them to the crooked fedSuggesting it's a fake story shows you know nothing about the situation, regardless of which source it's posted from ... Seems to be a theme around here watching your posts... CNN is reporting the same story, Washington times.. There are political figures who are traveling there and will be there in person. Mobilized militia groups have clearly stated they are on site (check some of their independent pages).... Damn faux news and their made up stories Here you go, little background (I didn't write this) : Those who say Bundy is a “deadbeat” are making inaccurate claims. Bundy has in fact paid fees to Clark County, Nevada in an arrangement pre-dating the BLM. The BLM arrived much later, changed the details of the setup without consulting with Bundy — or any other rancher — and then began systematically driving out cattle and ranchers. Bundy refused to pay BLM, especially after they demanded he reduce his heard’s head count down to a level that would not sustain his ranch. Bundy OWNS the water and forage rights to this land. He paid for these rights. He built fences, established water ways, and constructed roads with his own money, with the approval of Nevada and BLM. When BLM started using his fees to run him off the land and harassing him, he ceased paying. So should BLM reimburse him for managing the land and for the confiscation of his water and forage rights? Cliven Bundy’s problem isn’t that he didn’t pay — he did — or that his cattle bother tortoises — they don’t