Disolve the BLM, return all lands under their management to Natives it was taken from

originally posted by: Puppylove
a reply to: machineintelligence

There's no such thing as races, only human.

Yup. Race is a man-made idea. If anything different looking people are more like different genetic phenotype's or something.

a reply to: machineintelligence

That's getting better. Since as we both know, Native American tribes were not unwilling to raise non-native children. Native American culture was tribal not really racial. That was more a European invention. Most native american faults were in that many tribes suffered from extreme tribal pride. Is why tribes that warred with each other often had extreme enmity. It wasn't "race" that mattered it was what tribe you belonged to.

Native American issues were gang level territoriality, is why the natives lost to the europeans, not the small pox and not the weaponry, but division. Native American Tribes put aside their differences and banded together once it was already too late.

a reply to: Punisher75

North America Continent Size: 24,474,000 sq km, 9,449,460 sq miles

Our nation was at one time encompassing the area of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Montana. Far less than the whole continent of North America. Acting like there is no difference between the Blackfoot Nation and the South West Tribes is like saying the Portuguese are the same people as the Scandinavians.

originally posted by: machineintelligence
a reply to: Punisher75

North America Continent Size: 24,474,000 sq km, 9,449,460 sq miles

Our nation was at one time encompassing the area of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Montana. Far less than the whole continent of North America. Acting like there is no difference between the Blackfoot Nation and the South West Tribes is like saying the Portuguese are the same people as the Scandinavians.

YOUR nation, so then what about the others? Are they not real Scotsmen?
I do wonder though about this article in Natural Geographic... surprise! your Eurasian!
You crafty European you.
"This study changes this idea because it shows that a significant minority of Native American ancestry actually derives not from East Asia but from a people related to present-day western Eurasians,"
news.nationalgeographic.com...

a reply to: Puppylove

Pre contact populations of North America are estimated to be between 50-100 million people. By 1890 the native population in the usa was 250,000. Much of that drop is due to European diseases including Small Pox.

a reply to: machineintelligence

If not a divided people with tribal differences easily manipulated by the Europeans, the native tribes could easily have fended off a sea invasion. The Europeans were really good, both in the Americas and Africa at taking advantage of Tribalism to keep both continents divided. Which is a strategy that worked because the native tribes where divided.

a reply to: Punisher75

Didn't we all evolve from Adam and Eve?

Yup we took this land...and if we didnt someone else would have...So the we stole the land arguement is pointless and naive. How about we NOT give the land back to them, they are doing well getting their revenge bilking us at their casinos.

a reply to: intrptr

Where the natives lived in small bands or small villages they didn't stress the habitat. However, when villages grew to city size, there is ample evidence that environmental degradation was a major factor in the collapse of those large population centers and their subsequent abandonment.
Take a Google look for the environmental studies done of the area surrounding Cahokia Mounds. The nutritional studies of the later residents show a higher malnutrition rate, indicating that there were severe changes in the food supply.
The cutting of trees to build the palisades there would have required an enormous amount of habitat clearing.

Deeding the land back to the states, dissolving the various bureaus and turning the tax money used to support all that bureaucracy back to the states makes far more sense than our present system. And it's constitutional.

That's not to say there will never be fiefdoms in state management but it is far easier to uproot corruption and highlight neglect at the state level than at the federal level.

originally posted by: MystikMushroom
a reply to: intrptr

You can stake claims all day up here in Alaska. The state also sells off land for remote cabins all year long too.

I should have specified, lower 48.

Claims to own or use up herenlaska? You liven onerthem remote cabins up there do you?

Or in a town?

a reply to: diggindirt

I think the narrative about how they came to their demise has been written by those that caused it. The victors wrote that history.

Indian cities?

Even Agrarian lifestyles can only sup[port a population so big. Smaller communities if fixed and a roving lifestyle on the plains, like shown in Dances With Wolves.

They migrated with seasons and the game, like Buffalo.

We can't go back. Even if some land was "given back" they'd take it back under eminent domain the first sign of oil or gold, just like they did the first time. I find it ironic and highly amusing the Natives today soak Americans with Casinos…

originally posted by: Domo1
a reply to: intrptr

Nest you're going to tell us they had no idea of land ownership.

They didn't.

Not like we do as in real estate. They had territorial "grounds" as in Hunting grounds and Ancestral grounds. Loose terms for this is where we live, roam and hunt as a community. West of some rive east of some mountains, that kind of thing.

There were no deeds or "'property" like notions the Europeans brought with them. Just a bunch of bad asses n horseback that would chase you out if you infringed too much upon their "grounds".

This only became a problem when Whites started laying claim to their territory, homesteading, depleting game, exploiting it, messing it up, In droves. They cut down trees to build "cabins", raised livestock like cattle that crapped in the streams, fouling the water, and insisted they 'owned' these places, an insult to the rightful denizens.

Their attitude was, you may pass through our tribal grounds, but you may not settle here. We are already here.

We depend on this land, this forest, this game, this water for our survival. If they only knew what the whiteman was capable of early on they would have wiped them out. But the whiteman encroached, promised, lied, cheated and slaughtered them.

originally posted by: Punisher75

originally posted by: intrptr

originally posted by: Punisher75
I love when people who have benefited from technology complain about technology on technological devices, as if one can have internet without mining copper for wire.

They use light cable nowadays, Copper is needed for FMJ ammunition. Mining is destructive to the environment, so are bullets.

We never would have gotten to point B without going through point A.
Just say'n.

They still mine copper for wire for industrial machinery to mine more copper, and build arms (factories for war), generate and transmit mega watts of power across huge distances so you can have light switches on your wall.

Wifi replaces copper wire, too (just saying' )

originally posted by: machineintelligence
a reply to: intrptr

11,000 years or so take or give a millennium. The First people where here when the Europeans were first discovering Europe as they were pushed out of the Caucuses.

Thriving here, too. What a paradise that must have been. If only I could see what they saw with their eyes.

originally posted by: jaws1975
a reply to: intrptr

The Fed owns half the land in the US

They say that's public land, so are you telling me...gulp, it's really not ours?

When land is "owned by the federal government" - that means by the citizens of the United States of America. However, seeing as there are a lot more than 1 citizens in the US, people can't just do whatever they want with the land as if they're the sole owner.

As for the OP and anyone who supports giving the land back to the rightful owners...do you support negating all past conquests and migrations worldwide, throughout history, or just this particular one? What would be the motivation for the conquerers of so many years ago willfully turning the land over to the great-great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren of those who were conquered (many of whom have DNA of both the conquered and conquerers.) Would they need to trace back which particular lands their ancestors held? Would they need to prove the "purity" of their ancestral DNA? Will Canada and Mexico also turn their land over to the antecedents of their respective native populations?

Will the Kansas City Royals hand over the 2015 World Series trophy to the New York Mets?

a reply to: dogstar23

When land is "owned by the federal government" - that means by the citizens of the United States of America. However, seeing as there are a lot more than 1 citizens in the US, people can't just do whatever they want with the land as if they're the sole owner.

Tell me why the federal government should own 85% of Nevada, the State I live in? Why shouldn't Nevada and Nevadan's own the land? That's the fundamental question that is creating all of these standoffs.

a reply to: intrptr

Well I think you can stake out land, or buy it -- or win it through lottery. Here is last year's offerings. I think on some of the pre-surveyed ones, they even have prices. Yep, they do. Wow, $11,000 for 5 acres for this one area. The rest of the info is on their website:

Remote Recreation Cabin Sites Staking Program

These are remote enough that you'd need a float plane, boat, or *maybe* a 4-wheeler/ATV to get to. You'd never see another soul if you actually lived out there. Alaska is much bigger than people think.

a reply to: MystikMushroom

11,000 is hardly free.

Staking a claim is more about free. So are squatters rights. I think you're right, its a big place, really cold, with biggest land predators, too.

I saw a show once, they were traveling up river by boat and there was these cabins on the river bank that looked sort of abandoned and the guide was asked who lives there? the guide responded, nobody knows. Somebody built that and since abandoned it, or died or was eaten. If you're living in nobody for miles ville, then nobody will come to your rescue if you fall down and break an ankle while fishing or trapping.

Sure, anybody can move in an take over that cabin, but you better be young, strong and knowledgable about living like that. Alaska isn't easy and the locals are hungry.

Maybe they just tell us this so we'll stay out, or maybe there aren't as many people there because its so tough.

What about you, are you a rough neck mountain man?

Ever see Man in the Wilderness or Death Hunt?

Does that even compare? I spent a winters weekend in Yosemite valley once as a boy scout. They shut the place down but let us in, had the place all to ourselves.

It was beautiful and so cooold… we were glad to be able to come indoors out of it. I also been 'homeless' for extended periods, I know what self sufficiency is, but thats in an urban setting living within reach of grocery stores and hospitals.

Up there…. not so forgiving.

a reply to: intrptr

I made Eagle Scout up here, and our troop didn't just sit around weaving baskets. In fact, I did more OUTSIDE and BEFORE I ever joined the BSA with my Dad.

I climbed this with him when I was 11 or 12:



From the top:



I'm not in that pic, I recognize some though.

First you have to mountain bike 15 miles before you even can start climbing. Sometimes it's nice to setup a base camp at the end of the lake. Doing the whole bike/climb/descent/bike thing in one day can take about 14 hours.

I've done Crow Pass a few times near here. The historic Iditarod dog sled trail went through there (not anymore). It's 26 miles of this:



It's fun to do it in 2-3 days, you kind of want your pack to be light as you gain about 3,000 feet of elevation the very first day (depending on what side of the pass you start on). I like keeping my pack under 35 pounds for extended backpacking trips.

Yeah there are bears...you hang your food up at night outside of camp in a tree. Gotta make sure you don't have any food stains on you, they'll smell that and come tear your tent up. Bears will even go after toothpaste. We'll make a urine perimeter around the campsite sometimes, not sure if it helps but if it does why not do it anyway?

A lot of of those "survival" shows on TV about Alaska are really dramatized. Most of them are filmed only miles away from a road or town (there's a film crew to consider after all...).

To me, outdoors stuff doesn't include 4-wheelers and cammo gear from Cabella's. If I'm out and about, I'm going to REI and wearing the same stuff they use to climb Denali (which I've considered doing, I just don't have 15 grand to hire a guide and do it properly). If it can keep them alive, it's good enough for me.

originally posted by: jaws1975
a reply to: dogstar23

When land is "owned by the federal government" - that means by the citizens of the United States of America. However, seeing as there are a lot more than 1 citizens in the US, people can't just do whatever they want with the land as if they're the sole owner.

Tell me why the federal government should own 85% of Nevada, the State I live in? Why shouldn't Nevada and Nevadan's own the land? That's the fundamental question that is creating all of these standoffs.

I had to look up how the federal government came to own 85% of Nevada (and so much of the West in general.) Basically, it has more to do with how it only came down to 85% from 100%. I'm trying to sneak in a post between the boss pacing around snooping, so I need to take the lazy route and give you a great link which explains it. Long story short, the federal government would love to transfer a lot of that land to the states so that the states could bear the costs instead of the federal government. Here's the link:
NY Times - Why the Gov't Owns So Much Land in the West