SDFB couple indicted in federal fraud case

Carved from the Great Sioux Nation, the Buffalo Gap and Fort Pierre National Grasslands in South Dakota are managed from a US Forest Service office in Nebraska.

The Forest Service detected fraud, attempted a civil resolution and a grand jury indicted members of the South Dakota Farm Bureau. USA v. Maude, et al was brought by the US Attorney for the District of South Dakota and is being heard by US Magistrate Judge Daneta Wollmann, a Trump era appointee. If convicted the defendants face $250,000 in fines and ten years in federal prison.

On 20 June, Charles and Heather Maude of Caputa, South Dakota were charged with crimes against the United States after they “knowingly stole, purloined and converted” land on two allotments within the Buffalo Gap National Grassland. Charles is represented by an attorney employed by the Federal Public Defender's Office and Heather is charged with two counts and is being represented by private attorneys. The Maudes allegedly stole access to public land by claiming it as their own then after being advised of their crime blew off a civil remedy.

Maude Hog and Cattle has been providing product to Wall Meats which is heavily subsidized by the USDA and Charles Maude has received nearly $300,000 in ag subsidies since 1995. 

Livestock grazing isn't a right; it's a privilege and it's ruining public ground throughout the American West. Some 58% of grazing permits on federal land in critical habitat go without review. White Republican welfare ranchers are, of course, howling government overreach but also wail when eminent domain is applied for the public good. Fueled by Donald Trump and Republican politicians like Kristi Noem, Harriet Hageman, Dorothy Moon and Ammon Bundy white christian nationalists are the latest perpetrators of malicious attacks on public employees and on the grid.

“Subsequently, the Forest Service observed crops had been planted and an irrigation system installed on National Forest System land without authorization, despite the Maudes having been informed that they were trespassing,” the agency said. Contrary to allegations the indictments disrupted civil proceedings, the agency claims that it’d only referred the case to the U.S. Department of Justice after it was “unable to resolve the matter through administrative means.” The referral was “normal protocol” under such circumstances and it was ultimately the DOJ that decided to bring criminal indictments against the Maudes, according to the Forest Service. “At no point during this contact was anyone placed under arrest or taken into custody, nor did any officer utilize any tactical uniform, gear or assault weapons,” the agency said. [Feds deny jumping gun with criminal charges against ranch couple in land dispute]