A potentially violent confrontation was defused a week ago after federal agents released about 400-head of cattle confiscated in a decades-old dispute between Nevada rancher Cliven Bundy and the Bureau of Land Management.

    Bundy received support from hundreds of states’ rights protesters, including armed militia members.

    Idaho sheriffs and law makers said the federal response to Bundy’s refusal to comply with a court order was over the top, but they agree the rancher owns some responsibility for the week-long standoff.

    “You don’t need a hammer to kill a fly,” Bannock County Sheriff Lorin Nielsen said regarding the federal seizure.

    Bundy, 68, has waged a 21-year-long battle with the federal government over where his cattle can graze. He has not paid grazing fees for more than two decades, and the dispute between Bundy and the BLM has turned into a national debate about states’ rights versus federal land-use policy.

    The state of Nevada officially outlawed cattle grazing in the Gold Butte area in 1998 to protect habitat for the endangered desert tortoise.

    Bundy’s grazing rights were later revoked after he stopped paying grazing fees and disregarded federal court orders to remove his animals. His family has raised cattle in the 600,000-acre Gold Butte area since the late 1800s.

    In 2013, a federal judge gave Bundy 45 days to remove his cattle. Bundy refused.

    The BLM and the U.S. National Park Service responded to Bundy’s noncompliance by bringing in federal agents and cowboys for hire to block access to the public land and to confiscate the “trespass cattle” — about 900 head.

    The BLM contends it was implementing two court orders issued last year.

    Nielsen said it was civil action and should have been handled as such instead of enacting the federal blockade.

    “I wonder who ordered such a large-scale response,” Nielsen said. “They could have put a lien on his property or his cattle and collected their money that way. We are a nation of laws, but there has to be some common sense. None was used here.”

    On April 14, Clark County Sheriff Doug Gillespie was able to negotiate a resolution with Bundy. The BLM did not take part in negotiations but agreed to return the cattle.

    The showdown over Bundy’s cattle is a continuation of the Sagebrush Rebellion. Launched by Nevada lawmakers in the 1970s, the movement was an attempt to return management of federal land to the states.

    According to an Associated Press report April 14, environmentalists accused the BLM of surrendering to threats of violence from dozens of armed Bundy supporters and urged the federal agency to pursue action against the rancher.

    Bundy vowed to do whatever it took to maintain his family’s ranching operation.

    BLM Chief Neil Kornze told CBS News that after consulting with law enforcement, the agency decided to end the roundup of Bundy’s remaining cattle over fear for the safety of the public and their employees.

    “This is a matter of fairness and equity, and we remain disappointed that Bundy continues to not comply with the same laws that 16,000 public-lands ranchers do every year,” Kornze said. “After 20 years and multiple court orders to remove the trespass cattle, Mr. Bundy owes the American taxpayers in excess of $1 million. The BLM will continue to work to resolve the matter administratively and judicially.”

    Nielsen commended Gillespie for resolving the situation but believes that the Nevada sheriff should have probably acted sooner.

    “I question the need for so many federal police. There are BLM officers and U.S. Forest Service officers, and they share jurisdiction with counties,” Nielsen said. “As sheriffs we know our people and they know us — they vote for us. We don’t need firearms to resolve a civil action.”

    Nielsen did note that Bundy has profited from the free use of public lands during the past 20 years.

    Bundy compared the standoff to Ruby Ridge and Waco, and he credited the American people with getting his cattle back.

    “Like Ruby Ridge, a sheriff going in and serving a warrant would have been better than calling in the federal forces,” Nielsen said.

    Bundy said he doesn’t recognize federal authority on the land, which he believes belongs to the state of Nevada.

    Bundy’s 37-year-old son, Dave Bundy, was arrested and allegedly “roughed up” April 13 for filming federal agents outside an area designated for protesters and supporters. He was held overnight and released.

    The family also reported that snipers were stationed throughout the property.

    Bingham County Sheriff Craig Rowland said he didn’t understand why the federal government waited 17 years to act, and he believes Bundy got what he was looking for: publicity for his cause.

    “Some of these Constitutionalists apparently don’t read the Constitution,” Rowland said. “How can you live in the U.S. and say you don’t recognize your government?”

    Rowland agreed that the issue was a civil matter and that local authorities should have stepped in long before they did.

    “Sheriffs have control in their counties,” Rowland said. “If the feds are coming in, they usually give you advance notice.”

    Rowland believes the federal agencies will now attempt to collect their debt through judicial recourse.

    “I don’t think (Bundy) will be able to sell anything. They’re going to put a lien on everything he owns,” Rowland said. “It’s not fair for every other rancher in the country to pay grazing fees and for (Bundy) not to.”

    Idaho Sen. Jim Guthrie of McCammon is also an Idaho cattleman, but his animals are grazed on private lands.

    As well as paying grazing fees, Guthrie said ranchers are responsible for maintaining public lands. In some areas, animals must be kept out of riparian areas and the number of cattle and the length of time they can be grazed on public land is regulated.

    While Guthrie agreed that Bundy needs to take some ownership for the ongoing dispute with the BLM, he has concerns about the way the cattle in Nevada were handled by federal agents.

    “They made no attempt to keep the calves and cows together,” Guthrie said. “Some of (the calves) were newborn or young calves.”

    Guthrie also questioned why the federal government waited so long to take action, but he said the confiscation of Bundy’s cattle in Nevada and most recently the seizure of tax refunds to pay for overpayment of social security benefits to deceased parents demonstrates the federal government’s new, aggressive debt collection methods.

    “It’s a little threatening to people when the government takes these kinds of actions,” Guthrie said.   

    Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) weighed in on the high profile Bundy case last week and vowed that “it’s not over.”

    “We can’t have an American people that violate the law and then just walk away from it. So it’s not over,” Reid told reporters in Reno Monday.

    Idaho Rep. Ken Andrus of Lava Hot Springs is also a cattleman and said he pays a cow/calf fee for animals that he grazes on public lands.

    “I don’t think Harry Reid has any reason to get involved,” Andrus said. “But anyone that grazes cattle on public land has an obligation to pay the grazing fee.”

    Andrus is not unsympathetic to the plight of the Nevada cattleman, but said there is better course of action he could take.

    “(Bundy) does have an issue. If his grazing rights were cut significantly because of this endangered tortoise and with as much support as there’s been, he might be able to get the courts to overturn the ruling,” Andrus said. “Those people might back down a little bit.”