Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: Ben Ficklin

*Early census records show Cliven’s maternal grandmother, Christena Jensen, was born in Nevada in 1901*

So from this we know that Bundy’s great-grandparents were settled in Nevada at least by 1901 and likely well before, whether that area was called Nevada or Arizona (see comment below).

*John was a Mesquite farmer.... the farm was near Main Street and a bridge over the Virgin River.*

Mesquite Flats was settled in 1880 by Mormons and flooded out three times by the Virgin River between 1880 and 1884. One of the few roads leading to Littlefield Village, AZ (Mt. Trumbull) orginates in Mesquite.

*Census records show that Cliven Bundy’s paternal great-grandfather, Illinois native Abraham Bundy, lived in Littlefield Village in Mohave County, Ariz., as early as 1900.*

from history of the Arizona strip: “In the extreme west on the Virgin River is the small settlement of Littlefield just off Interstate 15”

(as an aside, much of Clark county, NV was once part of the territory of Arizona but was sliced off by the gubment and given to Nevada, while the Arizona strip remained with Arizona)

So, from the two references given in the I-team geneological report, it’s a simple matter to independently substantiate that the Bundy ancestors were indeed, “up and down the Virgin River” for over a hundred years, just as Bundy claims his family was.


The US land management policy prior to 1946 was not on managing range, but on rapid disposal of public lands to private citizens. Section 5 of the Grazing Act of 1934 provided for free grazing on over 65 million acres of grazing districts, one of which appears to be the area claimed by Bundy.

(map of Taylor grazing districts is right on the BLM site, here: http://www.blm.gov/wy/st/en/field_offices/Casper/range/taylor.1.html )

When the Land Office merged with the BLM, it was several years before the BLM mission changed from disposal to active long-term management, and so several more years before the BLM got around to instituting grazing fees on lands that were outside Section 15 of the 1934 Grazing Act, that is, lands NOT originally designated at free grazing districts. Bundy’s claimed range does not appear to be outside the 1934 designated free grazing district.


18 posted on 05/18/2014 5:50:51 PM PDT by blueplum
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies ]


To: blueplum
You can try spin it but the court has already ruled against Bundy on this.

This is merely the facts catching up with the news. Many people were under the impression that Bundy's family had homesteaded the 160 acres way back then and also had been grazing the allotment since way back then. And that these had passed down to Bundy thru succession. We know better now.

Not just this but other things.

We knew he was trespassing on the allotment but only after the BLM documents and court documents became available we see that there was a second trespass when he moved his stock onto the Lake Mead Recreation Area. It would appear that it was the second trespass that set the wheels in motion that led to this incident.

And it was only after the fact that it came to light that there were 3 separate incidents and it appeared that all 3 involved militia vs BLM. Now we know that the sheriffs dept was heavily involved in the main incident. And as the sergeant said, it didn't make any difference to Bundy and the militia whether it was the BLM or the sheriffs dept, the militia was looking for a fight.

19 posted on 05/19/2014 3:02:56 PM PDT by Ben Ficklin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson