Jump to content

Bundy Ancestral Rights Debunked


Recommended Posts

  • I-Team: Bundy's 'ancestral rights' come under scrutiny
  • Updated: Monday, April 21 2014 8:56 PM EDT2014-04-22 00:56:06 GMTApr 21, 2014 7:56 PM CDTApr 21, 2014 7:56 PM CDT

    Federal authorities remain silent about their next plans to confront Cliven Bundy at his Bunkerville ranch.Both sides are fighting over history, with federal courts denying Bundy's claims of "ancestral rights" on the Virgin River valley.More>>

LAS VEGAS -- It has been widely reported that Cliven Bundy’s family claims to have ranched in the Bunkerville area since the 1870s even though a federal judge held a different view of Bundy’s history.Bundy repeated a similar claim Thursday when he told TheBlaze website:

“My family has preemptive, adjudicated livestock water rights filed with the state of Nevada. They were established in 1877 when the first pioneers entered the valley. Among those first pioneers were my grandparents from my mother’s side. My father either bought or inherited his Nevada state livestock water rights and I, in turn, have done the same.”

Contrast that with the 1998 opinion from U.S. District Judge Johnnie Rawlinson in a case where it was determined Bundy wouldn’t be allowed to use federal land for his cattle because of failure to pay grazing fees to the Bureau of Land Management. Rawlinson wrote that it wasn’t until roughly 1954 that “Bundy or his father or both have grazed livestock on public lands owned by the United States and administered by the BLM.”

Clark County Recorder documents show the 160-acre Bunkerville ranch Bundy calls home was purchased by his parents, David and Bodel Bundy, from Raoul and Ruth Leavitt on Jan. 5, 1948. The purchase included the transfer to the Bundys of certain water rights, including water from the nearby Virgin River. Cliven Bundy was born in 1946.

Although no Bundys lived in Bunkerville in 1930 or 1940, according to Census records for those years, Cliven Bundy’s mother Bodel and her parents, John and Christena Jensen, lived in neighboring Mesquite in the early 20th Century.

Census records from 1930 indicate that John was a Mesquite farmer originally from Utah whose parents were from Denmark. Those records state the farm was near Main Street and a bridge over the Virgin River.
Separate records from the website FamilySearch, which is sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, indicate that Christena Jensen was born in Nevada in 1901 and that Bodel Jensen was born in Nevada in 1924. Christena Jensen’s parents originally were from Utah. This is the side of the family where Cliven Bundy claims long-standing livestock water rights.

Federal grazing districts were established with passage by Congress of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. The Las Vegas area grazing district was established Nov. 3, 1936. The Bureau of Land Management was formed in 1946, the year Cliven Bundy was born.

County records show the earliest construction on Bundy’s ranch was in 1951. The land is zoned rural open land. Since 1994 the ranch has been jointly owned by the David A. and Bodel Bundy Trust and the Bundy Revocable Trust.

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. Abraham Bundy was credited in 1916 with establishment in Mohave County of Bundyville, otherwise known as Mt. Trumbull, according to a history of the Arizona Strip on the Northern Arizona University website.

Abraham Bundy’s children included Cliven Bundy’s paternal grandfather, Roy Bundy, who was born in Nebraska. Two of Roy Bundy’s children were born in Nevada around World War I but Roy Bundy and his family returned to Mt. Trumbull and lived there for many years.

One of Roy Bundy’s sons was David A. Bundy, Cliven Bundy’s father. David Bundy, who was born in Arizona, lived in Mt. Trumbull until at least 1940, according to Census records.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

  • I-Team: Bundy's 'ancestral rights' come under scrutiny
  • Updated: Monday, April 21 2014 8:56 PM EDT2014-04-22 00:56:06 GMTApr 21, 2014 7:56 PM CDTApr 21, 2014 7:56 PM CDT

     

    Federal authorities remain silent about their next plans to confront Cliven Bundy at his Bunkerville ranch.Both sides are fighting over history, with federal courts denying Bundy's claims of "ancestral rights" on the Virgin River valley.More>>

LAS VEGAS -- It has been widely reported that Cliven Bundy’s family claims to have ranched in the Bunkerville area since the 1870s even though a federal judge held a different view of Bundy’s history.Bundy repeated a similar claim Thursday when he told TheBlaze website:

 

“My family has preemptive, adjudicated livestock water rights filed with the state of Nevada. They were established in 1877 when the first pioneers entered the valley. Among those first pioneers were my grandparents from my mother’s side. My father either bought or inherited his Nevada state livestock water rights and I, in turn, have done the same.”

 

Contrast that with the 1998 opinion from U.S. District Judge Johnnie Rawlinson in a case where it was determined Bundy wouldn’t be allowed to use federal land for his cattle because of failure to pay grazing fees to the Bureau of Land Management. Rawlinson wrote that it wasn’t until roughly 1954 that “Bundy or his father or both have grazed livestock on public lands owned by the United States and administered by the BLM.”

 

Clark County Recorder documents show the 160-acre Bunkerville ranch Bundy calls home was purchased by his parents, David and Bodel Bundy, from Raoul and Ruth Leavitt on Jan. 5, 1948. The purchase included the transfer to the Bundys of certain water rights, including water from the nearby Virgin River. Cliven Bundy was born in 1946.

 

Although no Bundys lived in Bunkerville in 1930 or 1940, according to Census records for those years, Cliven Bundy’s mother Bodel and her parents, John and Christena Jensen, lived in neighboring Mesquite in the early 20th Century.

 

Census records from 1930 indicate that John was a Mesquite farmer originally from Utah whose parents were from Denmark. Those records state the farm was near Main Street and a bridge over the Virgin River.

Separate records from the website FamilySearch, which is sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, indicate that Christena Jensen was born in Nevada in 1901 and that Bodel Jensen was born in Nevada in 1924. Christena Jensen’s parents originally were from Utah. This is the side of the family where Cliven Bundy claims long-standing livestock water rights.

 

Federal grazing districts were established with passage by Congress of the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934. The Las Vegas area grazing district was established Nov. 3, 1936. The Bureau of Land Management was formed in 1946, the year Cliven Bundy was born.

 

County records show the earliest construction on Bundy’s ranch was in 1951. The land is zoned rural open land. Since 1994 the ranch has been jointly owned by the David A. and Bodel Bundy Trust and the Bundy Revocable Trust.

 

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. Abraham Bundy was credited in 1916 with establishment in Mohave County of Bundyville, otherwise known as Mt. Trumbull, according to a history of the Arizona Strip on the Northern Arizona University website.

 

Abraham Bundy’s children included Cliven Bundy’s paternal grandfather, Roy Bundy, who was born in Nebraska. Two of Roy Bundy’s children were born in Nevada around World War I but Roy Bundy and his family returned to Mt. Trumbull and lived there for many years.

 

One of Roy Bundy’s sons was David A. Bundy, Cliven Bundy’s father. David Bundy, who was born in Arizona, lived in Mt. Trumbull until at least 1940, according to Census records.

 

Uhm, maybe you can explain as to how this criminal Cliven Bundy has gotten away with this for 20 years, seems like an open and shut case to hear the gubmits side. If he's broken the law and not paid taxes/grazing fees for all these years why hasn't he been thrown in jail, the guys been giving interviews and seems to be easy to find so what's stopping them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

someone seems obsessed... why isnt lored bragging about oblamercare ?

was this story debunked ?

snip
Unlike Bundy, who claims his ancestors were homesteaders on his ranch in 1877 and never ceded it to the federal government, the Danns, two Western Shoshone sisters, were not trampling over land set aside for sensitive plants and animals. Nor were they getting rich off the land while, in essence, robbing the taxpayers of grazing fees.

The Danns have lived without running water or electricity their entire lives. Their tribe, the Western Shoshone, have lived in Nevada and parts west since time immemorial. The land was Shoshone land, and the U.S. formally agreed that was the case when it signed the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, which explicitly stated that the Shoshone would never have to give up their land. That is, until the U.S. began encroaching on the land, claiming it for its own without the tribe's consent or knowledge.

snip

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Never Mind Cliven Bundy: Here’s the Real David vs. Goliath Story Between Ranchers and Feds

 

Shoshone sisters have battled against the U.S. over land and cattle.

 

dannsisters3.png

Photo Credit: Ronnie Farley

April 19, 2014 |
The decades-long standoff between Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy and federal officials trying to push his cows off public, protected land came to a head last week when Bundy's armed supporters forced the feds to back off on live TV, scoring a public relations victory. Now Bundy is a folk hero, at least to Libertarians, the Tea Party, conservative talk-show hosts and other right-wing critics of the government.

Bundy, a multi-millionaire farmer who hasn't paid for grazing rights on public lands for more than 20 years, also stands to garner substantial support from some very wealthy enemies of President Obama. Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group backed by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch (which spent $122 million trying to defeat Obama and other Democrats in 2012), is already instigating a campaign against the Bureau of Land Management on Bundy's behalf. It began a social media campaign, using the hashtag #BundyBattle, and is taking to the Internet to mock the time and money the bureau has wasted (some $1 million according to its poster) fighting the "little guy."

But Nevada is home to another epic battle between ranchers and the feds. As in Bundy's case, it involves ranchers Mary and Carrie Dann, whose ancestors lived on the land long before the federal government staked a claim to it.

 

Unlike Bundy, who claims his ancestors were homesteaders on his ranch in 1877 and never ceded it to the federal government, the Danns, two Western Shoshone sisters, were not trampling over land set aside for sensitive plants and animals. Nor were they getting rich off the land while, in essence, robbing the taxpayers of grazing fees.

The Danns have lived without running water or electricity their entire lives. Their tribe, the Western Shoshone, have lived in Nevada and parts west since time immemorial. The land was Shoshone land, and the U.S. formally agreed that was the case when it signed the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, which explicitly stated that the Shoshone would never have to give up their land. That is, until the U.S. began encroaching on the land, claiming it for its own without the tribe's consent or knowledge.

The Danns' battle goes back to the early 1970s, when the federal government first sued them to stop grazing horses and cattle on land the U.S. claimed as its own. The Danns said the land was Western Shoshone land that the U.S. had taken illegally, and refused to pay grazing fees. Mary waged this battle until her death in 2005 at age 82, in an accident while she was repairing a fence. Carrie, 82 years old, is still fighting.

Unlike Bundy, the Danns endured five roundups of their herds starting in 1998. These were operations more suited for what the feds confronted at Bundy’s ranch than at the ramshackle farmhouse of two elderly sisters barely five feet tall. Scores of heavily armed, jack-booted federal agents descended on their homestead, usually at dawn, and would confiscate hundreds of cattle and horses in helicopter roundups with dozens of trucks and other vehicles plowing through the land, as if anticipating an army.Many horses and cattle died during the roundups, starving to death in holding corrals where they were provided no food or water. The horses and cattle that managed to survive were sold at auction.

Both the Danns and their tribe tried legal means of support. The Western Shoshone filed suit decades ago to try to clear up the ownership of their land, which the U.S., through congressional legislation, began taking for various means. Some of the land was used for nuclear testing— the Department of Energy has detonated more bombs there than anywhere else on earth—while other plots were leased to mining companies digging for gold.

Here's the catch to the Western Shoshone's suit against the feds: A now-defunct U.S. department, the Indian Claims Court, ruled against the Western Shoshone's claims that the U.S. had stolen their land on the grounds that the U.S. had already encroached on it for decades. In other words, the Western Shoshone couldn't reclaim the land because the U.S. had already taken in. Finders, keepers.

The case continued, with the Western Shoshone losing each time. In 1979, the tribe was awarded $26 million for more than 20 million acres the U.S. had taken illegally, but the tribe, refusing the claim, refused the money. This backfired on them when the Department of Interior, acting on the tribe's behalf without its consent, agreed to take the money (which has gathered interest ever since). When the Danns sued the federal government, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government, claiming that because the U.S. had paid the tribe for the land, even though the tribe had refused the money, the payment extinguished the Shoshone's land claims.

Desperate for relief, the Danns finally asked the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination for help to recover the millions of acres of land in Nevada and bordering states that belonged to the Western Shoshone. The U.N. ordered the U.S. to stop its actions against the Western Shoshone, and agreed with all the tribe’s grievances. This victory on paper did nothing; the U.S. government ignored it.

The kicker to this story is that while the Bureau of Land Management’s fight against the Danns claimed the sisters' herds were overgrazing—and thus harming—the land, much of the land the Danns have fought for has been leased to gold mining companies that have conducted resource-intensive extraction methods.

The land surrounding the Danns' ranch sits atop one of the most significant deposits of gold ever found in the United States. Only a few months after the Danns' horses were first rounded up, Nevada's headlines blared about gold finds in Crescent Valley, at the exact locations where the horses were removed. Most of the world's largest gold mining companies have some interest in the land, which involves using cyanide to extract minuscule amounts of gold from rock. Because the gold dust sits under the water table, it also involves pumping 20,000 to 70,000 gallons of water per minute every day and moving tons of soil and rock, leaving open pits. The extraction methods are so energy-intensive that the production of a single gold ring generates 20 tons of waste land.

Carrie Dann is no Tea Party hero. But she vows to fight until her last breath.

"Right is right," she said in an interview. "And wrong is wrong."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, the census bureau wasn't founded until 1903. So how could they know records of anything before that time anyway? So it would be difficult to prove or disprove, one way or the other, who had that land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Never Mind Cliven Bundy: Here’s the Real David vs. Goliath Story Between Ranchers and Feds

 

Shoshone sisters have battled against the U.S. over land and cattle.

 

dannsisters3.png

Photo Credit: Ronnie Farley

April 19, 2014 |
The decades-long standoff between Nevada cattle rancher Cliven Bundy and federal officials trying to push his cows off public, protected land came to a head last week when Bundy's armed supporters forced the feds to back off on live TV, scoring a public relations victory. Now Bundy is a folk hero, at least to Libertarians, the Tea Party, conservative talk-show hosts and other right-wing critics of the government.

Bundy, a multi-millionaire farmer who hasn't paid for grazing rights on public lands for more than 20 years, also stands to garner substantial support from some very wealthy enemies of President Obama. Americans for Prosperity, a conservative group backed by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch (which spent $122 million trying to defeat Obama and other Democrats in 2012), is already instigating a campaign against the Bureau of Land Management on Bundy's behalf. It began a social media campaign, using the hashtag #BundyBattle, and is taking to the Internet to mock the time and money the bureau has wasted (some $1 million according to its poster) fighting the "little guy."

But Nevada is home to another epic battle between ranchers and the feds. As in Bundy's case, it involves ranchers Mary and Carrie Dann, whose ancestors lived on the land long before the federal government staked a claim to it.

 

Unlike Bundy, who claims his ancestors were homesteaders on his ranch in 1877 and never ceded it to the federal government, the Danns, two Western Shoshone sisters, were not trampling over land set aside for sensitive plants and animals. Nor were they getting rich off the land while, in essence, robbing the taxpayers of grazing fees.

The Danns have lived without running water or electricity their entire lives. Their tribe, the Western Shoshone, have lived in Nevada and parts west since time immemorial. The land was Shoshone land, and the U.S. formally agreed that was the case when it signed the 1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, which explicitly stated that the Shoshone would never have to give up their land. That is, until the U.S. began encroaching on the land, claiming it for its own without the tribe's consent or knowledge.

The Danns' battle goes back to the early 1970s, when the federal government first sued them to stop grazing horses and cattle on land the U.S. claimed as its own. The Danns said the land was Western Shoshone land that the U.S. had taken illegally, and refused to pay grazing fees. Mary waged this battle until her death in 2005 at age 82, in an accident while she was repairing a fence. Carrie, 82 years old, is still fighting.

Unlike Bundy, the Danns endured five roundups of their herds starting in 1998. These were operations more suited for what the feds confronted at Bundy’s ranch than at the ramshackle farmhouse of two elderly sisters barely five feet tall. Scores of heavily armed, jack-booted federal agents descended on their homestead, usually at dawn, and would confiscate hundreds of cattle and horses in helicopter roundups with dozens of trucks and other vehicles plowing through the land, as if anticipating an army.Many horses and cattle died during the roundups, starving to death in holding corrals where they were provided no food or water. The horses and cattle that managed to survive were sold at auction.

Both the Danns and their tribe tried legal means of support. The Western Shoshone filed suit decades ago to try to clear up the ownership of their land, which the U.S., through congressional legislation, began taking for various means. Some of the land was used for nuclear testing— the Department of Energy has detonated more bombs there than anywhere else on earth—while other plots were leased to mining companies digging for gold.

Here's the catch to the Western Shoshone's suit against the feds: A now-defunct U.S. department, the Indian Claims Court, ruled against the Western Shoshone's claims that the U.S. had stolen their land on the grounds that the U.S. had already encroached on it for decades. In other words, the Western Shoshone couldn't reclaim the land because the U.S. had already taken in. Finders, keepers.

The case continued, with the Western Shoshone losing each time. In 1979, the tribe was awarded $26 million for more than 20 million acres the U.S. had taken illegally, but the tribe, refusing the claim, refused the money. This backfired on them when the Department of Interior, acting on the tribe's behalf without its consent, agreed to take the money (which has gathered interest ever since). When the Danns sued the federal government, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in favor of the federal government, claiming that because the U.S. had paid the tribe for the land, even though the tribe had refused the money, the payment extinguished the Shoshone's land claims.

Desperate for relief, the Danns finally asked the United Nations Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination for help to recover the millions of acres of land in Nevada and bordering states that belonged to the Western Shoshone. The U.N. ordered the U.S. to stop its actions against the Western Shoshone, and agreed with all the tribe’s grievances. This victory on paper did nothing; the U.S. government ignored it.

The kicker to this story is that while the Bureau of Land Management’s fight against the Danns claimed the sisters' herds were overgrazing—and thus harming—the land, much of the land the Danns have fought for has been leased to gold mining companies that have conducted resource-intensive extraction methods.

The land surrounding the Danns' ranch sits atop one of the most significant deposits of gold ever found in the United States. Only a few months after the Danns' horses were first rounded up, Nevada's headlines blared about gold finds in Crescent Valley, at the exact locations where the horses were removed. Most of the world's largest gold mining companies have some interest in the land, which involves using cyanide to extract minuscule amounts of gold from rock. Because the gold dust sits under the water table, it also involves pumping 20,000 to 70,000 gallons of water per minute every day and moving tons of soil and rock, leaving open pits. The extraction methods are so energy-intensive that the production of a single gold ring generates 20 tons of waste land.

Carrie Dann is no Tea Party hero. But she vows to fight until her last breath.

"Right is right," she said in an interview. "And wrong is wrong."

 

 

You missed the point. Nobody showed up to protect the Dann Sister"s cattle.

 

Also, the Dann Sisters had an ancestral right and still lost in the courts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhm, maybe you can explain as to how this criminal Cliven Bundy has gotten away with this for 20 years, seems like an open and shut case to hear the gubmits side. If he's broken the law and not paid taxes/grazing fees for all these years why hasn't he been thrown in jail, the guys been giving interviews and seems to be easy to find so what's stopping them?

If he got away with it for 20 years, then why didn't the Govt. go after him BEFORE in those 20 years? Perhaps because they knew they had no case against him?

 

And wern't his grazing rights grandfathered in?

 

It looks like the Govt. got a hard on for him, because of political machinations inspired by the greed of the Chinese and Hairy Reid!

 

What else could explain this fiasco?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I understand, the census bureau wasn't founded until 1903. So how could they know records of anything before that time anyway? So it would be difficult to prove or disprove, one way or the other, who had that land.

 

http://search.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx?dbid=4873

 

In 1875, the state legislature of Nevada ordered a state census. During the first 15 years of statehood, Nevada had seen an enormous influx of people. The silver boom was at its height, and the population was higher than it would be at any time during the 19th century. This database contains more than 51,000 people listed in that state census. This update adds information from Storey County to that of Churchill, Douglas, Elko, Esmeralda, Eureka, Landon, Lincoln, Lyon, Nye, Ormsby, Washoe, and White Pine and counties. For each entry, the person's name, age, gender, occupation, status as head of household, and place of residence are listed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You missed the point. Nobody showed up to protect the Dann Sister"s cattle

lol

 

you are the biggest coward/loser on the internet...

 

you missed the point... dumbazz...

 

was the question "was this story debunked ?" too hard for the headless chicken ?

 

loreD the headless chicken

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

http://search.ancestry.com/search/db.aspx?dbid=4873

 

In 1875, the state legislature of Nevada ordered a state census. During the first 15 years of statehood, Nevada had seen an enormous influx of people. The silver boom was at its height, and the population was higher than it would be at any time during the 19th century. This database contains more than 51,000 people listed in that state census. This update adds information from Storey County to that of Churchill, Douglas, Elko, Esmeralda, Eureka, Landon, Lincoln, Lyon, Nye, Ormsby, Washoe, and White Pine and counties. For each entry, the person's name, age, gender, occupation, status as head of household, and place of residence are listed.

But Bundy's land is in clark county. Clark County is not on that list which makes sense because most of the influx in Nevada came in Northern Nevada, not Southern Nevada.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhm, maybe you can explain as to how this criminal Cliven Bundy has gotten away with this for 20 years, seems like an open and shut case to hear the gubmits side. If he's broken the law and not paid taxes/grazing fees for all these years why hasn't he been thrown in jail, the guys been giving interviews and seems to be easy to find so what's stopping them?

 

 

 

Because Cliven Bundy has been fighting it in the courts and finally lost all appeals. The government repeatedly attempted to settle the problem, but he still refused to pay.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/15/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-long-fight-between-cliven-bundy-and-the-federal-government/

 

1989: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lists the desert tortoise as an endangered species. A year later, its designation was changed to "threatened."

 

March 1993: The Washington Post publishes a story about the federal government's efforts to protect the desert tortoise in Nevada. Near Las Vegas, the Bureau of Land Management designated hundreds of thousands of acres of federal land for strict conservation efforts. "Among the conservation measures required," according to the Post's coverage, "are the elimination of livestock grazing and strict limits on off-road vehicle use in the protected tortoise habitat. Two weeks ago, the managers of the plan completed the task of purchasing grazing privileges from cattle ranchers who formerly used BLM land."

 

Many people were not impressed by the new conservation plan. "Cliven Bundy, whose family homesteaded his ranch in 1877 and who accuses the government of a 'land grab,' are digging in for a fight and say they will not willingly sell their grazing privileges to create another preserve." People who use the desert to prospect for minerals and to race motorcycles and jeeps also feel shortchanged. "'It was shoved down our throat,' said Mark Trinko, who represents off-road vehicle users on the committee that oversees the plan."

 

Bundy has repeatedly been fined for grazing his cattle on the protected land, fines he has not paid since 1993. The Bureau of Land Management, which oversees about 800 grazing areas in Nevada, responded by revoking his permit. Bundy has not applied for a new one.

April 1995: The fight between the Bureau of Land Management and the ranchers who want to use the federal land without fees or oversight is growing more tense, according to a story published in USA Today.

 

The reason that things were ramping up? Counties were starting to challenge federal ownership of land. In 1991, Catron County in New Mexico passed an ordinance that claimed state ownership and local management of public land in the state. Thirty five counties followed suit. Nye County, Nevada, became the first to act on its legislated threat. The county commissioner bulldozed his way down a closed national forest road. Forest rangers soon followed, who the county commissioner threatened to arrest if they interfered.Thursday evening, a small bomb went off in the U.S. Forest Service office in Carson City, Nev.

 

Though no one has taken responsibility -- and no one was injured -- it has sent chills through government agencies involved in Western land management.

 

"If it was sent as a message," says Forest Service spokeswoman Erin O'Connor, "we got it."

Ultimately the issue will be settled by the courts, but ranchers who say they can't afford to raise livestock without greater access to public land are taking matters into their own hands -- setting up what some officials fear is an inevitable and dangerous confrontation.

 

The situation is becoming so tense that federal workers now travel mostly in pairs and are in constant radio contact with district offices.

"I'm concerned about the safety of my employees," says Jim Nelson, Forest Service district manager for Nevada. "They can't go to church in these communities without having someone say something. Their kids are harassed in school. Stores and restaurants are not serving them."

Nelson, who oversees 7 million acres in Nevada, says his agency is just doing its job, which is to ensure that land remains healthy and viable for ranchers and any others who wish to use it.

 

That goal, he says, is hindered by unattended, free-ranging cows that degrade the state's precious springs and stream banks.

The battle is being called Sagebrush II, a sequel to a 1970s movement that sought a state takeover of federal public lands. Today, many ranchers, miners and loggers argue the federal government never had a legitimate claim to the land.

 

At this point, Cliven Bundy had racked up $31,000 in fees for grazing on federal land without a permit. Helicopters often hover over his herd, counting up the cows so he can be fined appropriately. "They've taken their authority and abused it," Bundy said. "I'm not being regulated to death anymore."

Bundy's neighbors were also angry.

 

March 18, 1996: The federal government, which owns 87 percent of the land in Nevada, is still worried about potential violence if they try to remove illegally grazing cattle from protected land. Two more pipebombs had exploded in Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management offices in the past two years. The Justice Department has 12 lawsuits pending against Nevada cattle ranchers. A federal court in the state struck down the Nye County ordinance that caused trouble the year before. Not that ranchers took that as reason to stand down, however. One local resident told USA Today,"A single district court decision in one district doesn't settle it. It's just a single day in the year of a revolutionary war. We're going to continue on with the fight." Bundy is also continuing to graze on federal lands. "I'm still saying the state of Nevada owns that land, and the federal government has been an encroacher. I'm not moving my cattle. We have ... rights."

 

 

"The federal government just wants control of us. But I'm not going to be controlled," Keith Nay says.

But those seeking greater access to federal land deny they are looking for an old-West shoot-out.

"Do you want to see my weapons?" asks Norm Tom, a Paiute Indian and Nay's son-in-law, who runs about 100 cows on range adjoining Bundy's. He pulls out two copies of the Constitution, one pocket-sized, one full sized.

Bundy states that his rights derive from the fact his Mormon ancestors were using the land far before the federal government claimed authority over it. One Elko County rancher, Cliff Gardner, has decided to take his case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that states' rights mean the federal government has no authority over the land where his cattle graze.

 

1998: A federal judge issues a permanent injunction against Bundy, ordering him to remove his cattle from the federal lands. He lost an appeal to the San Francisco 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. He represented himself.

 

March 2002: Cliff Gardner is sentenced to a month in a Reno halfway house, along with a $5,000 fine and a year of probation. He has been under house arrest for the three previous months for not taking his cattle off of federal land. When his sentence — which affirmed the U.S. Forest Service's authority over the disputed land — was announced, more than 50 states' rights protesters were in the courtroom with him.

 

July 2009: The federal government is still fighting with local ranchers. They have signs posted all over the public land, stating that it is off-limits for grazing.

 

 

Three were dressed in white wigs as American Revolutionary War patriots and another wearing a wig and red coat said he was England's King George. "Has the West been won, or has the fight just begun?" read a banner at a rally outside the courthouse where 15 protesters on horseback carried signs while children waved the Nevada state flag. "This court has tried to intimidate the citizens of Nevada by attempting to make an example of Cliff Gardner," said Cliven Bundy, a Clark County rancher.

 

April 2012: The BLM plans to round up Bundy's cattle. After several threats, these plans are abandoned. The Center for Biological Diversity files an intent to sue against the BLM for canceling their plans.

 

Some signs have been chain-sawed down; others have been filled with bullet holes. “There haven't been any confrontations out there, but we have to be careful,” says Gail Marrs-Smith, who manages the area for the BLM. “We travel in pairs.” Cliven Bundy, a local organic melon farmer, is one of those who resent the changes. To protect an endangered tortoise, Clark County has set aside habitat by buying and retiring all of the government grazing leases in Gold Butte. But Bundy still runs his cows through here, even though since 1993 he has been ordered to desist because he has no permit. Bundy says that his family has grazed here since the nineteenth century and that he doesn't recognize the authority of the federal government. He has threatened resistance if anyone enforces the court order to remove his cattle from the wilderness. “It's so blatant,” says Rob Mrowka, a conservationist who works for the Center for Biological Diversity, in Las Vegas. “Anyone can go out there anytime of the year and see cattle. BLM employees trying to protect sensitive plants and animals are very frustrated. It's a problem that's been going on and on.”

 

May 2012: BLM files a complaint in a federal Las Vegas court seeking an injunction against Bundy.

 

August 2013: A court order says Bundy has 45 days to remove his cattle from federal land.

 

October 2013: A federal district judge court tells Bundy not to “physically interfere with any seizure or impoundment operation.”

 

March 15, 2014: After nearly 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management sends Bundy a letter informing him that they plan to impound his "trespass cattle," which have been roaming on 90 miles of federal land. BLM averages four livestock impoundments a year, usually involving a few dozen animals.

 

March 27, 2014: The BLM has closed off 322,000 acres of public land, and is preparing to collect Bundy's cattle. Bundy files a notice with the county sheriff department, titled “Range War Emergency Notice and Demand for Protection." Bundy also says he has a virtual army of supporters from all over the country ready to protect him. He also has Gardner. “I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone," Gardner said. "I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984. Perhaps it’s difficult for the average American to understand, but protecting the individual was a underlying factor of our government. ... My support is that I am determined to stand by the Bundy family in any fashion it takes regardless of the threat of life or limb."

Clark County Commissioner Tom Collins also supports Bundy. “The U.S. government has perpetrated a bigger fraud on people over those tortoises than Al Capone did selling swampland in Miami."

 

April 1, 2014: Bundy's 14 children and 52 grandchildren are all bunkered down at his house waiting for the BLM to arrive. Bundy is giving constant interviews and making constant calls to local and state officials. BLM has set up two "First Amendment areas" in nearby Bunkerville.

 

April 2, 2014: Around 30 protesters line up outside the Livestock auction house to protest the sale of Bundy's cattle. If Bundy doesn't pay the fees he's accumulated, his cows could be sold to another buyer.

 

A group of local conservationists sent a letter to local officials demanding that they support BLM's actions. One of those people was Bundy's cousin, Terri Robertson. They've only met a few times, and only at meetings about the federal lands. “He’s just in a world of his own. I don’t think he’s working on all four cylinders,” Robertson said. Bundy retorts that his city slicker cousin doesn't know what she is talking about. “My cattle are the kind of cattle people look for at Whole Foods.”

 

April 5, 2014: After decades of trepidation, federal officials and cowboys start rounding up what they think are Cliven Bundy's hundreds of cows. The operation was going to cost $1 million, and reportedly last until May. BLM contends that Bundy owes $1 million in fees, and will also have to pay the round-up expenses. Bundy — who retorts that he only owes $300,000 in fees — says the city folk are only hurting themselves by taking his cows. He told a reporter from the Las Vegas Review Journal that there would be 500,000 fewer hamburgers per year after his cows were towed away; “But nobody is thinking about that. Why would they? They’re all thinking about the desert tortoise. Hey, the tortoise is a fine creature. I like him. I have no problem with him. But taking another man’s cattle? It just doesn’t seem right.”

He also thinks the co-habitating cows and tortoises could have a beautiful, symbiotic relationship if the government would let them. “The tortoises eat the cow manure, too. It’s filled with protein.”

 

The Nevada Cattlemen’s Association distances itself from protests over Bundy's cattle. “Nevada Cattlemen’s Association does not feel it is in our best interest to interfere in the process of adjudication in this matter."

But Bundy's land is in clark county. Clark County is not on that list which makes sense because most of the influx in Nevada came in Northern Nevada, not Southern Nevada.

 

 

Bundy's ancestors weren't in Nevada, they were in Utah:

 

Christena Jensen was born in Nevada in 1901 and that Bodel Jensen was born in Nevada in 1924. Christena Jensen’s parents originally were from Utah. This is the side of the family where Cliven Bundy claims long-standing livestock water rights.

 

Also, we do have land records for Clark County in 1948, when Cliven Bundy's parents PURCHASED THE PROPERTY:

 

Clark County Recorder documents show the 160-acre Bunkerville ranch Bundy calls home was purchased by his parents, David and Bodel Bundy, from Raoul and Ruth Leavitt on Jan. 5, 1948. The purchase included the transfer to the Bundys of certain water rights, including water from the nearby Virgin River. Cliven Bundy was born in 1946.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

 

Because Cliven Bundy has been fighting it in the courts and finally lost all appeals. The government repeatedly attempted to settle the problem, but he still refused to pay.

 

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2014/04/15/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-long-fight-between-cliven-bundy-and-the-federal-government/

 

1989: The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service lists the desert tortoise as an endangered species. A year later, its designation was changed to "threatened."

 

March 1993: The Washington Post publishes a story about the federal government's efforts to protect the desert tortoise in Nevada. Near Las Vegas, the Bureau of Land Management designated hundreds of thousands of acres of federal land for strict conservation efforts. "Among the conservation measures required," according to the Post's coverage, "are the elimination of livestock grazing and strict limits on off-road vehicle use in the protected tortoise habitat. Two weeks ago, the managers of the plan completed the task of purchasing grazing privileges from cattle ranchers who formerly used BLM land."

 

Many people were not impressed by the new conservation plan. "Cliven Bundy, whose family homesteaded his ranch in 1877 and who accuses the government of a 'land grab,' are digging in for a fight and say they will not willingly sell their grazing privileges to create another preserve." People who use the desert to prospect for minerals and to race motorcycles and jeeps also feel shortchanged. "'It was shoved down our throat,' said Mark Trinko, who represents off-road vehicle users on the committee that oversees the plan."

 

Bundy has repeatedly been fined for grazing his cattle on the protected land, fines he has not paid since 1993. The Bureau of Land Management, which oversees about 800 grazing areas in Nevada, responded by revoking his permit. Bundy has not applied for a new one.

April 1995: The fight between the Bureau of Land Management and the ranchers who want to use the federal land without fees or oversight is growing more tense, according to a story published in USA Today.

 

The reason that things were ramping up? Counties were starting to challenge federal ownership of land. In 1991, Catron County in New Mexico passed an ordinance that claimed state ownership and local management of public land in the state. Thirty five counties followed suit. Nye County, Nevada, became the first to act on its legislated threat. The county commissioner bulldozed his way down a closed national forest road. Forest rangers soon followed, who the county commissioner threatened to arrest if they interfered.Thursday evening, a small bomb went off in the U.S. Forest Service office in Carson City, Nev.

 

Though no one has taken responsibility -- and no one was injured -- it has sent chills through government agencies involved in Western land management.

 

"If it was sent as a message," says Forest Service spokeswoman Erin O'Connor, "we got it."

Ultimately the issue will be settled by the courts, but ranchers who say they can't afford to raise livestock without greater access to public land are taking matters into their own hands -- setting up what some officials fear is an inevitable and dangerous confrontation.

 

The situation is becoming so tense that federal workers now travel mostly in pairs and are in constant radio contact with district offices.

"I'm concerned about the safety of my employees," says Jim Nelson, Forest Service district manager for Nevada. "They can't go to church in these communities without having someone say something. Their kids are harassed in school. Stores and restaurants are not serving them."

Nelson, who oversees 7 million acres in Nevada, says his agency is just doing its job, which is to ensure that land remains healthy and viable for ranchers and any others who wish to use it.

 

That goal, he says, is hindered by unattended, free-ranging cows that degrade the state's precious springs and stream banks.

The battle is being called Sagebrush II, a sequel to a 1970s movement that sought a state takeover of federal public lands. Today, many ranchers, miners and loggers argue the federal government never had a legitimate claim to the land.

 

At this point, Cliven Bundy had racked up $31,000 in fees for grazing on federal land without a permit. Helicopters often hover over his herd, counting up the cows so he can be fined appropriately. "They've taken their authority and abused it," Bundy said. "I'm not being regulated to death anymore."

Bundy's neighbors were also angry.

 

March 18, 1996: The federal government, which owns 87 percent of the land in Nevada, is still worried about potential violence if they try to remove illegally grazing cattle from protected land. Two more pipebombs had exploded in Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management offices in the past two years. The Justice Department has 12 lawsuits pending against Nevada cattle ranchers. A federal court in the state struck down the Nye County ordinance that caused trouble the year before. Not that ranchers took that as reason to stand down, however. One local resident told USA Today,"A single district court decision in one district doesn't settle it. It's just a single day in the year of a revolutionary war. We're going to continue on with the fight." Bundy is also continuing to graze on federal lands. "I'm still saying the state of Nevada owns that land, and the federal government has been an encroacher. I'm not moving my cattle. We have ... rights."

 

 

"The federal government just wants control of us. But I'm not going to be controlled," Keith Nay says.

But those seeking greater access to federal land deny they are looking for an old-West shoot-out.

"Do you want to see my weapons?" asks Norm Tom, a Paiute Indian and Nay's son-in-law, who runs about 100 cows on range adjoining Bundy's. He pulls out two copies of the Constitution, one pocket-sized, one full sized.

Bundy states that his rights derive from the fact his Mormon ancestors were using the land far before the federal government claimed authority over it. One Elko County rancher, Cliff Gardner, has decided to take his case to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, arguing that states' rights mean the federal government has no authority over the land where his cattle graze.

 

1998: A federal judge issues a permanent injunction against Bundy, ordering him to remove his cattle from the federal lands. He lost an appeal to the San Francisco 9th Circuit Court of Appeals. He represented himself.

 

March 2002: Cliff Gardner is sentenced to a month in a Reno halfway house, along with a $5,000 fine and a year of probation. He has been under house arrest for the three previous months for not taking his cattle off of federal land. When his sentence — which affirmed the U.S. Forest Service's authority over the disputed land — was announced, more than 50 states' rights protesters were in the courtroom with him.

 

July 2009: The federal government is still fighting with local ranchers. They have signs posted all over the public land, stating that it is off-limits for grazing.

 

 

Three were dressed in white wigs as American Revolutionary War patriots and another wearing a wig and red coat said he was England's King George. "Has the West been won, or has the fight just begun?" read a banner at a rally outside the courthouse where 15 protesters on horseback carried signs while children waved the Nevada state flag. "This court has tried to intimidate the citizens of Nevada by attempting to make an example of Cliff Gardner," said Cliven Bundy, a Clark County rancher.

 

April 2012: The BLM plans to round up Bundy's cattle. After several threats, these plans are abandoned. The Center for Biological Diversity files an intent to sue against the BLM for canceling their plans.

 

Some signs have been chain-sawed down; others have been filled with bullet holes. “There haven't been any confrontations out there, but we have to be careful,” says Gail Marrs-Smith, who manages the area for the BLM. “We travel in pairs.” Cliven Bundy, a local organic melon farmer, is one of those who resent the changes. To protect an endangered tortoise, Clark County has set aside habitat by buying and retiring all of the government grazing leases in Gold Butte. But Bundy still runs his cows through here, even though since 1993 he has been ordered to desist because he has no permit. Bundy says that his family has grazed here since the nineteenth century and that he doesn't recognize the authority of the federal government. He has threatened resistance if anyone enforces the court order to remove his cattle from the wilderness. “It's so blatant,” says Rob Mrowka, a conservationist who works for the Center for Biological Diversity, in Las Vegas. “Anyone can go out there anytime of the year and see cattle. BLM employees trying to protect sensitive plants and animals are very frustrated. It's a problem that's been going on and on.”

 

May 2012: BLM files a complaint in a federal Las Vegas court seeking an injunction against Bundy.

 

August 2013: A court order says Bundy has 45 days to remove his cattle from federal land.

 

October 2013: A federal district judge court tells Bundy not to “physically interfere with any seizure or impoundment operation.”

 

March 15, 2014: After nearly 20 years, the Bureau of Land Management sends Bundy a letter informing him that they plan to impound his "trespass cattle," which have been roaming on 90 miles of federal land. BLM averages four livestock impoundments a year, usually involving a few dozen animals.

 

March 27, 2014: The BLM has closed off 322,000 acres of public land, and is preparing to collect Bundy's cattle. Bundy files a notice with the county sheriff department, titled “Range War Emergency Notice and Demand for Protection." Bundy also says he has a virtual army of supporters from all over the country ready to protect him. He also has Gardner. “I think Cliven is taking a stand not only for family ranchers, but also for every freedom-loving American, for everyone," Gardner said. "I’ve been trying to resolve these same types of issues since 1984. Perhaps it’s difficult for the average American to understand, but protecting the individual was a underlying factor of our government. ... My support is that I am determined to stand by the Bundy family in any fashion it takes regardless of the threat of life or limb."

Clark County Commissioner Tom Collins also supports Bundy. “The U.S. government has perpetrated a bigger fraud on people over those tortoises than Al Capone did selling swampland in Miami."

 

April 1, 2014: Bundy's 14 children and 52 grandchildren are all bunkered down at his house waiting for the BLM to arrive. Bundy is giving constant interviews and making constant calls to local and state officials. BLM has set up two "First Amendment areas" in nearby Bunkerville.

 

April 2, 2014: Around 30 protesters line up outside the Livestock auction house to protest the sale of Bundy's cattle. If Bundy doesn't pay the fees he's accumulated, his cows could be sold to another buyer.

 

A group of local conservationists sent a letter to local officials demanding that they support BLM's actions. One of those people was Bundy's cousin, Terri Robertson. They've only met a few times, and only at meetings about the federal lands. “He’s just in a world of his own. I don’t think he’s working on all four cylinders,” Robertson said. Bundy retorts that his city slicker cousin doesn't know what she is talking about. “My cattle are the kind of cattle people look for at Whole Foods.”

 

April 5, 2014: After decades of trepidation, federal officials and cowboys start rounding up what they think are Cliven Bundy's hundreds of cows. The operation was going to cost $1 million, and reportedly last until May. BLM contends that Bundy owes $1 million in fees, and will also have to pay the round-up expenses. Bundy — who retorts that he only owes $300,000 in fees — says the city folk are only hurting themselves by taking his cows. He told a reporter from the Las Vegas Review Journal that there would be 500,000 fewer hamburgers per year after his cows were towed away; “But nobody is thinking about that. Why would they? They’re all thinking about the desert tortoise. Hey, the tortoise is a fine creature. I like him. I have no problem with him. But taking another man’s cattle? It just doesn’t seem right.”

He also thinks the co-habitating cows and tortoises could have a beautiful, symbiotic relationship if the government would let them. “The tortoises eat the cow manure, too. It’s filled with protein.”

 

The Nevada Cattlemen’s Association distances itself from protests over Bundy's cattle. “Nevada Cattlemen’s Association does not feel it is in our best interest to interfere in the process of adjudication in this matter."

 

 

Bundy's ancestors weren't in Nevada, they were in Utah:

 

Christena Jensen was born in Nevada in 1901 and that Bodel Jensen was born in Nevada in 1924. Christena Jensen’s parents originally were from Utah. This is the side of the family where Cliven Bundy claims long-standing livestock water rights.

 

Also, we do have land records for Clark County in 1948, when Cliven Bundy's parents PURCHASED THE PROPERTY:

 

Clark County Recorder documents show the 160-acre Bunkerville ranch Bundy calls home was purchased by his parents, David and Bodel Bundy, from Raoul and Ruth Leavitt on Jan. 5, 1948. The purchase included the transfer to the Bundys of certain water rights, including water from the nearby Virgin River. Cliven Bundy was born in 1946.

 

 

But Bundy is claiming Clark County land. In the OP he said :

 

"My family has preemptive, adjudicated livestock water rights filed with the state of Nevada. They were established in 1877 when the first pioneers entered the valley. Among those first pioneers were my grandparents from my mother’s side. My father either bought or inherited his Nevada state livestock water rights and I, in turn, have done the same.”

 

So the matter in question is Clark County. Nevada didnt start their census report until 1875 but Clark County was not involved in that census. He transferred water rights in the 1900s, but was that because that was when the law was finally established? Im thinking that at the time in the 1800s the laws in Clark County were very loose in which there are little records formed. So it would be difficult for either Bundy or the Gov to prove their case. They are using documentation after the fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But Bundy is claiming Clark County land. In the OP he said :

 

"My family has preemptive, adjudicated livestock water rights filed with the state of Nevada. They were established in 1877 when the first pioneers entered the valley. Among those first pioneers were my grandparents from my mother’s side. My father either bought or inherited his Nevada state livestock water rights and I, in turn, have done the same.”

 

So the matter in question is Clark County. Nevada didnt start their census report until 1875 but Clark County was not involved in that census. He transferred water rights in the 1900s, but was that because that was when the law was finally established? Im thinking that at the time in the 1800s the laws in Clark County were very loose in which there are little records formed. So it would be difficult for either Bundy or the Gov to prove their case. They are using documentation after the fact.

 

THERE IS NO RECORD OF ANY BUNDYS IN CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA BEFORE 1946. That includes land records and census records. THERE IS ALSO NO RECORD OF ANY JENSENS (HIS MATERNAL FAMILY) IN CLARK COUNTY.

 

His maternal family came from Utah and lived in MESQUITE COUNTY until Cliven Bundy's parents arrived in Clark County and purchased the ranch from the Leavitts in 1946. They didn't have cattle until 1954.

 

Although no Bundys lived in Bunkerville in 1930 or 1940, according to Census records for those years, Cliven Bundy’s mother Bodel and her parents, John and Christena Jensen, lived in neighboring Mesquite in the early 20th Century.

 

Census records from 1930 indicate that John was a Mesquite farmer originally from Utah whose parents were from Denmark. Those records state the farm was near Main Street and a bridge over the Virgin River.

Separate records from the website FamilySearch, which is sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, indicate that Christena Jensen was born in Nevada in 1901 and that Bodel Jensen was born in Nevada in 1924. Christena Jensen’s parents originally were from Utah. This is the side of the family where Cliven Bundy claims long-standing livestock water rights.

 

 

 

The judge in the case stated:

 

Contrast that with the 1998 opinion from U.S. District Judge Johnnie Rawlinson in a case where it was determined Bundy wouldn’t be allowed to use federal land for his cattle because of failure to pay grazing fees to the Bureau of Land Management. Rawlinson wrote that it wasn’t until roughly 1954 that “Bundy or his father or both have grazed livestock on public lands owned by the United States and administered by the BLM.”

 

Edited by LoreD
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

we dont have a black president. we have a traitorious president. his skin tone is irrelevant, except to you liberal racists.

Your brain is broken, it is full of hate for people based solely on their color or religion ,etc...You may not have noticed but most adults arent like that

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your brain is broken, it is full of hate for people based solely on their color or religion ,etc...You may not have noticed but most adults arent like that

 

a textbook example of projection-yours.

 

i am pretty sure you are not qualified to determine what "adult" is, since you never display such qualities or characteristics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

a textbook example of projection-yours.

 

i am pretty sure you are not qualified to determine what "adult" is, since you never display such qualities or characteristics.

OMG, you actually accused me of projection

 

LOL

 

Son, i keep telling you, this has nothing at all to do with me, I am not the one who hates people because of the color of their skin, or because of who they worship or sleep with, that is Y O U

 

LOL

 

Oh man, wait till I tell my friends just how insane you and those like you are, sadly after we are done laughing, we have to worry, the damage you intend on doing is immense...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG, you actually accused me of projection

 

LOL

 

Son, i keep telling you, this has nothing at all to do with me, I am not the one who hates people because of the color of their skin, or because of who they worship or sleep with, that is Y O U

 

LOL

 

Oh man, wait till I tell my friends just how insane you and those like you are, sadly after we are done laughing, we have to worry, the damage you intend on doing is immense...

 

considering i am vastly much more rational than you could ever aspire to, your silly disparagement on my sanity are indeed laughable. any friends you have to buy i have no douibt would be in fact laughing at you, unless they are as vapid and simple minded as you are.

 

yes. i have accused you of projection, and rightly so. you have absolutely no evidence whatsoever that my dislike for obamas policies and ideology are a subterfuge for some hatred of his skin tone. thus your simple minded accusations to the contrary reveal your own LIKE for obama based on his skin tone. that is projection-classic projection.

 

yes, this would be a good time to seek medical help to staunch the massive metaphorical hemorrhaging of blood i have caused your silly position.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

OMG, you actually accused me of projection

that is Y O U

at least someone agrees with your dumbazz...

 

You may not have noticed but most adults arent like marthASS

wait till I tell my friends just how insane you and those like you are,

what did I just tell you about spewing this old worn out crap ?

 

 

so you run away and start spewing it here ?

 

cant you ever come up with anything new ?

 

how about oblamer care ?

 

is "creepy ass cracker" a racial slur ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Uhm, maybe you can explain as to how this criminal Cliven Bundy has gotten away with this for 20 years....

 

If he's broken the law and not paid taxes...for all these years why hasn't he been thrown in jail....

Maybe he pretended he was a illegal alien ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dann Sisters had an ancestral right and still lost in the courts.

study these words until you figure it out...

 

thats why we call it "over reach of government" thats why the t party won in the bundy cattle rustling

 

1863 Treaty of Ruby Valley, which explicitly stated that the Shoshone would never have to give up their land.

 

 

I know its hard... but you can do it....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

THERE IS NO RECORD OF ANY BUNDYS IN CLARK COUNTY, NEVADA BEFORE 1946. That includes land records and census records. THERE IS ALSO NO RECORD OF ANY JENSENS (HIS MATERNAL FAMILY) IN CLARK COUNTY.

 

His maternal family came from Utah and lived in MESQUITE COUNTY until Cliven Bundy's parents arrived in Clark County and purchased the ranch from the Leavitts in 1946. They didn't have cattle until 1954.

 

Although no Bundys lived in Bunkerville in 1930 or 1940, according to Census records for those years, Cliven Bundy’s mother Bodel and her parents, John and Christena Jensen, lived in neighboring Mesquite in the early 20th Century.

 

Census records from 1930 indicate that John was a Mesquite farmer originally from Utah whose parents were from Denmark. Those records state the farm was near Main Street and a bridge over the Virgin River.

Separate records from the website FamilySearch, which is sponsored by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, indicate that Christena Jensen was born in Nevada in 1901 and that Bodel Jensen was born in Nevada in 1924. Christena Jensen’s parents originally were from Utah. This is the side of the family where Cliven Bundy claims long-standing livestock water rights.

 

 

 

The judge in the case stated:

 

Contrast that with the 1998 opinion from U.S. District Judge Johnnie Rawlinson in a case where it was determined Bundy wouldn’t be allowed to use federal land for his cattle because of failure to pay grazing fees to the Bureau of Land Management. Rawlinson wrote that it wasn’t until roughly 1954 that “Bundy or his father or both have grazed livestock on public lands owned by the United States and administered by the BLM.”

 

How do we know there was no history of Bundy's before the census report was established. Your article accounts for 1920s through the 1950s. We cannot use the 1875 report because Clark County isnt on there? How I see it is that nobody can prove anything on either side. Its word against word. Yes, the gov has no record in the 1900s, ok fine. But Bundy is claiming preimptive rights since 1877, a time when records were never kept. Neither can prove or disprove anything. So if we are going off the report in the article then we are back to the original arguement that spurred this whole thing. The gov came in after the fact, then started claiming land. Its a cluster. The comment: Rawlinson wrote that it wasn’t until roughly 1954 that “Bundy or his father or both have grazed livestock on public lands owned by the United States and administered by the BLM.”

 

This doesnt say much. It just accounts for Bundy and his father, not Bundy's ancestors in 1877. Bundy is saying that since his family has always grazed there before the BLM that it is his land. Otherwise, the BLM is infringing on his territory after the fact.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OMG, you actually accused me of projection

 

LOL

 

Son, i keep telling you, this has nothing at all to do with me, I am not the one who hates people because of the color of their skin, or because of who they worship or sleep with, that is Y O U

 

LOL

 

Oh man, wait till I tell my friends just how insane you and those like you are, sadly after we are done laughing, we have to worry, the damage you intend on doing is immense...

Is it BINGO night already?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...